Agenda Document for Governance, Performance and Audit

Transcription

AGENDA
GOVERNANCE, PERFORMANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE
DATE
TIME
Monday 11 July 2016
10.30 am
Committee Room 3, City Hall, The Queen's Walk, London, SE1 2AA
VENUE
Members of the Governance, Performance and Audit Committee are hereby summoned to attend
the meeting of the Committee, which will be held in Committee Room 3, City Hall, The Queen's
Walk, London, SE1 2AA on Monday 11 July 2016 at 10.30 am to transact the business set out
below.
This meeting is open to the press and public, except for where exempt information is being
discussed as noted on the agenda. A guide for the press and public on attending and reporting
meetings of local government bodies, including the use of film, photograph, social media and other
means is available at
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/343182/140812
_Openness_Guide.pdf
Miles Smith
Head of Legal and Democratic Services
169 Union Street
London, SE1 0LL
Friday, 1 July 2016
Membership
Councillor Jack Hopkins (Chair)
Councillor Florence Eshalomi AM (Vice-Chair)
Councillor Amy Whitelock Gibbs
Councillor Oonagh Moulton
Councillor Tony Arbour AM
Agenda Part I
1.
Apologies for Absence
1
Agenda
2.
Disclosures of Interests and Dispensations
Clerk to Authority – Known details of membership of the GLA, other functional bodies and
London Boroughs are attached as an Appendix to this agenda. The Appendix does not
remove the need for a Member to declare at the meeting an interest (whether or not listed in
the Appendix) in any relevant item on the agenda paper and to state also the nature of that
interest.
3.
Minutes (Pages 1 - 4)
Minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 7 March 2016.
4.
Terms of Reference and Membership
The Committee is recommended to note the following terms of reference and membership of
the Committee as agreed by the Authority at its Annual Meeting on 30 June 2016:
Terms of Reference
1.
For service delivery functions, to develop, agree and review general performance
management policies, targets and indicators for the Authority.
2.
On behalf of the Authority, to agree the planned internal audit activities for the year and
to undertake an annual review of internal audit activity, and to review summary internal
audit reports and seek assurance that action has been taken where necessary.
3.
On behalf of the Authority and as necessary (where the Authority itself is not to
determine this matter), to approve the Authority’s annual accounts and to determine all
associated matters.
4.
To review and monitor the effectiveness of the Authority's policies on fraud, irregularity
and corruption.
5.
To consider the external auditors audit and inspection plan and their Annual
Governance report, and the main issues arising and the Authority’s response to those
issues.
6.
To monitor the Authority's risk management system, framework and its control
environment to ensure that it is fit for purpose, noting that management and
implementation of specific risk controls remain with the relevant committee and/or the
Authority.
7.
To monitor the framework for business continuity and disaster recovery arrangements
to ensure they are fit for purpose.
2
Agenda
8.
To oversee and agree the Authority’s policies on transparency issues and to receive at 6
monthly intervals reports on gifts and hospitality received by Members notified to the
Authority and itemised expenses incurred by Members and paid for by the Authority,
and reports on equivalent notifications, and expenses incurred, by the Commissioner,
Directors and Heads of Service and to oversee arrangements for the publication on the
Authority’s website of all such notifications and expenses.
9.
To grant dispensations to Members of the Authority (under Section 33 of the Localism
Act 2011) permitting, in certain circumstances, participation in discussion of, and voting
on, matters in which a disclosable pecuniary interest is held.
Membership
Group
Labour
Labour
Labour
Conservative
Conservative
5.
MEMBER
Cllr Jack
Hopkins
(Chair)
Cllr Florence
Eshalomi AM
(Vice-Chair)
Cllr Amy
Whitelock
Gibbs
Cllr Oonagh
Moulton
Cllr Tony
Arbour AM
Alternates: All other Members of the LFEPA Labour
Group
Alternates: All other Members of the LFEPA
Conservative Group
Governance, Performance and Audit Committee - Summary List of Actions - FEP
2608 (Pages 5 - 20)
Clerk to the Authority – setting out actions arising from previous meetings of the Committee.
6.
End of year Monitoring of Risk, Continuity and Governance for 2015/16 - FEP 2609
(Pages 21 - 40)
Head of Strategy and Inclusion – providing the end of year monitoring position on the Risk
management framework, including the risk audit programme and supporting assurance work;
the Business Continuity Management framework; and the Annual Governance Statement.
3
Agenda
7.
End of Year Monitoring of Performance Indicators in the London Safety Plan for
2015/16 (for Prevention, Protection and Response) - FEP 2610 (Pages 41 - 114)
Head of Strategy and Inclusion – reporting on end of year monitoring for 2015/16, including
key performance for indicators in LSP5 relating to Authority aims 1-3, Prevention, Protection
and Response.
8.
Annual Governance Statement 2015/16 - FEP 2611 (Pages 115 - 132)
Head of Strategy and Inclusion – reporting on preparation of the Annual Governance
Statement (AGS) required in accordance with the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015.
9.
2015/16 Statement of Accounts and Statutory Determinations - FEP 2612 (Pages
133 - 294)
Director of Finance and Contractual Services - presenting the external auditor’s Audit Results
Report, the audited Statement of Accounts and a Letter of Representation to the external
auditor for formal approval and adoption by the Committee.
10.
Internal Audit - Progress Report Quarter 4 2015/16 - FEP 2613 (Pages 295 - 322)
Director of Finance and Contractual Services – summarising the work carried out by
MOPAC’s Directorate of Audit, Risk and Assurance in the 4th quarter of 2015/16.
11.
Internal Audit - Review of 2015/16 - FEP 2614 (Pages 323 - 340)
Director of Finance and Contractual Services – reporting in accordance with Financial
Regulations.
12.
Urgent Business
Any other items that the Chair decides are urgent.
13.
Exclusion of Press and Public
The Committee is recommended to agree to exclude the public and press from the meeting,
in accordance with the relevant paragraphs of Schedule 12A of the Local Government Act
1972 (as amended), in order to consider the following item of business.
AGENDA PART II
The meeting is not likely to be open to the press and public during consideration of the
following item:
4
Agenda
14.
Urgent Business
Any items of exempt business that the Chair decides are urgent.
The next meeting of the Governance, Performance and Audit Committee is due to be held on
Monday 12 September 2016 at 10.30 am.
John Johnson, Clerk to Governance, Performance and Audit Committee
Democratic Services, Ground Floor, 169 Union Street,
London SE1 0LL / Tel 020 8555 1200 (ext: 30084)
e-mail: [email protected]
5
Agenda
APPENDIX - DISCLOSURES OF INTERESTS AND DISPENSATIONS
INTERESTS
The following declarations of offices held at the GLA, other functional bodies and
London borough councils have been received from Members of the Authority.
Members are asked to declare at the meeting any further relevant interests in any item on the
agenda paper and to state the nature of the interest(s) declared.
Member
Councillor Tony Arbour JP
Councillor Gareth Bacon
Councillor Fiona Colley
Councillor Leonie Cooper
Councillor Emma Dent Coad
Andrew Dismore
Councillor Florence Eshalomi
Councillor Susan Hall
Councillor Sarah Hayward
Councillor Jack Hopkins
David Kurten
Councillor Mehboob Khan
Councillor Caroline Russell
Dr Fiona Twycross
Councillor Martin Whelton
Councillor Amy Whitelock
Gibbs
Interest
Assembly Member for London South West
Constituency
Member, LB Richmond upon Thames
Assembly Member for Bexley and Bromley
Constituency;
Member, LB Bexley
Member, LB Southwark
Assembly Member
Member, LB Wandsworth
Mayoral Appointee
Member, Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea
Assembly Member for Barnet and Camden
Constituency
Assembly Member, Lambeth and Southwark
Constituency
Member, LB Lambeth
Member, LB Harrow
Member, LB Camden
Member, LB Lambeth
Assembly Member
Mayoral Appointee
Member, Royal Borough of Greenwich
Member, LB Merton
Assembly Member
Member, LB Islington
Assembly Member
Member, LB Merton
Member, LB Tower Hamlets
V3
6
MINUTES
GOVERNANCE, PERFORMANCE AND AUDIT
COMMITTEE
DATE
TIME
Monday 7 March 2016
10.30 am
Committee Room 4, City Hall, The Queen's Walk, London, SE1 2AA
VENUE
Minutes of the proceedings of the meeting of Governance, Performance and Audit Committee held
in Committee Room 4, City Hall, The Queen's Walk, London, SE1 2AA, on Monday 7 March 2016
Present:
Councillor Maurice Heaster
OBE (Chairman)
Councillor Liaquat Ali MBE, JP
(Vice-Chair)
1.
Andrew Dismore AM
Councillor Pauline Morrison
Apologies for Absence
No apologies for absence were received.
2.
Disclosures of Interests and Dispensations
Resolved – That the details of membership of the GLA, other functional bodies and London
Boroughs, as attached as an appendix to the agenda, be noted. No further disclosures were
made.
3.
Minutes
Resolved – That the minutes of the meeting of the Committee held on 16 November 2015
be approved and signed by the Chairman as a correct record.
4.
Governance, Performance and Audit Committee - Summary List of Actions Arising FEP 2560
Report by the Clerk to the Authority.
The Chairman moved the motion - That the completed, closed and ongoing actions arising
from previous meetings of the Committee, as set out in the report, be noted.
The motion was seconded by Councillor Moulton, put and agreed.
Resolved – accordingly.
5.
Internal Audit - Draft Annual Plan 2016/17 - FEP 2561
Report by the Director of Finance and Contractual Services.
The Director of Finance and Contractual Services introduced the report. The Internal Auditor
provided an overview of the internal audit plan for 2016/17, which included a reduction in
the total number of audit days. The plan would be reviewed later in the year to consider the
impact of the reduction in days and whether any additional resources were required.
The Chairman moved the motion That:
a)
The Internal Audit Plan for 2016/17, as set out in Table 1 of Appendix A to the report,
be agreed; and
b)
The intention to reduce the number of audit days from 1134 to 859 be noted.
6.
Internal Audit - Progress Report Quarter 3 2015/16 - FEP 2562
The Internal Auditor introduced the report, which set out the internal audit work carried out
in the third quarter of 2015/16.
During the course of the discussion a Member highlighted the decision to defer the deadline
for completing the action on lost 999 emergency calls to July 2016. The Director of
Operations noted that this had been due to the delays in the implementation of the mobilising
system and explained that, once the system had become established, issues relating to lost
calls would be reviewed.
The Chairman moved the motion –
That:
a)
The work undertaken by Internal Audit in the third quarter of the year be noted; and
b)
The current assessment of the adequacy of the internal control framework for each
review, as shown in Annex B to Appendix 1 of the report be noted.
7.
External Audit Plan - FEP 2563
The Director of Finance and Contractual Services introduced the report. The External Auditor
provided an overview of the external audit plan for 2015/16.
During the discussion, the Chairman suggested the scale fee for 2015/16 be reviewed as the
external auditors were now more familiar with the work of the Authority. The External
Auditor responded that the scale fee was set by the Regulator, but that the issue would be
kept under review.
A Member requested further information on the number of audit hours undertaken by the
External Audit team, comparisons with the previous year and a break down of the hourly rate.
The External Auditor agreed to provide the Committee with the relevant information
following the meeting.
The Chairman moved the motion – That, subject to the provision of the external audit
information as requested, the report be noted.
8.
Approach to the Annual Governance Statement and Statement of Assurance
2015/16 - FEP 2564
Report by the Head of Strategy and Inclusion.
The Head of Strategy and Inclusion introduced the report.
During the discussion, a Member sought confirmation that the Annual Governance
Statement and the Statement of Assurance would continue to be publicly reported, once
responsibility for fire and rescue services had been transferred to the Mayor. The Head of
Strategy and Inclusion confirmed that this was expected to be the case.
The Chairman moved the motion That:
a)
It be agreed that the 2015/16 Annual Governance Statement (AGS) and Statement of
Assurance (SoA) be produced as separate statements;
b)
It be noted that the 2015/16 SoA continues to include the data, including ward and
borough data where available (as referenced in paragraph 14 of the report) in order to
allow a full assessment of the impact of the Fifth London Safety Plan to be carried out;
and
c)
It be noted that the SoA will be presented to the Authority for approval, instead of the
Committee, following the precedent set in the previous two years, whereby the
statement has been deferred to the full Authority for a decision.
9.
Declarations of Gifts, Hospitality and Expenses - FEP 2565
Report by the Head of Legal and Democratic Services.
During the course of the discussion, a Member proposed that the number of claims for
mileage could be reduced by reintroducing the ability for officers to camp out in Authority
premises. The Director of Operations stated that there were a range of reasons as to why this
facility had been withdrawn, but also confirmed this was an issue being discussed with staff
side.
The Chairman moved the motion - That the report be noted.
10.
Urgent Business
There was no urgent business.
The meeting ended at 11.02am
Signed By:
Chairman
Laura Pelling, Ground Floor, 169 Union Street, London, SE1 OLL; tel: 020 8555 1200 (ext 30084);
e-mail: [email protected]
Clerk to GOVERNANCE, PERFORMANCE AND AUDIT COMMITTEE
Report title
Governance, Performance and Audit Committee - Summary List
of Actions Arising
Meeting
Date
Governance, Performance and Audit Committee
11 July 2016
Report by
Document Number
Clerk to the Authority
FEP 2608
Public
Summary
This report sets out the completed and ongoing actions arising from previous meetings of the
Committee.
Recommendation
That the Committee notes the completed and ongoing actions arising from previous meetings of the
Committee, as set out in the report.
Meeting of 7 March 2016
Minute Subject
item/
FEP
No
Action required
Status
7/
FEP:
2563
External Auditor to
provide Committee
with further
information on audit
hours/ previous year
Information was sent to Director of
Members on 17 March F&CS
2016 (see Appendix
1).
External
Audit Plan
Action by
Deadline
Completed
comparisons and a
breakdown of the
hourly rate.
Meeting of 16 November 2015
Minute Subject
item/
FEP
No
Action required
Status
Action by
Deadline
5/
FEP:
2530
Half-yearly
monitoring
of
performance
indicators in
the London
Safety Plan
for 2015/16
(Aims 1-3) End Sept
2015
The Director of
Operations agreed
to provide the
Committee with
further information
about the impact of
ongoing PFI
projects on
stations,
particularly in east
London.
A briefing note was
Director of
sent to Members on 2 Operations
March 2016 (see
Appendix 2).
Completed
5/
FEP:
2530
Half-yearly
monitoring
of
performance
indicators in
the London
Safety Plan
for 2015/16
(Aims 1-3) End Sept
2015
Appendix 4 of the
report to include
comparable data (if
available) with
other metropolitan
brigades regarding
the average time
taken to respond to
calls.
Contact has been
Head of
made with
Information
Metropolitan Brigades Management
about their ability to
supply this
comparative data.
There is currently no
consistent standard
for data reporting
across all Brigades.
However, CFOA,
working with
Government, the LGA
and CIPFA, have been
attempting to devise a
national suite of
‘benchmarking’
indicators, and when
this is in place it
should provide a
readily available
means of making
comparison with other
Brigades. In the
meantime, officers will
continue to see
whether they can
Completed New
comparative
data has
been added
to Appendix
4 of the
report for
first and
second
appliance
attendance
times for
metropolitan
fire and
rescue
services
(where this
has been
provided by
the service).
obtain attendance
times, as requested by
the Committee.
This data will be
included in the Q4
report to Committee.
5/
FEP:
2530
Half-yearly
monitoring
of
performance
indicators in
the London
Safety Plan
for 2015/16
(Aims 1-3) End Sept
2015
The fire fatalities
data at Appendix 2
to include the time
of first attendance
and the size of the
incident.
The data is included in Head of
the end of year report Strategy and
Inclusion
at item 7 on today’s
agenda.
Completed
Meeting of 14 September 2015
Minute Subject
item/
FEP
No
Action required
Status
Action by
Deadline
5/
FEP:
2495
That a procedure be
put in place to
regulate the use by
the Head of Legal and
Democratic Services
of covert surveillance
of plaintiffs in
defending personal
injury claims.
The staff side
consultation on the
procedure to cover use
of covert surveillance of
employees or former
employees in this and
any other instance has
been completed and
the procedure is now in
the process of being
put in place.
Head of
Legal and
Democratic
Services
The
procedure,
covering
any use of
covert
surveillance
outside
RIPA, was
formally put
in place on
25 February
2016.
Annual
Governance
Statement
2014/15
List of Appendices to this report:
Appendix 1 – Briefing note on External Audit Plan/fees.
Appendix 2 – Briefing note on the impact of ongoing PFI projects on stations
LOCAL GOVERNMENT (ACCESS TO INFORMATION) ACT 1985
List of background documents - All FEP reports to Governance, Performance and Audit
Committee Meetings
Proper officer
Clerk to the Authority
Contact officer
Telephone
Email
John Johnson
0208 555 1200 x 30084
[email protected]
Appendix 1
Proposed
work
programme
and scales of
fees 2016/17
Local government and police bodies
October 2015
Appendix 1
Public Sector Audit Appointments Limited (PSAA) is an
independent company limited by guarantee incorporated
by the Local Government Association in August 2014.
The Secretary of State for Communities and Local
Government delegated statutory functions (from the Audit
Commission Act 1998) to PSAA by way of a letter of
delegation issued under powers contained in the Local
Audit and Accountability Act 2014.
The company is responsible for appointing auditors to
local government, police and local NHS bodies, for setting
audit fees and for making arrangements for the
certification of housing benefit subsidy claims.
Before 1 April 2015, these responsibilities were discharged
by the Audit Commission.
Appendix 1
Contents
Introduction ...........................................................................................2
Background ....................................................................................................................... 2
2016/17 fees...................................................................................................................... 2
Fees beyond 2016/17 ........................................................................................................ 3
Redistribution of surplus .................................................................................................... 3
Responding to this consultation ......................................................................................... 3
Proposed work programme for 2016/17 ..............................................4
Audit .................................................................................................................................. 4
Auditors’ local value for money work ................................................................................. 5
Certification work ............................................................................................................... 5
National report ................................................................................................................... 5
Proposed scales of fees for 2016/17 ...................................................6
Scales of audit fees for local government and police bodies .............................................. 6
Pension fund audits ........................................................................................................... 6
Certification work ............................................................................................................... 6
Value added tax ................................................................................................................ 7
Next steps .............................................................................................8
Public Sector Audit Appointments
Page | 1
Appendix 1
Consultation on 2016/17 work programme and scales of fees
Introduction
This consultation document sets out the work that auditors will undertake at local
government and police audited bodies during 2016/17, with the associated proposed scale
audit fees and indicative certification fees. A separate consultation document covers
the work programme and scales of fees at local NHS bodies.
1
The consultation does not cover small bodies subject to the limited assurance regime.
Fee scales for small bodies were set in April 2012 for five years and are available on
the small bodies’ fees page of our website.
2
We hope the information set out in this document is helpful to stakeholders in
considering our proposals for the 2016/17 work programme and scale fees, as well as
supporting audited bodies’ financial planning.
3
Background
The Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014 provides for the introduction of a new
framework for local public audit. Under these provisions, the Audit Commission closed in
March 2015 and the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government delegated
some statutory functions from the Audit Commission Act 1998 to Public Sector Audit
Appointments Limited (PSAA) on a transitional basis.
4
PSAA will oversee the Commission’s audit contracts for local government and police
bodies until they end in 2018, following the announcement by the Department for
Communities and Local Government (DCLG) that it will extend transitional arrangements for
one year. PSAA’s responsibilities include setting fees, appointing auditors and monitoring
the quality of auditors’ work. Further information on PSAA and its responsibilities is available
on our website.
5
2016/17 fees
Scale fees for 2015/16 were set by the Audit Commission before it closed. The
Commission reduced 2015/16 scale fees by 25 per cent based on the fees applicable for the
previous year, in addition to the 40 per cent reduction in fees from 2012/13. The expectation
is that these substantial fee reductions will continue to apply for the length of the audit
contracts, providing there are no significant changes to auditors’ work, and subject to annual
review.
6
There are no planned changes to the overall work programme for local government and
police audited bodies for 2016/17. We propose that 2016/17 scale audit fees and indicative
certification fees are set at the same level as the scale fees applicable for 2015/16.
7
PSAA may approve variations to published scale fees and indicative certification fees for
individual audited bodies, to reflect changes in circumstances or audit risks.
8
For some authorities a change in accounting requirements in 2016/17 relating to
highways infrastructure assets will require additional audit work. The fee variation process
will apply in 2016/17 for this additional work, because the amount of work will vary at each
applicable authority in the first year of implementation of the new requirements.
9
Page | 2
Appendix 1
Fees beyond 2016/17
10 The current contracts with audit firms will run until 2018, covering completion of the audit
of the accounts for 2017/18, as DCLG has confirmed that the transitional arrangements will
be extended by one year. PSAA will therefore set fees for 2017/18 audits. We would expect
to consult on the 2017/18 work programme and scales of fees in late 2016, and publish the
confirmed scale fees in March 2017.
Redistribution of surplus
11 Following completion of the Audit Commission’s 2014/15 accounts, PSAA received a
payment in respect of the Audit Commission’s retained earnings. PSAA will redistribute this
and any other surpluses from audit fees to audited bodies, on a timetable to be established
now the position on transitional arrangements has been clarified by DCLG. The amount of
the redistribution, based on current information, is likely to be in the order of 15 per cent of
scale audit fees for local government and police bodies.
Responding to this consultation
We welcome comments from stakeholders on the proposals contained in this document.
Please send comments by email to:
[email protected]
or by post to Jon Hayes, Chief Officer, at:
Public Sector Audit Appointments Limited
3rd Floor
Local Government House
Smith Square
London SW1P 3HZ
The consultation will close on Friday 15 January 2016.
Page | 3
Appendix 1
Proposed work programme for 2016/17
Audit
12 Under the provisions of the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014, the National Audit
Office (NAO) is responsible for publishing the statutory Code of Audit Practice and guidance
for auditors from April 2015. Audits of the accounts for 2016/17 will be undertaken under this
Code, on the basis of the work programme and scale fees set out in this consultation.
Further information on the NAO Code and guidance is available on the NAO website.
13 Auditors tailor their work to reflect local circumstances and their assessment of audit
risk. They do this by assessing the significant financial and operational risks facing an
audited body, and the arrangements it has put in place to manage those risks.
Audit work on highways infrastructure assets
14 CIPFA/LASAAC is expected to confirm, subject to the outcome of consultation, that the
2016/17 Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom will adopt the
measurement requirements of the CIPFA Code of Practice on Transport Infrastructure
Assets, for highways infrastructure assets.
15 There is no reliable and equitable way of establishing at this stage the volume of
additional audit work, and therefore the fees required, at each applicable local authority
because:
a)
the amount of work needed will depend on the value of each authority’s highways
infrastructure assets, and the consequent impact of the change in reporting
requirements on their financial statements;
b)
authorities are at different stages in preparing for implementation, making it difficult
to estimate at this stage the amount of work auditors will need to undertake in each
case;
c)
as with other financial reporting changes, it is likely that the first year of
implementation will require more audit work than in subsequent years, so it would
not be appropriate to increase scale fees on the basis of the work needed in the first
year; and
d)
there is a possibility that some form of central assurance arrangements may be
implemented using an approach that CIPFA is developing, which could help to
contain the amount of additional audit work required.
16 Fees for the additional work identified by auditors at individual audited bodies in 2016/17
will be subject to approval under the normal fee variations process. We expect the additional
fees for a highway authority will be in the range £5,000 to £10,000, where authorities are
able to provide the information required, and the auditor is able to rely on central assurance
of the models in use. Fees for non-highway authorities with material highways infrastructure
assets should be below £5,000 where the same conditions apply.
Page | 4
Appendix 1
Auditors’ local value for money work
17 Under the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014, auditors are required to satisfy
themselves that an audited body has made proper arrangements for securing economy,
efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources (the value for money arrangements
conclusion).
18 Auditors will apply a risk-based approach to their local value for money work, giving a
conclusion on the arrangements in place. The NAO’s Code of Audit Practice and supporting
guidance for auditors set out the approach and reporting criteria applicable for principal
bodies.
19 A value for money arrangements conclusion is not required for audited bodies with
annual income or expenditure of less than £6.5 million and which are subject to a limited
assurance review. This is in line with the threshold set in the Local Audit and Accountability
Act 2014 defining smaller relevant bodies, and the requirements of the Accounts and Audit
(England) Regulations 2015.
20 Where a body with annual income or expenditure of less than £6.5 million elects to
prepare accounts as a larger relevant body, it is subject to a full Code audit including a value
for money arrangements conclusion.
Certification work
21 At the request of the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), auditors appointed
under the audit contracts will certify local authority claims for housing benefit subsidy for
2016/17. Auditors will undertake this work as agents of PSAA, using guidance based on the
arrangements previously developed by the Audit Commission.
National report
22 PSAA will publish a report summarising the results of auditors’ work on audited bodies’
financial statements and arrangements to secure value for money.
Page | 5
Appendix 1
Proposed scales of fees for 2016/17
Scales of audit fees for local government and police bodies
23 The scales of fees for 2016/17 reflect the cost of the work programme outlined above.
The proposed 2016/17 scale fee for each local government and police audited body is
available on our website.
24 The proposed scale audit fees for 2016/17 audits are the scale fees applicable for
2015/16.
25 PSAA has the power to determine the fee above or below the scale fee, where it
considers that substantially more or less work was required than envisaged by the scale fee.
The scale fees are based on the expectation that audited bodies are able to provide the
auditor with complete and materially accurate financial statements, with supporting working
papers, within agreed timeframes.
26 As the 2016/17 scale fees are based on the scale fees for 2015/16, they continue to
reflect the auditor’s assessment of audit risk and complexity. We would only expect
variations from the scale fee to occur in 2016/17 where these factors are significantly
different from those identified and reflected in the 2015/16 scale fee.
27 PSAA obtains updated fee information, and explanations for any proposed variations
from the scale fee, from appointed auditors on a regular basis. We consider the
reasonableness of the explanations provided by auditors, and seek confirmation that an
audited body has been consulted about a proposed variation, before agreeing to any
variation to the scale fee. Auditors cannot invoice audited bodies for any variations to scale
fees until these have been approved by PSAA.
28 We will continue to keep the scale fees for particular groups of bodies under review,
including police bodies and pension fund audits, to ensure they remain consistent with
auditors’ local assessments of audit risks.
29 PSAA will charge fees for considering objections from the point at which auditors accept
an objection as valid, or any special investigations, such as those arising from disclosures
under the Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998, as a variation to the scale fee.
Pension fund audits
30 The proposed scale fees for 2016/17 pension fund audits are the scale fees applicable
for 2015/16. The proposed pension fund audit scale fee for each relevant audited body for
2016/17 is available on our website.
Certification work
31 The statutory duty to make certification arrangements, delegated to PSAA by the
Secretary of State for the purpose of certifying housing benefit subsidy claims, requires
PSAA to charge fees that cover the full cost of certification work.
32 An indicative certification fee is published each year for each relevant audited body,
using the latest final certification fees available. Indicative fees for 2016/17 housing benefit
Page | 6
Appendix 1
subsidy certification work will be based on final 2014/15 certification fees. We will receive
this information from auditors in January 2016, after this consultation has closed, and will
publish indicative 2016/17 certification fees on our website in March 2016.
33 For the purposes of this consultation, audited bodies and stakeholders may wish to refer
to the indicative certification fees for 2014/15, published on our website.
34 Indicative fees for certification work are based on the expectation that audited bodies are
able to provide the auditor with complete and materially accurate claims and returns, with
supporting working papers, within agreed timeframes.
35 We expect variations from the indicative certification fee for an audited body to occur
only where issues arise that are significantly different from those identified and reflected in
the previous year’s fee.
Value added tax
36 All the 2016/17 fee scales exclude value added tax (VAT), which will be charged at the
prevailing rate of 20 per cent on all work done.
Page | 7
Appendix 1
Next steps
37 PSAA has a statutory duty to prescribe scales of fees for the audit of accounts. Before
prescribing scales of fees, we are required to consult relevant representative organisations.
38 We welcome comments from audited bodies and stakeholders on the proposals
contained in this document. The consultation will close on Friday 15 January 2016.
Please send comments by email to:
[email protected]
or by post to Jon Hayes, Chief Officer, at:
Public Sector Audit Appointments Limited
3rd Floor
Local Government House
Smith Square
London SW1P 3HZ
39 Following consideration of responses to this consultation, the PSAA Board will approve
the final 2016/17 work programme and scales of fees for publication in late March 2016.
40 If you have comments or complaints about the way this consultation has been
conducted, these should be sent by email to [email protected].
Page | 8
Briefing note
Appendix 2
2 March 2016
Subject
PFI Programme – Impact on average attendance times
Brief for
Members of the Governance, Performance & Audit Committee
Author
Dave Brown, Director of Operations
This briefing note is in response to the discussion at the Governance, Performance & Audit Committee meeting
on 16 November 2015 concerning the impact of the PFI programme on fire appliance average attendance
times during the 12 month period to end June 2015, as set out in the Q2 2015/16 performance report (FEP
2530).
There are a total of nine fire stations that were subject to the PFI programme, predominantly in the North East
and South East Areas, these were:
NE Area
Dagenham
Plaistow
Shadwell
Leytonstone
(Barking & Dagenham)
(Newham)
(Tower Hamlets)
(Waltham Forest)
SE Area
Purley
Dockhead
Old Kent Road
Orpington
(Croydon)
(Southwark)
(Southwark)
(Bromley)
SW Area
Mitcham (Merton)
The PFI programme necessitated staff and appliances based at seven (out of nine) fire stations to move to
alternative accommodation at local fire stations that were able to accommodate the requisite number of staff
and appliances (Orpington and Mitcham remained open with Orpington in temporary accommodation on the
same site and Mitcham rebuilt on a new site). Six of the nine fire stations have now been completed with
Purley likely to be completed and on the run in March 2016 and Shadwell in April and Dockhead in May.
The data presented in report FEP 2530 (for the 12 months to end June 2015 - Q2), showed that compared to
performance at 2014/15 outturn, average first and second appliance attendance times was five seconds and
four seconds slower respectively. The position now (at end February 2016) is similar (as set out in table 1
below) with first and second appliances six and three seconds slower respectively.
Table 1 – Comparison of outturn performance
First
Second
2014/15
05:32
06:54
2015/16 Q2
05:37
06:58
2015/16 (now)
05:38
06:57
Looking at current performance (end February 2016) at Brigade level (details in table 2 below), average
attendance times for the North East Area increased by eight seconds, with the South West showing a five
second increase and the South East a three second increase. In terms of the six boroughs hosting the seven
fire stations subject to the PFI programme, the increases in the average first appliance attendance times range
from three seconds in Southwark to 37 seconds in Barking & Dagenham. The average second appliance
attendance times were similar ranging from a five second increase in Newham to a 21 second increase in
Barking & Dagenham. None of these changes move a borough from within to outside of the six or eight
minute average attendance time targets.
Table 2 – Area performance
DAC Area
North East
North West
South East
South West
London Total
First appliance
2014/15 2015/16
05:26
05:34
05:50
05:55
05:38
05:41
05:14
05:19
05:32
05:38
diff
00:08
00:05
00:03
00:05
00:05
Second appliance
2014/15 2015/16
diff
06:55
07:00
00:05
07:10
07:14
00:04
07:06
07:07
00:01
06:25
06:28
00:02
06:54
06:57
00:03
The PFI programme is well correlated with average attendance time performance in 2014/15 and 2015/16. In
2014/15, there were an average of only three stations subject to PFI each month across the year, with only two
stations over the first six months. During the 12 months to Q2 2015/16, for which performance was set out in
report FEP 2530, there were an average of five stations subject to PFI, which continue for all 2015/16.
It is highly likely, therefore, that the increased average first and second appliance attendance times reported to
GPAC for Q2 can be largely attributed to the PFI programme, with a larger amount of PFI stations impacting in
Q2 2015/16 compared to 2014/15. That performance is likely to be reflected in outturn performance for
2015/16. However, the impacts visible in 2015/16 will gradually reduce as stations come back into service,
with negligible PFI impacts on performance in 2016/17.
Please contact me if you require any further information
Dave Brown
Director of Operations
Report title
End of year Monitoring of Risk, Continuity and Governance for
2015/16
Meeting
Date
11 July 2016
Report by
Document Number
Head of Strategy and Inclusion
FEP 2609
Summary
This report is submitted to the Committee to provide the end of year monitoring position (as at the
end of March 2016) on the Authority’s:
 Risk management framework, including the risk audit programme and supporting assurance
work;
 Business Continuity Management (BCM) framework; and
 Annual Governance Statement (AGS).
Recommendation
That the report be noted.
1 of 20
Background
1. This is the end of year monitoring report for 2015/16 covering the Authority’s activities around
managing risk, business continuity and governance. Collectively these areas demonstrate how
the Authority is governing itself in terms of taking appropriate action to mitigate the risks that may
impair or prevent the organisation from delivering its services.
Part 1 – Risk management, audit and assurance
2. Strategic risk management enables the Authority to plan for, anticipate, manage, and mitigate
risks which have the potential to seriously impact upon the services provided by the
organisation. As a fire and rescue service, many of our activities are naturally underpinned by a
response to a range of hazards, but it is only through the evaluation of the chance or probability
of harm associated with those hazards (i.e. by undertaking a risk assessment) that we are able to
accurately understand the risk they pose to the organisation.
3. Risk management is a process which seeks to identify, evaluate and manage these risks in a
structured way. A robust strategic risk management framework enables the Authority to take
sufficient action, which could involve prevention of significant risks and/or reduction of the
impact of those that do occur by putting adequate risk mitigation controls in place.
4. As the assessment of risk and the implementation of controls is largely an in-house function, the
Authority’s internal audit function (provided by MOPAC) effectively provides independent
verification to make sure that the appropriate risks are being identified and prioritised, that they
are rated correctly and that evidence for the risk controls in place can be checked.
Corporate Risk Register
5.
Corporate risks are those which officers have identified could have a serious impact on how the
Authority operates. These corporate risks were last reported to the Committee in November
2015 (FEP2531).
6. Since November’s report, all the corporate risks have been reviewed with their respective risk
owners in order to update the controls, triggers (events that have the potential to cause the risk
to be realised) and impacts, and to determine whether the overall assessment of the risk (the risk
score) is still appropriate or needs to change. The end of year review represents an opportunity
to re-assess the risk management priorities for the Brigade. This has resulted in the following
changes to the corporate risk register.
Review of existing corporate risks
7. The following table summarises the changes to the current corporate risks:
Corporate risk
Summary of changes
CRR1 – A death or serious injury occurs as a
result of our staff not operating a safe system
of work
No change
2 of 20
Corporate risk
Summary of changes
CRR2 - Disconnect between top, middle and
junior management leads to a lack of consistent
leadership affecting our ability to manage and
change behaviours
During 2015/16, a number of developments
have taken place which have helped to reduce
the perceived disconnect between the
management levels. This includes the change
in governance structures with a Corporate
Management Team meeting, and a Top
Management Group meeting supporting
decision making amongst a wider pool of
officers. Significant progress has also been
made with people focussed strategies and
frameworks such as the new Inclusion Strategy
and the forthcoming behavioural framework.
For these reasons, it is recommended that the
overall risk rating is reduced from its current
amber rating (6) to green (4).
CRR3 – Failure or perceived failure to deliver
all aspects of the service
This is a legacy risk from the early days of the
corporate risk register. Its scope has expanded
over time. However, the breadth of this risk is
no longer helpful in directing where to focus
risk management efforts. It is recommended
that the risk is closed.
CRR5 - Ability to effect change is limited
leading to poor / ineffective resource
management
Recent performance has shown that the
Brigade’s ability to deliver change has not been
unduly impacted by how we manage our
resources. While acknowledging that there is
still work to do on effective resource
management, this risk is no longer relevant. It
is recommended that the risk is closed.
CRR7 - Failure of a significant contractual
relationship impacts on the delivery of services
No change
CRR8 – Failure to develop and maintain equity
across the Brigade
The work on equality and diversity remains a
core priority for the Brigade. However, this has
now developed into inclusion, which picks up a
wider remit, and is linked to the people
focussed work taking place across the
organisation. The current wording of the risk is
not helpful, and could be mistaken for equity
of attendance times. It is recommended that
the risk description is changed to “The new
inclusion strategy doesn’t deliver a people
focussed workplace.”
3 of 20
Corporate risk
Summary of changes
CRR10 - The current economic climate
requires strategic decisions that impact on the
Brigade’s ability to budget effectively
The Brigade’s financial situation has changed
since the inception of this risk. It is
recommended that the risk description is
changed to “Uncertainty about the
government’s approach to Home Office
funding for fire and rescue services impacts on
the Brigade’s ability to budget effectively.”
CRR13 - A breakdown in industrial relations
affects our ability to deliver the service
There has been an improvement in industrial
with a move towards more transparency and
informal working to progress matters. The
outcome of the LGA peer challenge included
industrial relations as a theme, and the
recommendations from the challenge has led
to an agreement with the trade unions to hold
joint workshops facilitated by ACAS with a
view to improving relationships further.
Combined with the FBU’s declaration that
there will be no industrial action before June
2017 means that this risk which has
traditionally been rated as a high red risk, has
reduced in likelihood. It is recommended that
the risk rating is reduced from a red rating (12)
to amber (6).
CRR14 - A risk averse culture within the
organisation lessens our ability to deliver
efficient and effective services
No change
CRR15 - The national programme to replace
Airwave with the Emergency Services Network
(ESN) by 2017 fails to deliver a solution for the
provision of radio and data communications
which is both affordable in the long term and
which delivers the complete functionality
required by LFB
No change
New corporate risks
8. As part of the end of year review, it is apparent that there are new risk areas that need to be
addressed. Accordingly, three new corporate risks are proposed:
New corporate risk
Rationale, proposed rating and owner
CRR16 – Failure to adequately prepare for the
governance changes under the Policing and
Crime Bill leads to bureaucratic, undemocratic
or ineffective arrangements
The governance arrangements for the Brigade
will transfer from the Authority to the London
Fire Commissioner under the Policing and
Crime Bill. It is important that officers consider
the impact of these changes to reassure
4 of 20
stakeholders that the new arrangements are
transparent, lead to good governance and
continue to improve Brigade services.
Suggested rating – Unlikely (2) x Major (3) = 6
(amber)
Owner: Commissioner
CRR17 – Environmental concerns regarding
diesel vehicles leads to challenges regarding
the Brigade’s fleet
A large part of the Brigade’s fleet (including
lease cars) run on diesel. As lobbying and
concerns grow over the continued use of
diesel, this could lead to difficult challenges for
the Brigade as it seeks to maintain its status as a
sustainable leader.
Suggested rating – Likely (3) x Significant (2) =
6 (amber)
Owner: Director of Finance and Contractual
Services
CRR18 – The Brigade is susceptible in terms of
its capability to provide a specialist response to
certain types of incident
The national threat level is at ‘Severe’ meaning
that an attack is highly likely. Combined with a
rise in the threat level from dissidents in
Northern Ireland, this could mean that the
Brigade is not adequately prepared in dealing
with a rising tide of new types of terrorist
activity.
Suggested rating: Likely (3) x Major (3) = 9
(red)
Owner: Director of Safety and Assurance
9. A complete list of the updated and new corporate risks is available at Appendix 1.
Departmental risk review
10. In addition to the corporate risk review, all departmental risks (with the exception of ICT
programmed into the next quarter) have been reviewed with their respective risk owners. The
process employed focussed on ensuring risk continues to be relevant and reflect issues currently
or potentially affecting departments. This rationalising of risks on registers has removed ‘legacy’
and poorly defined risks. This has also led to a reduction by 50 per cent in terms of the numbers
of risks at this level, enabling risk management priorities to be clearly defined.
The corporate risk appetite
11. Risk appetite is the amount of risk, broadly, that an organisation is willing to accept in pursuit of
its objectives. It reflects the organisation’s history and risk management philosophy and, in turn,
influences the organisation’s culture and risk management style. The better able we are to
5 of 20
manage our risks in accordance with our risk appetite, the more we can use this information (i.e.
are we within our risk appetite or exceeding it?) to aid decision making.
12. The new position of the corporate risks on the risk matrix is shown below in Figure 1.
Figure 1 – The summary corporate risk profile – end of year 2015/16
Very Likely
4
5
Likelihood
Likely
3
Unlikely
2
1
CRR7, CRR8,
CRR10,CRR15,
CRR17
CRR18
2
3
CRR2, CRR14
CRR1, CRR13,
CRR16
Significant
2
Major
3
Very Unlikely
1
Minor
1
Catastrophic
4
Impact
13. Overall, the Authority’s risk appetite can be described as low to low-medium. At the moment, the
overall position of the corporate risks (including the three new risks) shows that one risk (CRR18)
is over the threshold line meaning that the Authority is at an amber status.
Risk Management Strategy 2014-17 – Update
14. A new Risk Management Strategy 2014-17 (FEP2356) was approved by the Strategy Committee
in November 2014, together with an action plan. An update on progress has been provided at
Appendix 2.
Part 2 - Business Continuity Management
15. Business Continuity Management (BCM) is a holistic management system that relies on both the
information captured through the departmental Business Impact Analysis (BIA) programme to
identify potential threats to business operations, and the development of a single framework
through which organisational resilience and response arrangements can be built. The BCM
programme that has been in operation across the Brigade since 2005 has enabled us to
successfully identify critical organisational activities, explore the key dependencies that exist
between them, and has assisted in the development and review of business continuity plans.
6 of 20
16. Underpinning the BCM work that is undertaken across the Brigade are the statutory
requirements imposed on us by the Civil Contingencies Act 2004, which require all category one
responders to put BCM arrangements in place and to test those arrangements through staged
exercises. As with risk management in general, BCM is a dynamic activity that is continually
evolving and for this reason it is essential that the Brigade’s approach to BCM is based on the
principles of continuous development and review. Both the Civil Contingencies Act 2004 and
International Standard for Business Continuity Management (ISO 22301) make reference to a
Plan-Do-Check-Act model and it is this iterative approach to BCM that has been adopted by the
Brigade.
17. Since the last report to the Committee in November 2015 (FEP2531), officers have continued to
work on a number of initiatives that have been designed to further develop and embed business
continuity practices within the Brigade’s normal business.
Business continuity planning
18. As reported at the last Committee, the Brigade has modernised its approach to business
continuity planning through the rationalisation of critical activities and the simplification of plans.
From June 2016, the departmental BC plan review cycle starts with the focus on streamlining and
making plans clearer and accessible to all staff.
19. The Strategic Response Arrangements (SRA) Policy has been redrafted to reflect the formation of
the Civil Contingences Group that resulted from the merger of the London Resilience Team and
the LFB Emergency Planning Team. The policy outlines the core structures and key processes
that the Brigade can stand up during major incidents and other business disruptions. The policy
includes clear instructions for how structures are to be set up and the lines of communication to
be maintained.
20. The Brigade participated in this years Business Continuity Awareness Week (BCAW). Alongside
London Resilience Forum (LRF), we supported London Councils in tweeting Business Continuity
messages and distributing Business Continuity materials aimed at promoting the importance of
having business continuity plans to small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs). This year’s
theme was focussed on the possible financial losses SMEs could face as a result of poor continuity
planning.
21. Business Continuity awareness sessions have also been held for Heads of Service and business
continuity deputies. These sessions have acted as a refresher to revisit continuity plans and
maintain up to date contact details, locations of plans / useful documents and the importance of
having a scheduled regular review of departmental plans.
Business continuity exercise and testing
22. The process of rationalising critical activities is now complete and an annual program will be put in
place that aims to increase the frequency but reduce the burden of previous testing regimes by
having a ‘desktop’ review of plans. This utilises a business consultancy ‘on the spot’ style
approach to updating and testing departmental BC plans by posing scenarios such as a weather
disruption to see how well local plans stand up to likely sources of disruption. Meetings are being
programmed in with each Head of Service starting in June 2016 to initially review their
departmental continuity plan ahead of a desktop exercise later in the year.
23. The advantage of the desktop internal business continuity exercise programme is that it will test
department specific plans against relevant scenarios that best stress test critical activities. This
approach will allow us to vary the specific details of the scenarios to ensure the tests are robust
7 of 20
and can be amended depending on the department and other exercises that have been run. The
testing process will also involve the business continuity deputies in each department to better
embed business continuity resilience within the Brigade.
24. A number of other larger scale exercise arrangements have also taken place since the last report
to the Committee. These are detailed below.
Exercise Charley Bravo
25. During Business Continuity Awareness Week, the Chief Fire Association’s (CFOA) Business
Continuity Management Group ran injects for exercise Charley Bravo. This exercise was
designed with pick and choose injects to allow flexible involvement. As the Brigade had recently
organised and successfully run Exercise Unified Response (see below) rather than opt for full
participation, the opportunity was taken to use the injects as training material to build better
resilience within Strategy and Inclusion (as the department responsible for business continuity)
and to give other staff members an introduction to business continuity exercises.
Exercise Cygnus
26. As reported to members in November (FEP2531), the final live-play phase of Exercise Cygnus
was initially postponed to May 2016 due to the emerging Ebola crisis. The exercise has now been
rescheduled again to the 18-20 October 2016. Since participating in the exercise in 2014, the
Brigade’s Influenza Pandemic Policy (PN655)has been updated and published. Learning
outcomes identified from the exercise debrief have been progressed as part of the Brigade’s
Exercise Cygnus Action Plan. The majority of these actions are now complete (see FEP2477), with
all outstanding actions on track for completion prior to the reinstatement of Exercise Cygnus in
October 2016.
Exercise Unified Response
27. In June 2014 Emergency Planning submitted a successful bid to the European Commission on
behalf of London Fire Brigade and the wider London Resilience Partnership to deliver an exercise
programme under the call for proposals for Civil Protection Mechanism Exercises 2014.
28. After months of preparation, the largest and most complex multi-agency training exercise the
Authority has ever undertaken, took place from Monday 29 February to Thursday 4 March 2016.
The exercise involved over 2,000 'casualties' and 2,000 participants, including 150 Brigade staff
volunteers. All of London's emergency response organisations, including local and national
authorities, were involved along with specialised teams from across the UK and from Hungary,
Italy and Cyprus.
29. The exercise was successfully conducted simultaneously at four separate locations in central and
south east London. The main 'live' exercise element took place at the disused Littlebrook power
station in Dartford.The scenario was based on a major building collapse at Waterloo station,
involving mass casualties and fatalities. The main exercise control room was located on the first
floor of Union Street and there were 16 other control rooms and coordinating centres involved in
delivering the exercise.
30. The scope of the exercise was unprecedented in terms of the scale and multiagency involvement.
In order to create the most realistic environment possible, an entire mock tube station was
created and seven tube carriages positioned within thousands of tons of rubble. Planning for the
exercise took over a year with funding coming from the European Commission , Civil Protection
Mechanism, the Brigade, TfL and other partners and groups.
8 of 20
31. As part of the exercise, the Brigade activated its Strategic Response Arrangements and all
elements under the arrangements were activated, including the multi-agency, operational and
business continuity components. The London Local Authority Coordination Centre (LLACC) and
Brigade Coordination Centre (BCC) were stood up and the Commissioner’s Group (CG) was
convened throughout the exercise and hosted at Union Street.
32. The Commissioner’s Group took place in two parts; one focussed on the exercise management
and issues relating to either the exercise itself or possible impact of the extent of staff or resource
involvements on our operational readiness; and the second part of the meeting dealt with inexercise play and took part with full participation of the Commissioner’s Group, Gold
commanders, and Communications Gold. The supporting Continuity Management Team (CMT)
was also convened, and Commissioner’s Group was held twice daily during the exercise.
33. Due to the scale and level of involvement of the exercise, an extensive debrief is in progress to
ensure all learning is effectively captured. This process is being coordinated by the core EUR
project team who will collate and analyse the post exercise evaluation. The process is due to be
completed in November 2017.
34. Learning from the exercise itself and the result of the debrief process will feed back into our
Strategic Response Arrangements and other relevant policies. Early feedback has indicated the
Brigade’s response arrangements worked well and enabled effective communication between
strategic , tactical and operational levels. Much of the learning from Exercise Strong Tower (see
FEP2531) was implemented in the development of the BCC and the initial activations of the
Commissioner’s Group and CMT.
Business disruptions
35. Since the last report to the Committee, no further periods of strike action have taken place as part
of the ongoing dispute between the FBU and the government over the firefighter pension
reforms. Additionally, the FBU has announced that no further action will take place at least until
June 2017.
36. A debrief relating to the Capitalguard arrangements stood up during the periods of strike action,
has been scheduled to take place in June 2016. This will capture learning and relevant actions to
be implemented as a result of the arrangements. Internal monitoring and reporting that took place
throughout the strike periods to date identified that our strategic response and contingency
arrangements are not only robust, but also highly effective, with the overall success of these
arrangements being strongly attributed to the level of commitment demonstrated by all officers
involved. The debrief will provide an opportunity to recognise this formally, along with any
further improvements that can be made.
37. Over the past six months RMT, TSSA and other unions have balloted for strike action affecting
services on London Underground and the DLR. Much of the strike action was postponed and
subsequently cancelled as the result of ongoing negotiations. As some of the strike action was
cancelled only a day prior to action, it remains important for us to work with the London
Resilience Partnership and effectively communicate any likely strike action and strike
cancellations in order for staff to plan their travel arrangements accordingly.
38. To mitigate the impacts of the above strikes, the London Resilience Partnership coordinated the
multi-agency preparation, planning and response to the strikes as per the London Partnership
Protocol. This ensured that each of the strikes was effectively monitored and that all partner
agencies were kept updated on the situation, latest impacts and agreed response strategies. As a
9 of 20
result the multi-agency partnership was able to effectively prepare, plan and respond to the
strikes in an integrated and coordinated manner.
39. In response to the various strikes, the Brigade’s internal business continuity strategy for transport
disruption was also effectively put into place with all affected staff with business continuity
responsibilities ensuring that critical activities were not disrupted (this includes either working
remotely from home or from alternative Brigade locations where necessary). As a result there
were no impacts on the delivery of any of the Brigade’s critical activities or key services,
highlighting the effectiveness of the Brigade’s existing business continuity arrangements.
Part 3 –Annual Governance Statement Action Plan
40. This section of the report provides the end of year update on the Annual Governance Statement
(AGS) Action Plan 2014/15 as approved by the Committee in September 2015 (FEP2495).
41. The end of year position shows that two actions; pension changes - higher turnover of staff; and
delivering a staff engagement programme have now been closed. The remaining four items relate
to longer term aspirations and will be carried over to the next AGS action plan. The new Annual
Governance Statement for 2015/16 (and associated action plan) is also on the agenda for today’s
Committee meeting.
42. Progress on each of these items in the 2014/15 action plan is provided below so that the
Committee can exercise its role of monitoring and review in terms of improving governance of
the Authority.
National Fire Role – LFEPA to take a proactive role on policy direction nationally by working
with others on a range of matters to secure improvement of the fire service to the public.
43. There are two updates of note for this quarter where the Brigade has taken a leading role as
follows:
(i) Funding arrangements for the future of the National Operational Guidance programme
44. The new Fire Minister has now approved the programme’s funding for the final two years of the
Programme. The £1 million for 2016/17 has been received, with the final payment being
approved in principle, based upon having a sustainable system in place plus confirmation of
funding requirements in relation to outturn expenditure after 2016/17.
45. Project delivery for the first year of the second three year programme delivered to time, cost and
quality, with the exception of Specialist Operational Response CBRN(E) which has been delayed
awaiting publication of the National Joint Operating Principles and the review of the Incident
Response Unit provision. Five further projects have been initiated for delivery over the next
twelve months. This will see the majority of the framework complete, with the final year set to
have four guidance projects.
46. In addition to the guidance projects the Programme has initiated projects to establish a notable
practice methodology for national operational learning as well as a project to establish the
electronic database approach to guidance.
(ii) Taking a leading role in supporting the National Joint Council’s position on conditions of
service
47. There are now five national workstreams looking at the different aspects of the future role of the
firefighter. The Brigade is continuing to lead and support these workstreams, and is represented
10 of 20
on two (Emergency Medical Response and Multi-Agency Response), with the Commissioner
acting as the lead advisor to the national employers.
Pension changes – Higher turnover of experienced staff – Analyse the exposure and
impact to the organisation of knowledge loss through retirement and the measures required to
ensure key learning is retained.
48. Completed - The staffing establishment figures have been back on target since July 2015
following a period after LSP5 implementation where staffing levels were temporarily above
establishment. This was achieved through a combination of the voluntary severance programme
and natural wastage.
49. The 2015 firefighter recruitment round replenished leavers in 2015/16, with trainee cohorts from
this round commencing on station from December 2015 onwards . A subsequent firefighter
recruitment round was launched in February 2016, and this will provide further trainee cohorts in
2016/17. Future recruitment needs will be met from further firefighter recruitment activity. More
generally, the Brigade has in place a succession planning model which can predict future
recruitment requirements for all operational roles, and an annual cycle of operational promotion
rounds has been put in place.
50. In addition, a framework to define critical posts within the organisation is currently being
researched and options will be developed for approval. This will include identifying the required
knowledge to be successful in a critical post, and a range of methods to retain key learning will be
developed to meet those specific needs.
New mobilising system – Secure the delivery and operation of a new mobilising system
ensuring that it links to existing systems and controls as well as providing opportunities for further
efficiencies in service provision.
51. The contract for the replacement mobilising system that was placed with Capita on 31 July 2012,
was due to go-live no later than 25 July 2014. Following a failure of the Factory Acceptance
Testing (FAT) during January 2014 a correction plan was agreed with Capita which gave a
revised go-live date of no later than 31 July 2015 and a planned go-live date of 15 July 2015.
Capita subsequently reviewed their position and confirmed that there were further delays and
the system would be ready for operational use by end of September 2015. Capita were subject
to the full impact of delay payments that are permitted within the contract for these delays.
52. Operational Acceptance Testing was successfully completed. Differentiation was made between
Operational go-live and acceptance of the system for entering into contractual full operational
service. This was a Brigade decision based on LFB readiness for cutover following Control
training. Operational go live was scheduled for 17 November 2015 and the replacement
mobilising solution entered into full operational service at 02:00hrs on Tuesday the 17 November
2015.
53. The decommissioning of legacy systems was completed in January 2016, however dates still
need to be agreed for the introduction of geographical mobilising for Senior Officers and the use
of BOSS Mobile. Since go-live the Brigade has experienced problems with the solution and
continues to hold the Supplier to task. This is being dealt with by ICT department’s In-Service
Management team.
11 of 20
54. Due to the ongoing problems, the Project Sponsor has requested that the project should not
move to formal closure at this time. A new forecast end date of August 2016 has been agreed to
align with the Supplier’s plan for the delivery of further corrective releases of software.
55. In a recent meeting (May 2016) with Capita Secure Systems’ managing director the Brigade
indicated that it did not expect to receive invoices for, nor to make any further milestone
payments, until the system is in a continuous acceptable state of working and performing as
required by the contract.
56. The project is reporting as green.
Promoting equality and diversity – Define a new equality and diversity strategy for the
Authority and implement a step change process, working with relevant departments and the
support groups to drive the equalities agenda forward both within the Brigade and the service
nationally.
57. Since the last report to the Committee, the draft strategy has been presented to the Authority
and was well received by Members. Officers were charged with developing an action plan to
support the strategy and to return to the Authority at the annual meeting in June with the final
strategy. As well as defining priorities for the future, the new strategy will demonstrate how we
meet the duties of the Equalities Act while identifying where more work is needed to improve
further.
58. The draft strategy has been formulated by working closely with a number of key stakeholders,
including the support groups. This approach is being maintained as officers develop both the
final strategy and associated action plan. In the meantime, data regarding workforce monitoring
continues to be published as part of the Authority’s standard performance reports.
59. Going forward, this action will be amended slightly so that it focusses on promoting inclusion
and delivering the inclusion strategy action plan. A new corporate risk has also been added to
ensure there is sufficient focus on this objective.
Staff engagement programme – Deliver a staff engagement programme to involve staff at all
levels in discussing and shaping the future of the Brigade.
60. Completed - The Staff Engagement Project has continued to deliver engagement sessions with
staff; in the last quarter 35 sessions for both uniformed and non-uniformed staff were delivered.
Further sessions are scheduled that will include Regulatory Fire Safety, Community Fire Safety
and Fire Investigation Teams. The project has now been established as normal business and for
this reason, this action will close. There will be a new action in the AGS for 2015/16 focussing on
people and staff engagement will form an important strand of that.
Statutory financial reporting deadlines – To work to prepare the statement of accounts to
earlier timescales, and to work with the Authority’s external auditors to be ready for the new
deadlines from 2017/18.
61. The Accounts and Audit regulations 2015 require Local Authorities, with effect from the financial
year 2017/18, to close their accounts by 31 May (currently 30 June) and publish audited accounts
by 31 July (currently 30 September). Finance officers have put in place procedures in anticipation
of the earlier close and achieved the 31 May deadline for 2013/14, 2014/15 and 2015/16
accounts.
12 of 20
62. The earlier publishing date will be dependent on the external audit being completed in time for
approval at the July cycle of Committee meetings. Therefore the next stage of this process is to
undertake a mid-year close-down to allow the audit process to begin earlier. To this end, officers
liaised with Ernst and Young (EY), the Authority’s auditor, to scope the workload and officers
have agreed to work with EY to test their approach to the earlier close for 2015/16. This saw an
accounts soft close-down run at six months with a hard close at nine months. This allowed the
auditors to test systems and transactions at those points, with EY then placing reliance on this
work at financial year end. EY are currently testing this approach as part of their audit of the
accounts 2015/16.The target is to provide their outcome report for the July GPAC meeting,
which will enable publication of the audited accounts by 31 July 2016.
Head of Legal and Democratic Services comments
63. Part 3 of this report is consistent with the statutory requirements set out in Regulation 4(2) of the
Accounts and Audit (England) Regulations 2011 for authorities to prepare a statement of internal
control in accordance with “proper practices”. The Authority follows the widely accepted
CIPFA/SOLACE guidance on ‘proper practices’ as outlined in the Authority’s Annual Governance
Statement. The Annual Governance Statement was approved by the Committee in September
2015 (FEP2495).
64. Section 21 (7) of the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004 requires fire and rescue authorities to
have regard to the National Framework in carrying out their functions. The Fire and Rescue
National Framework for England requires the Authority to produce an annual statement of
assurance. The Authority’s Statement of Assurance was approved by Members in October 2015
(FEP2514).
Director of Finance and Contractual Services comments
65. The Director of Finance and Contractual Services has reviewed this report and has no comments.
Sustainable development implications
66. There are no environmental implications associated with this report.
Staff Side consultations undertaken
67. As a regular monitoring report for risk, business continuity and the AGS action plan,
representative bodies have not been consulted over the content of this particular report.
Equalities implications
68. The risk and business continuity strategies ensure that we consider all equality issues to arise out
of these programmes and develop responses that address any issues.
13 of 20
1. Corporate risks
2. Action plan to support the Risk Management Strategy 2014/2017
List of background documents
1. Half yearly monitoring of risk, business continuity and governance 2015/16 – FEP2531
2. Annual Governance Statement 2014/15 – FEP2495
Proper officer
Contact officer
Telephone
Email
Daniel Ingram
020 8555 1200 x30071
[email protected]
14 of 20
Appendix 1
Corporate risks
The current corporate risks for the London Fire Brigade are as follows:
Risk Code Risk Description
Score
CRR1
A death or serious injury occurs as a result of our staff not operating a safe system
of work
6
CRR2
Disconnect between top, middle and junior management leads to a lack of
consistent leadership affecting our ability to manage and change behaviours
4
CRR7
Failure of a significant contractual relationship impacts on the delivery of services
6
CRR8
The new inclusion strategy doesn’t deliver a people focussed workplace
6
CRR10
Uncertainty about the government’s approach to Home Office funding for fire and
rescue services impacts on the Brigade’s ability to budget effectively
6
CRR13
A breakdown in industrial relations affects our ability to deliver the service
6
CRR14
A risk averse culture within the organisation lessens our ability to deliver efficient
and effective services
4
CRR15
The national programme to replace Airwave with the Emergency Services
Network (ESN) by 2017 fails to deliver a solution for the provision of radio and
data communications which is both affordable in the long term and which delivers
the complete functionality required by LFB
6
CRR16
Failure to adequately prepare for the governance changes under the Policing and
Crime Bill leads to bureaucratic, undemocratic or ineffective arrangements
6
CRR17
Environmental concerns regarding diesel vehicles leads to challenges regarding
the Brigade’s fleet
6
CRR18
The current threat levels arising from terrorism means that the Brigade is under
prepared in its initial response to certain types of incidents
9
15 of 20
Appendix 2
Action Plan to support the Risk Management Strategy 2014/2017
Strategy Commitment
Action/Task and deadline
1. Making smarter use of available risk information
(1a) – We will consider whether the new
Review output of annual assessment of risk when
‘annual assessment of risk’ (which will be
available (expected by March 2015)
reported to the Strategy Committee) can
By end of December 2015
inform our approach to strategic risk
Assess extent of relationships between annual
management and risk management priorities
assessment of risk and strategic risk management
at a borough and/or corporate level, and to
framework and agree benefits and possible extent
potentially explore a stronger link between
of forging stronger links between the two areas.
strategic risk management and integrated risk
management planning.
Progress
(1b) – We will strive to make better links
between the business continuity framework
and strategic risk framework, including
investigating how information about key
products and services can be used to inform
our corporate risks.
Completed - The mapping of critical
activities to key services has been
completed and will be reflected in the
streamlined business continuity plans.
Outputs from this work where necessary
have been fed into the review of corporate
risks.
Review the eight key products and services (e.g.
999 call handling and emergency response,
management of incident or emergency, corporate
governance services, etc.) in the corporate
business continuity plan to test their criticality and
the extent to which they relate to the corporate
risks.
Completed – The annual assessment of risk
was presented to Authority in December
2015. While this will be a useful tool for
reassuring the public about what we know
about risk and their perceptions of risk in
their local communities, it is less applicable
to the Brigade’s internal risk management
challenges. Outputs from the assessment of
risk will continue to be reviewed as the tool
evolves but at this stage, there is no further
work to do.
By end of November 2015
Assess the critical activities that support the
(revised) key products and services.
16 of 20
Strategy Commitment
2. Risk and Performance
(2a) – We will continue the integration of risk
management into normal business operations
so that there is a greater understanding of
how risk management supports achievement
of corporate aims and objectives.
Introduce/amend risks to ensure that any gaps in
the Brigade’s continuity arrangements are managed
(to include further actions in departmental plans).
Progress
Completed – The corporate and
departmental risks have been reviewed with
new items to address any shortcomings in
By end of March 2016 continuity arrangements introduced as
necessary.
Analyse impacts of risks (corporate/departmental)
Completed – The corporate risks are
against each corporate aim to ensure all controls are appropriately aligned to the existing
appropriately identified.
corporate aims. The presentation of the aims
By end of March 2016 will change as part of the development of
the Sixth London Safety Plan as this will be
revisited as part of that work.
Assess the alignment of corporate, department,
Under review – the proposal to move to an
borough and project risks so that there is
ABC risk model (see 4b) will aid this
consistency of assessment.
alignment.
By end of August 2016
Ensure relationships between risks, plans and
performance indicators are understood and applied
at the departmental level through workshops,
awareness sessions and supporting advice.
Completed – A comprehensive review of
each department’s plans and risk registers
has been conducted. This has had two
benefits: namely the rationalisation of
By end of March 2017 existing content, and a greater
understanding of how the components
inform each other. It is planned that this
exercise will be repeated annually.
17 of 20
Strategy Commitment
(2b) – We will investigate how to strengthen
the link between risk management activity,
risk information and decision making to
ensure the effective delivery of services
which are efficient
(2c) - We will look to ensure our processes
encourage the capture of current material
risks to the Brigade.
(2d) We will include the development of risk
information as part of the wider Information
Strategy.
Re-assess the Brigade’s risk management maturity
against the ALARM model and agree the required
maturity level to ensure effective decision making
processes taking account of risk.
Progress
An initial discussion has taken place with the
project management office. Re-assessing
the maturity of risk management in the
Brigade may form part of a wider
By end of March 2017 assessment on planning and project
capability. This is in the early stages of
development.
Review how we collate evidence of risk
Under review – the proposal to move to an
management activity (and report on it) to further
ABC risk model (see 4b) will aid evidence
improve risk management processes and effective
collation.
delivery of services.
By end of August 2016.
Conduct face to face workshops with leading risk
Completed - A full programme has been
officers to challenge and improve their
conducted to support departments with
understanding of risk.
reviewing and managing their local risks.
By end of March 2017.
Ensure that strategic risk information is given the
same status and data quality focus as other Brigade
performance information and include this in the
revised Information Strategy.
Officers are working with Information
Management colleagues to ensure this is fed
into the new ICT/Information Management
Strategy.
3. Projects and positive risk
(3a) – We will ensure that risk matters arising
from projects are managed in line with the
risk management framework and that positive
risk opportunities continued to be pursued
through the agreed project management
framework.
Develop regular review meeting with the project
Completed – A regular meeting is now held
management office (PMO) to ensure consistency of with the PMO to ensure consistency and
risk assessment across projects and departments.
discussion regarding risk matters.
By December 2014.
Obtain overview of project risks and assess
Completed – Project risks were reviewed
whether they are adequately reflected in the
and assessed as being adequately reflected
in the corporate risk register.
18 of 20
Strategy Commitment
corporate risk register.
Progress
4. Areas for improvement
(4a) – We will deliver the agreed
recommendations from the internal audit
review of the risk management framework
conducted in 2014.
Undertake quality assurance checks with clear
guidance on identifying, assessing and monitoring
risks appropriately at a departmental level.
Completed - This is done on a regularly
basis as part of the performance reporting
arrangements to the Corporate
Core business to run through to March 2017. Management Board. It will also be triggered
by Internal Audit reports.
Publish and implement a Risk Management Policy. Completed – A manual has already been
By December 2014 issued and is available to staff on the
intranet site. This contains all the procedural
detail behind risk the management strategy.
Monitor target implementation dates to determine, Completed – As per this report, progress
assess and track whether progress against the
against the action plan will be reported to
strategy is achieved
the Governance, Performance and Audit
By December 2014 Committee.
(and thereafter for lifetime of strategy).
Consider the skills required by staff and further
Completed – Following a review of the
development of risk management awareness in the Authority’s training requirements by
context of a published Risk Management Policy so
Babcock, it has been agreed that the risk
that all staff are made aware of their risk
management awareness course ‘Managing
management responsibilities
Risk and Uncertainty’ will be maintained and
By December 2014. updated to reflect current practice.
19 of 20
Strategy Commitment
(4b) – We will explore the current structure
for our risks and investigate whether to adopt
a governance level approach similar to that
for projects.
Consider the best method for linking risks and
associated controls with department planning.
Progress
Completed - Actions from exercises and
internal audit recommendations are now
By March 2015. recommended for inclusion into
departmental plans. Action 4b below will
also provide the best opportunity to provide
test links between risks and plans, and
progress will be reported to the Committee
through this report.
Use the outputs from the risk maturity reUnder review – see the proposal to move to
assessment (see 2b above) to determine whether
an ABC risk model below .
the current risk governance model is the most
appropriate.
By March 2016.
Explore the potential for moving to an A, B, C
governance risk model (like the project
management office) and the advantages and
disadvantages of this, compared to the existing
corporate, department, borough and project
model.
In progress – Following the end of year
review of both corporate and departmental
risks, there is merit in moving to an ABC
model for risk management to further
streamline arrangements and to ensure that
active risks are being managed, with
By March 2017. emphasis on actions to close risks down
within an agreed timeframe. This will help
reduce legacy risks and redirect Brigade
efforts to focus on core risk management
priorities.
20 of 20
Report title
End of Year Monitoring of Performance Indicators in the London
Safety Plan for 2015/16 (for Prevention, Protection and Response)
Meeting
Date
11 July 2016
Report by
Document Number
FEP 2610
Public
Summary
This is the end of year monitoring report for 2015/16 (with data for the 12 months to the end of March
2016). It contains key performance for indicators in the Fifth London Safety Plan (LSP5), related to
Authority aims 1-3 (Prevention, Protection and Response).
Performance against indicators for aims 4-6 (Resources, People and Principles) is addressed in a separate
report to the Resources Committee.
Recommendation
Page 1 of 74
Table 1: Performance against key performance indicators 2015/16.
2013/14 2014/15 2015/16
Q4
Q4
Q4
Aim 1 : PREVENTION
LI 1i : Primary fires - fatalities (10 yr. average)
LI 1ii : Primary fires - injuries (excluding precautionary checks)
LI 2 : Arson incidents - all deliberate fires
LI 3 : Dwelling fires - all
LI 4 : Outdoor rubbish fires - all
LI 5 : Fires in care homes and sheltered housing
LI 6i : Home fire safety visits (HFSVs) by LFB staff
LI 6iii : Priority HFSVs - high risk people/places (P1)
LI 7 : Time spent by station staff on community safety
Aim 2 : PROTECTION
LI 8i : All non domestic primary fires in RRO properties
LI 9i : All fire safety inspections/audits carried out
LI 9ii : Fire safety inspections/audits – previously not visited
LI 10i : Fire safety inspections / audits in high risk premises
LI 11 : Consultation & advice requests received
Aim 3 : RESPONSE
LI 12 : False alarms due to AFAs - non domestic
LI 13 : Shut in lift releases
LI 14i : Average arrival time – 1st appliance (mm:ss)
LI 14ii : Average arrival time – 2nd appliance (mm:ss)
LI 15ii: 999 calls answered in 7 seconds
Target 2015/16
normal stretch
5 year
trend
50
647
4,237
5,996
5,944
550
83,948
62407
13.7%
49
593
4,094
5,989
5,726
530
86,990
69470
13.6%
46
571
4,135
5,702
6,125
422
86,596
69,911
13.9%
52
757
5,924
6,390
6,275
503
73,500
58,800
13.0%
691
4,326
5,925
5,160
442
-
q
q
q
q
q
q
p
p
p
2,208
16,658
4,639
8,112
19,502
2,050
11,880
3,256
5,449
19,353
2,052
16,250
3,579
8,493
18,220
2,372
14,000
3,000
5,000
16,000
2,055
-
q
q
q
p
q
20,636 21,160
21,932
4,715
4,894
5,573
00:05:28 00:05:36 00:06:00
00:06:52 00:06:56 00:08:00
92.5%
89.4%
92.0%
19,300
4,849
-
q
q
p
p
q
23,235
5,385
00:05:23
00:06:46
93.7%
Key
Performance
Green – on target
Amber – within 10
per cent of target
Red – more than 10
per cent outside
target
Trend
p Numbers
increasing, good
performance trend
q Numbers
decreasing, good
performance trend
p Numbers
increasing, poor
performance trend
q Numbers
decreasing, poor
performance trend
u No discernible
trend
Page 2 of 74
Introduction
1. This is the end of year monitoring report covering the Authority’s activities around prevention,
protection and response (corporate aims 1, 2 and 3) for 2015/16. The Resources Committee also
receives a performance monitoring report covering the performance indicators relevant to its terms of
reference (corporate aims 4, 5 and 6, including staff, sickness and health and safety).
2. A copy of the corporate performance digest, containing the full suite of corporate performance
information, will be circulated to all Members of the Committee, along with the papers for this
meeting.
3. All indicators in this report fall within the remit of the Director of Operations. There are a number of
items covered within this report and supporting appendices, and the Director may wish to draw the
attention of Members to particular matters, given the importance of this area of work to the Brigade.
Performance targets and monitoring
4. Information on performance for 2015/16 for a selection of key performance indicators, is set out in
table 1 with comparative data for the two previous years. The five year trend indicator reflects the
change in performance since 2011/12. Full details of performance for each indicator, together with
comments from the lead officer concerned, are set out in Appendix 1.
5. Indicators and targets were initially set for 2013/14 to 2015/16 as part of the Fifth London Safety Plan
(LSP5); these were approved by the Authority at the meeting on 18 July 2013.
6. Targets were set having regard to the performance in 2011/12 (the last full year of data when the
LSP5 was prepared). As performance for some indicators will fluctuate on an annual basis, the
objective of target setting over the last few years has been to set targets based on longer term
performance trends rather than respond to the performance in a recent year.
Performance highlights
7. Overall, performance for 2015/16 remains good, with the majority of indicators showing
achievement and a number achieving/exceeding the performance target. In some cases, the
performance targets do mask a small rise in some incident types. For example, secondary fires
increased by 6.9 per cent (due to warmer drier summer weather in 2015) and there were increased
numbers of shut in lift releases (up 3.8 per cent) and automatic fire alarms (AFAs) in non-residential
buildings (up 2.5 per cent) attended (due to fewer callers being challenged/filtered). However,
primary (more serious) fires continued to fall in 2015/16 compared to earlier years, as did fires in
dwellings, which are the focus of the Brigade’s community safety work. The performance highlights
are:

The total number of fire fatalities as at the end of March 2016 based on the 10 year rolling
average (LI1i) was 46. The longer term trend remains one of substantial improvement with fire
fatalities over 24 per cent lower (based on the 10 year average) compared to the highest point
of the last five years (61 – October 2011); there were 36 fire deaths in 2015/16 which is over a
20 per cent reduction on the yearly figure five years ago, although the number is slightly higher
than the 2014/15 (30). Deaths in accidental dwelling fires (the main focus of the Brigade’s
community safety work) continued to fall; deaths in deliberate fires were up compared with
2014/15. Details of each fire fatality in the last six months are set out in Appendix 2.

The number of Injuries arising from primary fires (571) shows an improvement over the
same period for 2014/15. Performance over the past six months continues to represent an
improvement with a 36 per cent improvement from the high point of the past five years (891 –
12 months to end of April 2011); and the current normal and stretch targets are being achieved.

The number of dwelling fires continues to reduce (5,702) over the long term and performance
Page 3 of 74
over the past six months is meeting the current normal and stretch targets.

Time spent on community safety (CS) activity by fire station staff is at 13.9 per cent as
at the end of March 2016. This represents continual improvement, maintaining the high level of
performance which continues to be above the target.

The indicator for primary fires in non-domestic properties (LI 8) was amended for 2013/14
to focus just on those property types covered by the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order
2005 (RRO). The figure of 2,052 as at the end of March 2016 is a slight increase over the end of
year position for 2014/15 (2,050) but performance remains within target.

The speed of attendance to incidents by both first and second fire pumping appliances
continues to remain well within the performance targets (6 minutes and 8 minutes, on average,
respectively). On average, a first appliance arrived at an incident in 5 minutes 36 seconds and a
second appliance in 6 minutes 56 seconds.

The number of unwanted calls to false alarms caused by automatic fire alarms (AFAs) in
non-domestic buildings has increased; however, the figure of 21,160 as at the end of March
2016 still represents a reduction of 20 per cent over the last five years.
Confirmation of indicators and targets for 2016/17
8. LSP5 set out the suite of indicators with targets, and service measures, to be used to monitor the
performance of the Authority in the delivery of services and other ways, for the initial three year
period (2013/14 to 2015/16) covered by the plan. LSP5 has been extended for another year to cover
2016/17 (Budget Update FEP2520) and targets for 2015/16 have been rolled forward into 2016/17.
No changes to the suite of indicators are proposed; changes will be considered as part of the
preparation for the Sixth London Safety Plan (LSP6).
Fire fatalities during October 2015 – March 2016 (Quarters 3 and 4)
9. Details of fatal fires occurring during the past six months are set out in Appendix 2. This fatality
information focuses on those deaths which were likely to be preventable or where the Brigade can
learn from their circumstances and improve its community safety activity as a result.
10. Additionally, at the Committee meeting in November 2015, Members asked for the following
additional information for each fatality:


the time the first appliance arrived; and
the number of pumping appliances that attended the fire (on the initial and subsequent
attendance, but excluding relief appliances).
11. This information has been provided for each fatality occurring during October 2015 to March 2016.
Additionally, officers have also provided the time taken between the discovery of the fire and the call
to the Brigade (where this is known).
Fire safety regulation prosecutions during October 2015 – March 2016 (Quarters 3
and 4)
12. During the past six months, three cases were successfully prosecuted under the Regulatory Reform
Order (RRO). Details of these cases are set out in Appendix 3.
Comparative data for other metropolitan fire and rescue services
13. Appendix 4 provides comparative data for the other fire and rescue services in metropolitan areas in
England for some performance measures which are similar for other services. The data for this
comparison is shared between the relevant services and does not, at this stage, represent official
statistics. In order to aid comparison, the data is expressed on a ‘per head of population’ basis.
Page 4 of 74
14. In addition, new comparative data has been added for first and second appliance attendance times
for the metropolitan fire and rescue services (where provided by the service) which was requested
by the Committee.
Head of Legal & Democratic Services comments
15. The Head of Legal & Democratic Services has reviewed this report and has no comments.
16. The Director of Finance and Contractual Services has reviewed this report and has no comments.
17. Action being taken by the Brigade to prevent and reduce fires, and attendance at false alarms and
some special services (e.g. shut in lift releases) will also reduce the environmental impact of these
incidents and the impact that attending incidents (appliance movements) has on the environment
through reduced:




air-borne pollution associated with fires;
appliance movements so less diesel pollution;
CO2 emissions (e.g. from vehicle fires and vehicle exhaust); and
pollutants being released into the water course from run-off at incidents.
Staff side consultations undertaken
18. Any performance issues which need input from Staff Side would be dealt with as part of the Brigade’s
established performance management framework.
19. Reaching London’s diverse communities is a key longstanding aspect of the Brigade’s community
safety activity, which is helping to drive down the number of fires and the casualties that result from
fires. The Brigade targets risk by addressing a number of factors such as people’s lifestyles, physical
impairments and social demographics. This approach gives a broader understanding of the risks
different groups face rather than focusing on a single factor such as a person’s age or ethnicity.
However, within the lifestyle groups which are the target for our community safety work, both age
and ethnicity are factors that are over-represented in these at risk groups.
1. Fifth London Safety Plan
2. FEP 2520 – Budget Update
3. Corporate performance digest
Proper officer
Contact officer
Telephone
Email
David Wyatt
020 8555 1200 x30352
[email protected]
Page 5 of 74
This page is intentionally blank
Page 6 of 74
Appendix 1 – Performance indicators & commentary
Context to the key performance indicators
page 8
Fire fatalities
page 10
Fire injuries
page 12
Arson (all deliberate fires)
page 14
Fires in the home - All dwelling fires
page 16
All outdoor rubbish fires
page 18
Fires in care homes and sheltered housing
page 20
Home fire safety visits
page 22
Time spent by station staff on community safety
page 24
Fires in non domestic buildings
page 26
All fire safety inspections/audits
page 28
All fire safety inspections/audits – premises not previously visited
page 30
All fire safety inspections/audits – high risk
page 32
Consultation/advice requests received
page 34
Attendance – 1st and 2nd appliance
page 36
Emergency (999) calls
page 38
Automatic Fire Alarms in non-domestic premises (AFAs)
page 40
Shut in Lift releases
page 42
Page 7 of 74
Context to the key performance indicators
This appendix includes detailed information about the key performance indicators that support delivery
of the Authority’s aims and strategic objectives, and the commitments set out in the Fifth London Safety
Plan (LSP5). Indicators and accompanying targets (both normal and stretch targets where appropriate)
have been devised to reflect the key areas to measure achievement on LSP5 commitments. By their
nature, these indicators are very specifically focussed (e.g. reduction in fires in care homes and sheltered
housing – LI5). This context section provides background to the indicators by displaying total incidents
by type, and the relationships between different types of incident.
Emergency calls and incidents
The bubble chart below shows total emergency (999) calls received in 2015/16 (12 months to the end of
March 2016), together with the total number of emergency incidents attended by the brigade, and how
the different incident based performance indicators relate to each other. The incident types with a darker
colour are amongst key performance indicators included in this report.
Fires in care homes/
sheltered housing
Non-domestic
buildings fires
Shut in lift
releases
4,894
Road traffic
collisions
Effecting
entry/exit
6,341
Fires
20,773
Special services
30,065
4,214
1,115
Spills and leaks
1,041
Making safe
Fires in
the home
5,702
Primary fires
10,634
All emergency (999)
calls received, 171,488
Flooding
6,255
422
2,431
All emergency
incidents
attended
template
99,537
Arson
incidents
4,135
Secondary
fires
10,139
Outdoor
fires
10,065
Grass
fires
3,588
Rubbish
fires
6,125
Over the border 564
False alarms
48,699
Malicious
(hoax) calls
Automatic fire
alarms (AFAs)
36,174
AFAs
in non-domestic
buildings
21,160
1,353
Good intent
11,170
Notes: (1) Indent types in darker colours represent LSP5 headline targets. (2) Primary fires includes late calls, and secondary fires include
chimney fires. (3) Some incident types with smaller numbers have been excluded from the chart for purposes of clarity.
Page 8 of 74
Incidents – five year trend
The chart below shows trend data for five years for the main types of incident (rolling 12 month figures).
140,000
chart 1 : rolling 12 months
all special services
false alarms
120,000
all fires
100,000
80,000
60,000
40,000
20,000
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
Primary and secondary fires – five year trend
The chart below shows trend data for five years for the main types of fire (rolling 12 month figures).
30,000
chart 1: rolling 12months
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
secondary fires
primary fires
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
Page 9 of 74
London Safety Plan - Aim 1: Prevention
Fire fatalities
Primary fires - fatalities
LI 1i - PRIMARY FIRES - FATALITIES (10 YEAR AVERAGE)
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
70
Feb
Mar
target
61
61
61
60
61
61
60
59
59
58
58
59
57
57
58
57
57
56
56
56
56
56
55
54
58
54
55
55
54
55
54
53
52
52
52
51
50
54
50
50
49
50
50
50
50
50
50
50
49
49
53
49
49
49
49
49
48
49
48
47
47
46
46
52
PRIMARY FIRES - FATALITIES (12 MONTH ROLLING)
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
Jan
61
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
59
55
56
57
58
59
57
55
55
53
48
47
45
43
45
41
44
36
35
41
42
41
47
44
44
51
53
55
53
53
54
45
49
46
40
43
42
34
29
31
29
31
30
33
29
32
30
30
31
36
37
32
33
32
36
33
32
31
34
36
chart 1: rolling ten yearly average
60
50
40
30
20
10
70
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
chart 2: 12 month rolling
fire fatalities
60
50
40
30
20
10
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
Page 10 of 74
Indicator Description
This indicator counts those people for whom fire has been clearly identified as the cause of death, even if
they die some time after the actual fire. Those who die at, or after, the fire but where fire is not identified
as the cause of death are not included in these figures1.
As fire death is a very low frequency event and numbers are subject to fluctuation, the target and
performance are expressed as an annual ten year average (table and chart one) along with 12 month
rolling performance (in chart two). Fatalities arising from primary fires, using the 10 year average
continue to fall; the average for 2015/16 represents a significant reduction even over the past five years.
In the 1990s there were more than 100 a year in most years; there are now less than 50 fire deaths a year
based on the ten year average.
Annual performance is also shown in the chart below and there were 36 fire deaths to the end of March
2016. It should be noted that annual number of fires deaths does fluctuate, with a fall one year followed
by a rise the next. That has happened in 2015/16 compared to 2014/15, although Members will note
that deaths in accidental dwelling fires continued to fall; the increase was driven by a high number of
deliberate fire deaths.
Performance Management
In the six months between 1 October 2015 and 31 March 2016, there were 20 fatalities at fires. 19 were
fire related, and 10 of people died in an accidental fire in the home (see table below):
Total fatalities at fires
Total fire related fatalities
Total fatalities in accidental fires in the home
Oct
5
4
2
Nov
0
0
0
Dec
2
2
1
Jan
3
3
2
Feb
3
3
2
Mar
7
7
3
Total
20
19
10
Details of each fire related fatality for this period are shown in Appendix 2. The annual report looking in
detail at accidental dwelling fires and fatalities is programmed for the Strategy Committee in July 2016.
Fire deaths by financial year (i.e. 12 months to end Q4) and the rolling 10 year average is shown in the
chart below, which also shows those deaths in accidental fires in the home (blue bars).
1
For official statistics and Authority performance indicators, the focus is on fires where people die because of the effects of the
fire. The data for “fatalities at fires” includes non-fire related causes of death and the Coroner will determine the cause of
death; where the inquest outcome is delayed, the data will reflect officers’ views about the likely cause of death. The data for
‘fire related fatalities’ and ‘fatalities in accidental fires in the home’ are those deaths where the fire was the cause of death.
Page 11 of 74
Fire injuries
Primary fires - injuries (excluding precautionary checks)
LI 1iii - PRIMARY FIRES - INJURIES (EXCLUDING PRECAUTIONARY CHECKS)
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
target stretch
891
854
860
859
849
850
839
822
828
823
812
778
788
-
719
728
728
709
729
723
701
725
754
743
749
775
863
-
771
771
758
758
724
702
724
729
682
676
653
647
765
719
646
636
647
636
631
631
623
601
598
611
609
593
761
705
584
592
589
602
619
605
598
593
599
580
591
571
757
691
chart 1: rolling 12 months
1,000
800
600
400
200
Dec-13
Feb-14
Apr-14
Jun-14
Aug-14
Oct-14
Dec-14
Feb-15
Apr-15
Jun-15
Aug-15
Dec-13
Feb-14
Apr-14
Jun-14
Aug-14
Oct-14
Dec-14
Feb-15
Apr-15
Jun-15
Aug-15
Feb-16
Oct-13
Oct-13
Feb-16
Aug-13
Aug-13
Dec-15
Jun-13
Jun-13
Dec-15
Apr-13
Apr-13
Oct-15
Feb-13
Feb-13
Oct-15
Dec-12
Oct-12
Aug-12
Jun-12
Apr-12
Feb-12
Dec-11
Oct-11
Aug-11
Dec-12
140
Jun-11
Apr-11
0
chart 2 : Monthly
120
100
80
60
40
20
Oct-12
Aug-12
Jun-12
Apr-12
Feb-12
Dec-11
Oct-11
Aug-11
Jun-11
Apr-11
0
Page 12 of 74
Injuries at fires are recorded according to one of four different severity levels: (i) serious, (ii) slight,
(iii) first aid at scene and (iv) precautionary check. The figures reported here represent those injuries
assigned a severity level of (i) serious or (ii) slight.
The number of fire injuries in 2015/16 has fallen by 36 per cent over the high point of the last five years
(891 – April 2011). The number of injuries continues to fall and the Authority is currently achieving both
its normal and stretch targets for this indicator.
Officers are working with crews to confirm and clarify their understanding of what constitutes an injury at
an incident and what is being recorded as an injury. This is to ensure that crews are not over or under
classifying injuries.
The continued analysis of the data of both fatal and accidental fires highlights the need to work in
partnership across the public, private and voluntary/community sectors to help reduce the risk of fire
deaths, injuries and accidental fires.
The Accidental Dwelling Fire Policy was revised in March 2015 broadening the range of criteria which
determines when an accidental dwelling fire review (ADFR) should be initiated. The revised criteria
includes multiple casualties or where the officer in charge of an incident determines a previous ADF has
occurred at the premises. Other criteria for an ADFR include a member of the public being taken to
hospital as a result of injuries sustained at the incident (but not necessarily kept in overnight), and it is
determined by the officer in charge that the severity of the fire has made the dwelling uninhabitable for
at least 24 hours. This has seen an increase in the number of ADF reviews generated, providing the
opportunity for further trend analysis as follows:

The percentage of people recorded as casualties that survived an accidental dwelling fire meeting
the Brigade’s high risk individual criteria (as identified during accidental dwelling fire reviews) was 27
per cent – 63 out of 233 casualties.

The percentage of people with a vulnerability that became a fire fatality (as identified during fatal fire
reviews) was 86 per cent – 18 of 21. This reinforces the priority person approach to risk but also
supports the case for the Brigade’s work targeting people who are less likely to die in a fire but are
still at risk of having a fire.

In addition to the reduction in the number of dwelling fires and the number of deaths in dwelling
fires, the number of injuries in dwelling fires is also down, 4 per cent (475) compared to (494) in
2014/15.
Overall , there is clear downward trend in terms of injuries with 24 Boroughs achieving their target and
17 of the 33 Boroughs achieving their stretch target for 2015/16.
Page 13 of 74
Arson incidents
Arson incidents - all deliberate fires
LI 2 - ARSON INCIDENTS - ALL DELIBERATE FIRES
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
8,000
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
6,928
7,061
6,835
6,461
6,728
6,732
6,873
6,887
6,951
7,012
6,998
6,957
target stretch
6,430
-
6,562
6,178
6,027
5,756
5,294
5,214
4,903
4,813
4,720
4,577
4,460
4,220
6,808
-
4,173
4,214
4,250
4,423
4,446
4,326
4,297
4,205
4,169
4,157
4,157
4,237
6,472
6,113
4,299
4,261
4,265
4,124
4,001
4,077
4,069
4,078
4,086
4,115
4,099
4,094
6,045
4,652
4,137
4,135
4,191
4,264
4,264
4,176
4,220
4,212
4,223
4,176
4,198
4,135
5,924
4,326
7,000
6,000
5,000
4,000
3,000
2,000
1,000
Jan-13
Apr-13
Jul-13
Oct-13
Jan-14
Apr-14
Jul-14
Oct-14
Jan-15
Jan-13
Apr-13
Jul-13
Oct-13
Jan-14
Apr-14
Jul-14
Oct-14
Jan-15
Jan-16
Oct-12
Oct-12
Oct-15
Jul-12
Jul-12
Jul-15
Apr-12
Apr-12
Apr-15
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jan-12
1,000
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
chart 2 : monthly
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
Page 14 of 74
A deliberate fire (arson) is where the suspected motive is not accidental or unknown, and where it is
believed that the fire has been deliberately set. This indicator includes all deliberate fires whether
primary or secondary fires. Although the number of arson incidents in 2015/16 (4,135) has risen slightly
compared to 2014/15 (4,094), there is a long term tread of continual improvement and the Authority is
currently achieving both its normal and stretch target for this indicator. Officers are currently analysing
the figures by borough to see if any trends can be identified to explain the increase.
A key part of the Authority’s work to reduce arson has a continued focus on children and youth
engagement schemes. Whilst all schemes include input into citizenship and antisocial behaviour, JFIS, in
particular, focuses on children who have demonstrated any type of fireplay or firesetting behaviour; from
curiosity fireplay in younger children to deliberate firesetting and arson in older teenagers.
All boroughs and borough commanders have a tailored approach to reducing arson. In November, for
the first time in over five years, 14 girls from Tottenham aged between 14 and 17 took part in a LIFE
course aimed specifically at teenage girls. The course is normally aimed at both boys and girls aged
between 13 and 17. The all-girls course took place in Haringey, which is one of the most deprived
boroughs in the country, suffering from higher than average rates of youth unemployment, crime, teen
pregnancies and lack of opportunities and resources. The area is also linked to several high-profile
gangs.
In Bexley, when a significant rise in deliberate fires within the borough was identified, a partnership was
formed with the local authority and the MPS and a initiative involving firefighters on bicycles focusing on
the ‘hotspot’ areas was launched. This resulted in a significant and rapid decrease within these areas –
from a high of 32 in June to a low of seven in September. As a result, Bexley are intending to expand this
programme for next summer.
Analysis of arson incidents shows that there has been an increase in the number of deliberate primary
fires in non-residential buildings (up 30 per cent to 406 for the 12 months ending March 2016 (from 313
for the 12 months ending March 2015), and in commercial and public buildings in particular. Officers are
working to address this.
Page 15 of 74
Fires in the home
Dwelling fires - all / fires in the home with no smoke alarm present or working
LI 3 - DWELLING FIRES - ALL
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
6,810
6,818
6,778
6,698
6,719
6,697
6,680
6,651
6,655
6,664
6,718
6,672
target stretch
6,618
6,296
6,545
6,516
6,493
6,439
6,391
6,443
6,428
6,495
6,476
6,466
6,475
6,434
6,565
6,200
6,449
6,394
6,399
6,472
6,473
6,371
6,285
6,281
6,196
6,130
5,987
5,996
6,472
6,113
5,959
5,924
5,914
5,855
5,799
5,858
5,920
5,861
5,893
5,942
5,992
5,989
6,427
6,014
5,984
6,018
6,038
6,000
6,027
5,967
5,915
5,892
5,840
5,789
5,768
5,702
6,390
5,925
SM 4iii - FIRES IN THE HOME WITH NO SMOKE ALARM PRESENT OR WORKING
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
50.51%
47.01%
41.45%
38.85%
34.74%
50.81%
45.83%
41.48%
38.45%
34.73%
50.81%
45.14%
41.35%
38.11%
34.53%
50.10%
44.65%
41.72%
37.59%
34.13%
49.99%
44.09%
41.48%
36.95%
34.44%
49.41%
43.71%
41.33%
36.75%
33.75%
49.52%
43.05%
40.83%
36.74%
33.41%
49.00%
43.02%
40.17%
36.56%
32.94%
48.43%
42.68%
39.86%
36.18%
32.84%
48.06%
42.24%
39.90%
35.61%
32.68%
48.06%
41.67%
39.74%
35.51%
32.42%
47.56%
41.54%
39.53%
35.03%
32.73%
7,000 chart 1 : rolling 12 months
75%
6,000
60%
5,000
45%
4,000
3,000
30%
2,000
15%
Dwelling fires
1,000
% no smoke alarm
700
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
0%
Apr-11
0
chart 2 : monthly
60%
600
45%
500
400
30%
300
200
15%
Dwelling fires
100
% no smoke alarm
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
0%
Apr-11
0
Page 16 of 74
The largest single type of primary fire is fires in the home and their prevention is a key focus of the
Brigade’s community safety activity. The number of fires in 2015/16 (5,702) continued to fall compared
to 2014/15 (5,989). This continues the long term downward trend and the Authority achieved both its
normal and stretch targets for this indicator in 2015/16.
The number of fires in the home where a smoke alarm was not present continues to reduce. Five years
ago at the start of 2011/12 more than half (51 per cent) of homes which had fires had no smoke alarm
installed. The proportion for 2015/16 continues this reduction with just over a third (33 per cent) of
dwelling fires occurring in homes with no smoke alarm.
Brigade continues to fund provision of fire retardant bedding where vulnerable individuals are identified,
which has now been extended to include bed-throws in addition to full bed sets. A pilot in Camden to
provide vulnerable residents with fire retardant night clothes resulted in very low levels of interest and
take up by residents.
In Barking & Dagenham, officers have spent time on various activities raising awareness of fire risk to
vulnerable people, including engagement with ‘Barking and Dagenham Young Carers’, a charity which
looks after children who have caring responsibilities for members of their family. Firefighters have
organised four activity and education sessions to give those carers respite from their caring
responsibilities and through that education, improving the safety of a group of vulnerable people of
which the Brigade was previously unaware.
In addition, two care worker fire risk awareness and dementia awareness sessions have been held with
more than 30 frontline care workers attending. Officers have also presented issues around the fire risk to
vulnerable people at the Community Safety Partnership and Health & Wellbeing Board with resulting
actions being taken for improving the local authority commissioning standards and data sharing of at risk
individuals.
In Islington, a multi agency hoarding protocol, comprising of the Clinical Commissioning Group, the NHS
Trust, London Borough of Islington (LBI) Housing, LBI Social Services, Metropolitan Police Service and
Islington Voluntary sector amongst others, went live during quarter three. The cross agency agreement
includes a referral system that brings all borough hoarding cases to the multi agency forum for
notification resolution, delivering guidance for practitioners from all agencies using the Brigade’s Home
Fire Safety Visit (HFSV) matrix and the clutter image rating. This approach ensures there is a common
standard of identification and referral across the borough. A multi agency information sharing agreement
is in place to enable specific information to be passed to partners to enable the appropriate action to be
taken. This has been widely used by the NHS who are passing relevant cases to us for HFSV referral and
also facilitates better cross agency discussions about risk, advice and action.
Page 17 of 74
Outdoor rubbish fires - all
LI 4 - OUTDOOR RUBBISH FIRES - ALL
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
8,257
8,375
8,163
7,993
8,221
8,234
8,428
8,391
8,549
8,598
8,585
8,628
target stretch
8,264
7,880
7,731
7,459
7,116
7,066
6,677
6,526
6,317
6,146
6,101
5,853
-
-
5,862
5,900
5,945
6,091
6,072
5,947
5,949
5,927
5,984
5,926
5,852
5,944
7,255
6,231
5,946
5,881
5,968
5,829
5,779
5,820
5,805
5,664
5,693
5,760
5,776
5,726
6,747
5,670
5,859
5,946
6,019
6,068
6,044
5,982
6,056
6,137
6,125
6,108
6,194
6,125
6,275
5,160
-
-
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
Oct-13
Jan-14
Apr-14
Oct-13
Jan-14
Apr-14
Jan-16
Jul-13
Jul-13
Oct-15
Apr-13
Apr-13
Jul-15
Jan-13
Jan-13
Apr-15
Oct-12
Oct-12
Jan-15
Jul-12
Jul-12
Oct-14
Apr-12
Apr-12
Jul-14
Jan-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
1,000 chart 2 : monthly
900
800
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
Page 18 of 74
Outdoor fires in rubbish are classified as secondary fires as they do not involve casualties. The Brigade
collects data for every secondary fire attended and these are categorised by motive (e.g. accidental,
deliberate) in the same way as primary fires. In 2015/16 , the number of outdoor rubbish fires (6,125)
increased slightly compared to 2014/15 (5,726). Outdoor rubbish fires can be weather related, and the
warmer and drier weather in Summer 2015 could potentially have contributed, to an increase in
numbers. However, over the long term, there is a trend of continual improvement and these types of
fires reduced by over 26 per cent over the last five years (when compared to 2011/12).
Outdoor rubbish fires can be subject to seasonal variations as is shown by the monthly chart opposite. As
with arson incidents, there has been a small increase which is difficult to tie to any particular trend.
Borough commanders continue to work to identify potential hot spots and to make use of effective
partnership working to drive the number of outdoor rubbish fires down.
As part of the objective to reduce deliberate fires including outdoor fires in rubbish and ensure the safety
of our communities, fire crews conduct visual audits as part of their day to day activity to observe and
reduce fire hazards and environmental issues.
In Enfield, concern about the growing number of rough sleepers and in particular, fires in open land
along the A406 and the river Lea, has led officers to work in collaboration with the local authority, MPS,
immigration and homeless charities, to carry out visual audits to note where the risks are. This has
previously resulted in smoke alarms being provided for rough sleepers in make shift ‘accommodation’ to
improve safety as they are at a high risk of fire.
Page 19 of 74
Fires in care homes and sheltered housing
fires in care homes (non-domestic buildings) and in sheltered housing (dwellings)
LI 5 - FIRES IN CARE HOMES AND SHELTERED HOUSING
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
600
Jan
Feb
Mar
target stretch
515
520
522
545
529
523
495
504
505
492
511
506
-
-
504
512
514
512
535
540
555
566
569
587
581
578
-
-
573
551
546
553
562
573
563
578
558
549
542
550
535
490
554
561
575
569
551
546
536
521
538
535
528
530
519
466
520
523
518
506
497
483
483
466
444
440
436
422
503
442
500
400
300
200
100
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Jul-12
Jul-12
Oct-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Apr-12
100
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
chart 2 : monthly
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
Page 20 of 74
The Brigade remains concerned by the number of elderly people who are still harmed, or killed, by fire in
places where they should be safe.
This headline target, agreed as part of LSP5, is designed to measure the focus of the Brigade’s
prevention and protection activities to ensure that people living in care homes and in sheltered housing
are as safe as possible. The target here is to reduce fires in care homes and sheltered housing by three
per cent by March 2016 (and by nine per cent as a stretch target).
Performance for 2015/16 (422) shows that the numbers of fires in care homes and sheltered housing
has fallen again, and we are now achieving the Authority’s normal and stretch targets.
Staff have continued to target care homes and sheltered housing throughout 2015/16, with over 3,000
inspections carried out in cares homes and sheltered housing. A pilot in the south east area involved fire
safety staff carrying out regulatory inspections alongside station based crews doing HFSVs. This
provided the opportunity for fire safety officers to assess the compliance of the premises with the
Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order, which extends to the common parts of the premises, whilst
station based crews were able, where residents took up the offer of a Home Fire Safety Visit (HFSV), to
go beyond the common parts into individual rooms and dwellings to provide fire safety advice to
residents. An evaluation of this pilot is underway to inform further consideration of utilising station based
crews to deliver fire safety activities.
Due to the changing care landscape, individuals that were once in care homes are now staying in their
own homes which brings increased problems of protecting them from fire. Officers are leading work
nationally to introduce sector guidance that will help address these risks. The guidance which is being
produced in conjunction with the Chief Fire Officers Association (CFOA) will focus on assessing the risks
of people beyond the front door and include a package of measures to ensure they are safe from fire
which could include additional detection, telecare and personal protection systems .
In Havering officers are making direct contact with scheme managers in sheltered housing schemes to
arrange HFSVs. This approach is supported by the Borough Commander, working with the London
Borough of Havering sheltered housing and telecare managers to ensure that HFSV referrals can be
written in to their risk assessments for residents and exploring potential for sprinkler installations.
In October, officers wrote to all care home operators in the capital to remind them of their fire safety
responsibilities. This followed from a prosecution of a care home in the London Borough of Southwark
after the death of a resident. The care home company was fined £120,000 for fire safety offences under
the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005.
As part of preparation for the Sixth London Safety Plan (LSP6), officers are looking at the approach to
HFSVs and how these could be developed to potentially include safety and wellbeing visits. The
approach will have to be developed with the relevant stakeholders, including staff and the representative
bodies and legal advice taken on issues which may arise for the Authority in undertaking this approach.
Page 21 of 74
Home fire safety visits
HFSVs by LFB staff and Priority HFSVs - high risk people/places (P1)
LI 6i - HOME FIRE SAFETY VISITS (HFSVs) BY LFB STAFF
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
90,000
Jan
Feb
Mar
target
70,014 70,284 70,539 71,271 71,875 73,584 77,334 80,281 81,303 81,700 80,123 77,478
66,000
78,074 78,745 79,377 80,117 80,417 80,495 81,366 82,109 82,282 82,360 83,238 83,582
69,000
83,501 83,476 83,565 83,490 83,238 83,254 83,318 83,496 83,940 84,289 83,262 83,948
72,500
84,646 85,092 85,456 85,427 85,780 86,577 85,629 84,960 85,223 85,777 86,718 86,990
73,000
86,501 86,555 86,878 87,043 86,856 86,587 87,125 87,885 87,867 87,113 86,613 86,596
73,500
LI 6iii - PRIORITY HFSVS - HIGH RISK PEOPLE/PLACES (P1)
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
39,478
48,878
58,527
63,344
69,120
39,700
50,039
58,667
64,219
69,438
40,095
51,137
58,847
65,118
69,776
40,773
52,575
59,097
65,430
69,983
41,435
53,547
59,148
65,964
70,032
43,153
53,937
59,620
67,059
69,779
45,461
55,075
60,297
66,774
70,265
47,330
56,048
60,970
66,652
70,998
48,213
56,731
61,558
67,149
71,074
Jan
Feb
Mar
target
49,377
56,990
62,295
67,941
70,427
49,055
57,948
61,779
69,083
69,800
47,904
58,308
62,407
69,470
69,911
42,900
48,300
58,000
58,400
58,800
80,000
70,000
number of visits
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
HFSV
10,000
Number - priority visits
Jan-13
Apr-13
Jul-13
Oct-13
Jan-14
Apr-14
Jul-14
Oct-14
Jan-15
Apr-15
Jul-15
Oct-15
Jan-13
Apr-13
Jul-13
Oct-13
Jan-14
Apr-14
Jul-14
Oct-14
Jan-15
Apr-15
Jul-15
Oct-15
Jan-16
Oct-12
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
chart 2 : monthly
10,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
HFSV
Number - priority visits
Jan-16
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
0
Apr-11
number of visits
8,000
Page 22 of 74
The Brigade has been increasing the number of home fire safety visits (HFSVs) carried out, with a target
to complete 73,500 in 2015/16. This work is now well established at station level and the number of
Home Fire Safety Visits (HFSVs) carried out continues to improve. Almost 86,600 visits in 2015/16,
although slightly lower than in 2014/15, remains a significant achievement and well in excess of the
target. Partial visits (e.g. where the offer of a full visit is not accepted by the householder and only
printed information is provided) are not included in this figure.
Since April 2010, targets have also been set for visits carried out either in priority areas or with priority
people, as defined by the risk of fire arising from the location or from the lifestyle characteristics of an
individual. Performance has been improving and the target for 2015/16 was for 58,000 (80 per cent) of
all visits to be within this priority category. Current performance shows that 69,911 (against the target of
73,500 = 95 per cent) of visits have been carried out in priority areas or to priority people.
HFSVs continue to be a key component of community safety work and all borough commanders
continue to pursue local HFSV initiatives.
The Department of Communities and Local Government alarm project was implemented in July 2015.
The initial priority for the allocation of alarms was for high risk areas and individuals. A revised strategy
has now been developed in collaboration with local authorities to ensure remaining alarms are made
available to those most at risk.
Going forward it is envisaged a more focused approach aligning this to the annual assessment of risk
(FEP2544) will continue to ensure we are targeting the most vulnerable.
Page 23 of 74
Community safety work by station staff
percentage of time spent on community safety work (includng HFSVs)
LI 7 - TIME SPENT BY STATION STAFF ON COMMUNITY SAFETY
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
Jan
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
16%
Feb
Mar
target
12.0%
12.1%
12.1%
12.2%
12.2%
12.3%
12.6%
12.9%
13.0%
12.9%
12.7%
12.5%
10.00%
12.6%
12.7%
12.8%
12.9%
12.9%
13.0%
13.1%
13.3%
13.4%
13.5%
13.6%
13.6%
11.00%
13.6%
13.5%
13.4%
13.3%
13.3%
13.3%
13.3%
13.3%
13.3%
13.4%
13.4%
13.7%
12.00%
13.8%
13.8%
13.8%
13.7%
13.8%
13.7%
13.7%
13.7%
13.7%
13.8%
13.7%
13.6%
13.00%
13.6%
13.7%
13.7%
13.8%
13.8%
13.9%
13.9%
14.0%
14.0%
13.9%
13.9%
13.9%
13.00%
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
Jul-14
Oct-14
Jan-15
Apr-15
Jul-15
Jul-14
Oct-14
Jan-15
Apr-15
Jul-15
Jan-16
Apr-14
Apr-14
Jan-16
Jan-14
Jan-14
Oct-15
Oct-13
Oct-13
Oct-15
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-13
16%
Jul-11
Apr-11
0%
chart 2 : monthly
14%
12%
10%
8%
6%
4%
2%
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0%
Page 24 of 74
This indicator measures the percentage of available time spent on community safety activity by fire
station staff. The indicator includes HFSVs and other community safety work and continues to be above
the 13 per cent target. Performance at almost 14 per cent for 2015/16 shows considerable success in
maintaining the momentum of community safety work with performance continuing above the target.
HFSVs continue to make up a major proportion of available time spent on community safety. Whilst we
recognise this is the case, officers continue to ensure fire crews carry out a number of other activities
which contribute to better fire safety awareness.
In Havering, we are actively engaged in the Community MARAC (Multi Agency Risk Assessment
Conference) which provides a vital outlet for raising care concerns identified when attending incidents,
this is in addition to any safeguarding referrals made and fills the gap for information sharing that
currently exists within the Borough.
In Islington, we have agreed to run two LIFE courses for Islington and four more sessions of our Taste of
LIFE, a bespoke one-day version of the LIFE course developed in partnership with the Arsenal in the
Community project. The project was initiated in response to local concerns about increasing gang culture
and is intended to give young people positive role models, encouragement to stay in school, complete
their education and to feel part of the community. The course includes an unexpected “shout”, casualty
handling and leadership skills. It is hoped to take the scheme forward with the involvement of other
football clubs and as such an approach has been made to Tottenham football club to gauge their interest
in running the scheme.
Staff in Redbridge continue their partnership work as a driving force with the Redbridge First Response
Service (ReFRS), multi-agency scheme working together to provide a one-stop referral service for
vulnerable residents with easy access to services that can support their wellbeing, safety, choice and
independence.
The Box Clever project in Lambeth involves the Brigade in partnership with Miguel’s Gym in a scheme
to reduce antisocial behaviour and arson within Lambeth borough, and seeks to tackle and educate
around issues of child/young adult obesity under the LA Health and Wellbeing strategy. The project is
about to receive an award for community engagement and has been recognised in both local and
national media publications.
Staff in Hounslow launched the One LIFE programme in conjunction with Hounslow MPS and Hounslow
Council. This was a three day event attended by 12 young people (aged 11-17). The principle aim is to
deliver a shortened version of LIFE with more interaction from Hounslow MPS to tackle the anti social
behaviour issues apparent to the west of the borough. The course was developed in collaboration with
the Central LIFE Team and gave the candidates an understanding of how the fire service and the police
force works together, identifying amongst other things, the risks and consequences of anti social
behaviour. One LIFE, is set to continue with the support of Hounslow MPS and Hounslow Council and it
is hoped that another One LIFE event will be planned in during the second quarter of 2016/17.
Looking ahead, during 2016/17, 71 stations are hosting Station Open Days to celebrate our 150th
Anniversary – 65 of which are in partnership with Playmobil as corporate sponsor of our birthday
celebrations.
Page 25 of 74
London Safety Plan - Aim 2: Protection
Fires in non-domestic buildings
All non domestic primary fires in RRO properties
LI 8i - ALL NON DOMESTIC PRIMARY FIRES IN RRO PROPERTIES
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
Jan
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
Feb
Mar
target stretch
2,642
2,617
2,574
2,557
2,609
2,585
2,586
2,535
2,524
2,525
2,539
2,515
2,684
2,408
2,462
2,451
2,423
2,393
2,306
2,302
2,268
2,287
2,290
2,291
2,285
2,293
2,651
2,332
2,314
2,308
2,312
2,362
2,385
2,361
2,346
2,337
2,320
2,284
2,232
2,208
2,401
2,124
2,202
2,184
2,194
2,122
2,062
2,063
2,028
2,020
1,999
2,027
2,046
2,050
2,386
2,088
2,062
2,073
2,060
2,112
2,120
2,116
2,146
2,153
2,121
2,091
2,069
2,052
2,372
2,055
3,000
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
Oct-15
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jan-16
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
300 chart 2 : monthly
250
200
150
100
50
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
Page 26 of 74
Non-domestic buildings include a wide range of properties and structures including offices, leisure
centres, care homes, hostels and hospitals, as well as some buildings to which the Regulatory Reform
(Fire Safety) Order (RRO) does not apply, like garages and garden sheds.
Indicator LI 8i covers most types of buildings subject to the RRO but does not include blocks of flats or
Houses in Multiple Occupation (HMOs) where the Brigade has powers under the RRO in respect of
common parts; these areas are counted as domestic premises (LI 3). LI 8i is designed to reflect the
effectiveness of regulatory fire safety activity in respect of non-domestic buildings subject to the RRO.
Performance for LI 8i for primary fires in non-domestic buildings where the RRO applies continues to
show good improvement. The number of primary fires in non-domestic premises (2,052) for 2015/16
shows that performance is achieving the Authority’s normal and stretch targets.
Fires in non domestic premises can not only have an impact on the safety of occupants but can also have
a devastating economic effect both on the community and the businesses themselves through loss of
production, disruption to business and the loss of revenue.
Examples of fires causing significant disruption to business in these premises and involvement of the
Brigade over the past six months include:






A 10 pump fire in a retail shop in Camden in October 2015;
A 10 pump fire in a warehouse in Enfield in November 2015;
A 10 pump fire in a factory in Park Royal, Brent in November 2015;
A 10 pump fire in a takeaway in Lewisham in November 2015;
A 10 pump fire in a factory in Romford, Havering in March 2016; and
A 20 pump fire in a recycling plant in Enfield in March 2016.
In November an elderly man had a lucky escape from a fire caused by a cigarette in his home thanks to a
personal protection system (PPS). Firefighters were called to the fire at a residential care home in Cheam
to find the gentleman had already escaped and the PPS had put out most of the flames.
The Brigade continues to champion the benefits of Automatic Fire Suppression Systems, both as retro fit
or portable options in sheltered accommodation and the incorporation of engineered solution and other
fixed installations in new builds as part of our consultation process.
Page 27 of 74
Fire safety inspections
All fire safety inspections / audits carried out
LI 9i - ALL FIRE SAFETY INSPECTIONS / AUDITS CARRIED OUT
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
Jan
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
Feb
Mar
target
18,141 18,362 18,380 18,156 18,104 18,046 18,185 18,075 17,965 17,889 17,817 17,316
13,050
17,196 17,111 16,540 16,520 16,448 16,180 16,266 16,028 15,869 16,027 16,135 16,038
14,000
16,417 16,353 16,755 17,109 17,128 17,412 17,268 17,109 17,203 17,049 16,683 16,658
13,000
16,326 15,991 15,361 14,742 14,338 13,754 13,296 13,043 12,877 12,371 12,080 11,880
13,500
12,133 12,280 12,970 13,314 13,676 14,016 14,456 14,895 15,329 15,805 16,131 16,250
14,000
20,000
800
18,000
700
16,000
600
14,000
12,000
500
10,000
400
8,000
300
6,000
200
4,000
Inspections
2,000
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-13
Apr-13
Apr-14
Jan-13
Jan-13
Jan-14
Oct-12
Oct-12
Oct-13
Jul-12
Jul-12
Jul-13
Apr-12
0
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
2,000
100
enforcement notices
chart 2 : monthly
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
Inspections
200
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
Page 28 of 74
Fire safety inspections are carried out to regulate buildings, and other places, to protect people from
fires. The inspection is an information gathering process that enables the Authority to fulfil its role as the
enforcing authority under the Regulatory Reform Order (RRO). The inspection process provides the
means to check that responsible persons have carried out and implemented a risk assessment process
and to enforce where fire safety conditions are not adequate.
From April 2015, the total number of fire safety inspections now include audits of known and unknown
premises, site visits at the request of the general public, follow-up inspections after an enforcement
notice, joint visits with other authorities, peak activity inspections and site visits to licensed premises. LI9i
covers all types of physical inspections carried out by inspecting officers.
Following a reduction in inspections in 2014/15, performance is now back on track against the target.
The Head of Fire Safety has implemented a robust system of reporting which has resulted in an increase
in performance. It is believed that a more robust approach to enforcement in our targeted high risk
premises such as care homes and sheltered housing, has contributed to a decrease in the number of
enforcement notices issued over recent years. It is the third consecutive year that this premises type has
been targeted in high volumes and as such enforcement notices that were issued in 2012/13 have
resulted in follow up visits in the following years to confirm continued compliance. Enforcement action
for the 12 months ending March over the last five years is as follows:
Rolling Year
(to end Q4)
Enforcement
notices served
Notices as % of total
inspections
2011/2012
642
5
2012/2013
735
6
2013/2014
537
4
2014/2015
381
4
2015/2016
414
3
In January, the former landlord of a public house received a 16 month suspended prison sentence for
committing seven offences under the Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005, including breaching a
prohibition notice preventing the premises from being used for sleeping and living accommodation
Also in January a housing association were fined £40,000 and ordered to pay £23,407 prosecution costs
for breaking fire safety laws following a fatal fire in a Deptford tower block in which two women died.
In February, one of the UK's largest property service groups was prosecuted by our fire safety and legal
teams for breaking fire safety laws which injured a 91-year-old woman in sheltered housing
accommodation. They were fined £5,600, ordered to pay £14,000 prosecution costs to the Brigade and a
£120 victim surcharge for failing to comply with the Regulatory Reform Order and breaching a previous
Enforcement Notice.
Page 29 of 74
Fire safety inspections - premises not previously visited
Fire safety inspections / audits - all premises never previously visited
LI 9ii - FIRE SAFETY INSPECTIONS / AUDITS - ALL PREMISES NEVER PREVIOUSLY VISITED
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
target
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
10,000
8,388
8,487
8,648
8,528
8,413
8,279
8,337
8,266
8,217
8,112
8,004
7,551
-
7,408
7,239
6,854
6,816
6,772
6,609
6,535
6,365
6,255
6,292
6,347
6,322
-
6,464
6,253
6,188
6,075
5,896
5,861
5,601
5,349
5,273
5,053
4,755
4,639
2,000
4,480
4,411
4,225
4,082
3,987
3,853
3,747
3,708
3,662
3,463
3,312
3,256
3,000
3,313
3,377
3,511
3,528
3,529
3,488
3,483
3,493
3,551
3,631
3,685
3,579
3,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
Apr-14
Jul-14
Oct-14
Jan-15
Apr-15
Jul-15
Apr-14
Jul-14
Oct-14
Jan-15
Apr-15
Jul-15
Jan-16
Jan-14
Jan-14
Jan-16
Oct-13
Oct-13
Oct-15
Jul-13
Jul-13
Oct-15
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Apr-13
1,000
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
chart 2 : monthly
800
600
400
200
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
Page 30 of 74
This indicator measures the number of inspections of premises carried out that were not previously
known to the Brigade or that were known but have not been previously visited.
In 2013/14, the focus changed from targeting unknown premises to focussing on care homes, sheltered
housing and hostels which are predominately known premises. However, in addition to this, the Brigade
is committed to visiting 3,000 unknown premises in 2015/16. These visits are in response to fires
occurring in unknown and other premises that are referred through partner agencies.
It is reasonable to expect that with the continuing reduction in fires, those occurring in unknown
premises will also reduce. The current target is based on historical data and 3,579 inspections for the 12
months to March 2016 remains above target.
Our current focus remains on higher risk known premises and the majority of audits in relation to
premises not previously visited are as a result of local targeting, alleged fire risks or post fire reviews. 78
per cent of premises inspected were broadly compliant.
The current approach to fire safety audits and inspections will be subject to review as part of LSP6 to
ensure the strategy going forward means we are making effective use of our resources to improve the
safety of the built environment and reduce the risk of fire and its effects.
Page 31 of 74
Fire safety inspections in high risk premises
Fire safety inspections / audits in high risk premises
LI 10i - FIRE SAFETY INSPECTIONS / AUDITS IN HIGH RISK PREMISES
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
Jan
Feb
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
target
4,690
4,830
4,790
4,764
4,784
4,815
4,946
5,051
5,071
5,028
4,981
4,895
-
4,851
4,830
4,761
4,746
4,691
4,651
4,666
4,643
4,594
4,633
4,721
4,724
5,278
4,971
5,218
5,679
6,221
6,507
6,924
7,194
7,321
7,512
7,739
7,863
8,112
4,500
8,083
7,915
7,510
7,089
6,799
6,421
6,149
6,027
5,988
5,737
5,596
5,449
4,750
5,634
5,790
6,213
6,518
6,895
7,195
7,419
7,678
7,833
8,095
8,322
8,493
5,000
2,569
10,000
Mar
70.0%
60.0%
8,000
50.0%
6,000
40.0%
30.0%
4,000
20.0%
2,000
Inspections in high-risk premises
10.0%
high risk - hours
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
0.0%
Apr-11
0
chart 2 : monthly
1,000
80.0%
70.0%
800
60.0%
50.0%
600
40.0%
400
30.0%
20.0%
200
Inspections in high-risk premises
10.0%
high risk - hours
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
0.0%
Apr-11
0
Page 32 of 74
This indicator shows how much of the inspection programme is targeted toward those premises deemed
to be higher risk. Higher risk premises are mainly those types of property where there is a sleeping risk,
such as hospitals, care homes, blocks of flats over four floors and Houses of Multiple Occupancy
(HMOs). Performance in 2015/16 (8,493) is significantly better than in 2014/15 and now exceeds the
level in 2013/14 (8,112); the target for this indicator is being achieved.
The number of premises visited has risen significantly in comparison to the same period last year. At this
stage we are continuing to focus on HMOs and rental properties.
Additionally as part of the Care Home and Sheltered Housing Strategy, we have increased knowledge
and understanding of both these types of premises and the vulnerability of persons residing in such
properties.
A joint working pilot in the south east area between Fire Safety staff and station based crews has now
concluded. An evaluation of this pilot is underway to inform further consideration of utilising station
based crews to deliver fire safety activities.
Page 33 of 74
Fire safety consultation and advice requests
statutory consultations and advice requests from architects, etc. received
LI 11 - CONSULTATION AND ADVICE REQUESTS RECEIVED
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
Jan
Feb
Mar
target
19,734 19,920
20,075 19,935 19,849 20,033 19,872 19,633 19,410 19,375 19,601 19,248
-
19,173 19,657
19,622 19,673 19,757 19,518 19,774 19,682 19,560 19,526 19,390 19,340
-
19,328 18,980
18,917 19,045 18,734 18,932 19,002 18,990 19,145 19,376 19,341 19,502
16,000
19,658 19,603
19,917 19,898 20,123 19,957 19,896 19,932 19,930 19,536 19,305 19,353
16,000
19,481 19,363
19,201 19,111 19,088 19,100 18,773 18,579 18,321 18,327 18,328 18,220
16,000
22,000
20,000
18,000
16,000
14,000
12,000
10,000
8,000
6,000
4,000
2,000
2,200
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
chart 2 : monthly
2,000
1,800
1,600
1,400
1,200
1,000
800
600
400
200
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
Page 34 of 74
This indicator shows the workload in dealing with statutory consultations from other authorities and
other requests for fire safety advice.
A large number of building control consultations as well as advice requests from the public, architects
and other authorities are received each year. This covers building control, licensing, planning
applications and all goodwill advice where the Brigade has a duty under the Fire Services Act 2004.
This area of work is ‘demand led’ and has an impact on the resources that are available for other fire
safety regulation activities. The number of consultation and advice requests for 2015/16 (18,220) is
exceeding the target, although slightly lower than the numbers in 2014/15.
Analysis of the statistics to the end of March 2016 indicates that the 18,220 requests received can be
broken down into 5,033 goodwill advice requests, 2,356 licensing consultations and 10,831 building
control consultations. These job types include giving advice to building control and approved inspectors.
Job Type
Building Control consultations
Licensing
Goodwill advice
Total
Q1
Q2
Q3
Q4
2015/16 2015/16 2015/16 2015/16 2015/16
2,829
2,879
2,582
2,541
10,831
760
728
499
369
2,356
1,368
1,461
982
1,222
5,033
4,957
5,068
4,063
4,132
18,220
This area of work relies on receiving consultations and requests for advice from local authorities, building
control, the public, industry and businesses.
Consultations often have to be prioritised in order to meet statutory deadlines, this will have an impact on
other areas of work. Following a successful pilot and subsequent rollout of a more efficient way to
manage these job types, it is anticipated that while the numbers of consultations received will be broadly
the same, the way that they are processed will reduce the amount of these job types that need to be
completed by area based inspecting officers. This will increase their capacity to complete inspections.
Page 35 of 74
London Safety Plan - Aim 3: Response
Average appliance arrival time
1st appliance and 2nd appliance
LI 14i - AVERAGE ARRIVAL - 1st APPLIANCE
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
target
05:31
05:32
05:32
05:32
05:33
05:33
05:30
05:27
05:22
05:21
05:22
05:22
06:00
05:22
05:21
05:21
05:20
05:20
05:20
05:19
05:19
05:20
05:20
05:19
05:18
06:00
05:18
05:17
05:17
05:17
05:17
05:17
05:18
05:18
05:19
05:20
05:22
05:23
06:00
05:24
05:26
05:27
05:28
05:29
05:30
05:30
05:32
05:32
05:31
05:31
05:28
06:00
05:29
05:30
05:30
05:31
05:32
05:33
05:33
05:34
05:34
05:34
05:34
05:36
06:00
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
LI 14ii - AVERAGE ARRIVAL - 2nd APPLIANCE
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
Nov
target
06:51
06:52
06:52
06:53
06:54
06:53
06:48
06:42
06:34
06:32
06:31
06:31
08:00
06:31
06:30
06:30
06:29
06:29
06:29
06:29
06:30
06:29
06:29
06:28
06:28
08:00
06:28
06:28
06:28
06:30
06:30
06:32
06:34
06:36
06:39
06:41
06:44
06:46
08:00
06:48
06:50
06:52
06:53
06:54
06:55
06:55
06:55
06:55
06:55
06:53
06:52
08:00
06:53
06:53
06:54
06:55
06:55
06:56
06:56
06:56
06:55
06:55
06:55
06:56
08:00
100.0%
07:00
90.0%
06:00
80.0%
70.0%
05:00
60.0%
04:00
50.0%
03:00
40.0%
02:00
01:00
2nd appliance
30.0%
1st appliance
20.0%
1st appliance within 12 minutes
10.0%
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
0.0%
Apr-11
00:00
chart 2 : monthly
08:00
100.0%
90.0%
07:00
80.0%
06:00
70.0%
05:00
60.0%
04:00
50.0%
40.0%
03:00
30.0%
02:00
2nd appliance
20.0%
1st appliance
01:00
10.0%
1st appliance within 12 minutes
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
0.0%
Apr-11
00:00
Page 36 of 74
These indicators measure the Brigade’s London-wide performance for the time it takes for a first fire
engine to arrive at an emergency incident, within an average of six minutes, and a second fire engine,
within an average of eight minutes. There is also a standard that a first appliance should arrive at an
emergency incident within 12 minutes on at least 95 per cent of occasions. The performance calculation
excludes incidents which were not attended as an emergency on 'blue light' (for example, some shut in
lift releases). The performance calculation is set out in full in LFB Fire Facts, Incident Response Times
2005-2015 (originally published in June 2014, with an updated version published in June 2016) and
available on the LFB web site.
The black line on each graph (using the scale on the right axis) shows the proportion of first appliances
arriving within 12 minutes (target is 95 per cent of all incidents) measured against the right hand axis.
Whilst the overall attendance times Brigade-wide are within targets, compared with the position in
2014/15, there has been an increase of four boroughs moving very slightly outside of the first appliance
attendance target time and one borough moving outside of the second appliance attendance target time.
Attendance time performance in 2015/16 have been impacted by a range of contributing factors
including station closures for Phase 2 of the PFI redevelopment programme, which involved pump
displacements during redevelopment, and the impact of extensive London wide infrastructure and
roadwork changes, including the construction of the new cycle superhighways.
Page 37 of 74
Emergency (999) calls
answered in 7 seconds & time to deal with a call in Control
LI 15ii - EMERGENCY 999 CALLS - % ANSWERED WITHIN 7 SECONDS*
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
Jan
Feb
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
Mar
target
91.02% 91.06% 91.39% 92.48% 91.40% 91.63% 92.03% 92.42% 92.78% 92.72% 92.75% 92.81%
91%
92.99% 93.13% 93.18% 93.04% 94.46% 94.36% 94.44% 94.43% 94.38% 94.45% 94.59% 94.62%
92%
94.73% 94.76% 94.84% 94.69% 94.81% 94.91% 94.48% 94.38% 94.11% 94.10% 93.77% 93.70%
92%
93.47% 93.33% 92.93% 92.82% 92.51% 92.28% 92.17% 92.12% 92.30% 92.27% 92.48% 92.50%
92%
92.45% 92.53% 92.63% 92.56% 92.87% 92.90% 93.18% 91.76% 90.83% 90.41% 90.10% 89.42%
92%
*Data for October and up to 16 November (Vison go-live: 17/11/2015) has been estimated, this due to missing data for that period. The digest will be re-issued as soon as this data is retrieved
LI 15iii - AVERAGE TIME TO DEAL WITH A 999 CALL IN CONTROL
Apr
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
100%
May
01:51
01:50
01:49
01:53
01:54
01:51
01:50
01:49
01:54
01:54
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
01:51
01:50
01:49
01:54
01:53
01:51
01:50
01:49
01:56
01:51
01:52
01:50
01:46
01:58
01:54
01:53
01:50
01:46
02:01
01:51
01:52
01:50
01:46
02:01
01:51
01:51
01:50
01:46
02:02
01:54
01:51
01:50
01:49
01:59
02:00
01:51
01:50
01:49
01:58
02:06
01:51
01:50
01:54
01:53
02:11
01:51
01:50
01:53
01:54
02:17
target
01:30
01:30
01:40
01:40
01:40
00:02:20
90%
00:02:00
80%
00:01:40
70%
60%
00:01:20
50%
00:01:00
40%
30%
00:00:40
Answered in 7
seconds
20%
00:00:20
time to deal
with call
10%
100%
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
00:00:00
Apr-11
0%
chart 2 : monthly
00:03:20
90%
00:03:00
80%
00:02:40
70%
00:02:20
60%
00:02:00
50%
00:01:40
40%
00:01:20
30%
20%
10%
Answered in 7
seconds
00:01:00
time to deal
with call
00:00:20
00:00:40
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
00:00:00
Apr-11
0%
Page 38 of 74
LI5ii measures the percentage of emergency (999) calls answered by Control Officers within seven
seconds. LI15iii measures the time taken for Control operators to deal with an emergency call from the
time the call is answered to the mobilisation of the first resources (attended calls only).
Performance for 2015/16 (89.42 per cent) has declined when compared to 2014/15 and we failed to
achieve the target of 92.5 per cent. It should be noted that the data for about six weeks (between
October to 16 November 2015) is missing. The figures will be updated once the data has been retrieved.
Vision, the Brigade’s new Control and Mobilising system went live in November 2015. As reported at Q2
2015/16, officers were expecting call handling times to increase temporarily which is common place
when any new and more complex IT system is introduced. The ‘bedding in’ period is taking longer than
expected and can be largely put down to system issues that continue to be worked on. Members
received a briefing note in April 2016 that provided information on one particular issue where the system
was slowing down and that on five occasions it slowed down to the extent that Control implemented
their well rehearsed secondary mobilising arrangements. The root cause for that particular issue was
identified and a solution was applied to the system, however some other technical issues have arisen
which has had an impact on performance. Officers continue to work closely with Capita who are
committed to resolving the issues. Officers are confident that the faults will be rectified and improved
performance will then be achieved.
Members received a briefing note in April 2016 that provided information on one particular issue where
the system was slowing down and that on five occasions it slowed down to the extent that Control
implemented their well rehearsed secondary mobilising arrangements. The root cause for that particular
issue was identified and a solution was applied to the system, however, some other technical issues have
arisen which has had an impact on performance. Officers continue to work closely with Capita who are
committed to resolving the issues. Officers are confident that the faults will be rectified and improved
performance will then be achieved.
Calls to primary fires (which include any with casualties) take, on average, just under 90 seconds (01:30)
– see table below (data for 12 months to end March 2016):
Type of Call
Number of
incidents
Average
time taken*
mm:ss
Primary fires
10,407
01:24
Secondary fires
9,815
01:44
Special service – shut in lift
4,660
02:02
False alarm – automatic fire alarms
35,324
01:29
False alarm – good intent
10,617
01:56
False alarm - malicious
1,305
02:01
* From answering the call to mobilising the appliance. The ‘type of call’ uses the incident stop code confirming the incident
type when the incident concluded, not at the point of mobilisation.
Page 39 of 74
False alarms due to AFAs in non-domestic buildings
incidents attended and calls not-attended
LI 12 - FALSE ALARMS DUE TO AFAS - NON DOMESTIC - ATTENDED
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
Jan
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
Feb
Mar
target stretch
28,565 28,296 28,375 28,212 28,011 27,783 27,505 27,370 26,992 26,699 27,009 26,774
30,562 24,669
26,619 26,732 26,368 26,544 26,312 26,022 25,891 25,711 25,562 25,431 24,882 24,700
30,055 25,168
24,721 24,346 24,110 23,903 23,737 23,748 23,748 23,645 23,526 23,470 23,373 23,235
24,301 21,385
22,871 22,786 22,546 22,148 21,934 21,786 21,592 21,297 21,135 21,009 20,794 20,636
23,086 20,316
20,709 20,530 20,641 20,694 20,715 20,662 20,537 20,737 20,758 20,867 21,107 21,160
21,932 19,300
SM 10ii - FALSE ALARMS DUE TO AFAS - NON DOMESTIC - NOT ATTENDED
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
1,123
1,172
1,239
1,287
1,316
1,399
1,424
1,470
1,472
1,468
1,488
1,522
1,527
1,521
1,500
1,504
1,506
1,482
1,482
1,468
1,463
1,456
1,430
1,409
1,423
1,447
1,431
1,419
1,405
1,431
1,433
1,487
1,579
1,622
1,627
1,616
1,598
1,627
1,723
1,828
1,963
1,982
2,006
2,323
2,345
2,336
2,422
2,485
2,493
2,477
2,434
2,363
2,271
2,263
2,233
1,864
1,752
1,730
1,637
1,552
30,000
Non domestic AFAs
not attended
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
3,000
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
chart 2 : monthly
Non domestic AFAs
2,500
2,000
1,500
1,000
500
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
Apr-11
0
Page 40 of 74
Fire alarms and fire detection systems are fundamental to providing early warning from fire, giving
people the chance to evacuate safety - but to be effective, they must be properly installed and
maintained so they do not activate when there is no fire.
LI 12 measures the number of false alarms due to automatic fire alarms (AFAs) in non-domestic buildings.
The number of these false alarm calls has reduced by over 30 per cent since April 2010, reflecting work
with building owners and occupiers to improve fire safety management of buildings. The 20,655 AFA
attendances for 2015/16 is a further improvement over the previous year and means that the normal
target for 2015/16 is being achieved.
Service Measure (SM) 10ii measures the number of calls for AFAs sounding that were not attended after
call filtering by Control. The figure of 2,110 for 2015/16 represents a decrease of over 30 per cent over
the same period 2014/15.
An unwanted fire alarms and AFA reduction strategy was introduced in 2005/06 which included issuing
guidance when providing an operational response. This was in addition to targeted visits by fire safety
inspecting officers. This was successful in making some initial reductions of this incident type. In 2009,
call filtering was implemented and following this, in January 2014, an AFA charging policy was
introduced. The aim of the policy is to encourage more effective management of alarm systems, thereby
improving fire safety in those premises. In 2015/16, attendances to AFAs remained at lower levels and
end of year performance is within target and is significantly better than typical performance in 2013/14
and earlier years. Officers continue to work closely with Capita and other stakeholders to bring about
enhancements to the method used to filter calls on the new mobilising system to ensure that this
performance continues to improve throughout 2016/17.
Cost recovery for non domestic premises generating 10 or more calls a year is set out below. 1,352
invoices were raised during the 12 months to end of March 2016 with a potential recovery value of
£462,046.
2015/16
Invoices raised
Total value of
invoices issued
in quarter
Amount Received
in quarter*
Quarter 1
413
£147,688
£84,667
Quarter 2
361
£129,093
£120,620
Quarter 3
305
£95,508
£60,682
Quarter 4
273
£89,757
£58,902
* Whilst this amount was received within the quarter, this relates to invoices raised since charging began.
Page 41 of 74
Shut in lift releases
Shut in life releases attended and not attended
LI 13 - SHUT IN LIFT RELEASES
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
Sep
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
9,056
8,905
8,740
8,575
8,456
8,273
8,128
7,839
7,715
7,657
7,494
7,375
7,335
7,307
7,175
7,082
7,052
6,944
6,836
6,684
6,672
6,619
6,458
6,430
6,600
-
6,370
6,230
6,113
6,186
6,175
6,076
6,011
5,957
5,732
5,601
5,512
5,385
5,744
5,154
5,334
5,234
5,212
4,960
4,840
4,781
4,754
4,703
4,743
4,726
4,736
4,715
5,657
4,999
4,715
4,718
4,752
4,780
4,806
4,804
4,800
4,843
4,853
4,886
4,882
4,894
5,573
4,849
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
2,373
2,370
2,349
2,349
2,334
2,315
2,290
2,316
2,312
2,293
2,333
2,298
2,266
2,243
2,214
2,174
2,155
2,117
2,098
2,067
2,045
2,055
2,078
2,106
2,146
2,009
2,351
2,112
2,074
2,286
2,103
2,150
2,195
2,074
2,239
2,121
2,120
2,255
2,063
2,119
2,258
2,077
2,152
2,298
2,025
2,175
2,330
1,925
2,200
2,298
1,836
2,163
2,291
1,774
2,119
2,293
1,706
2,068
2,315
1,621
14,000
stretch
9,230
SM 12ii - SHUT IN LIFT RELEASES - NOT ATTENDED
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
2011/12
2012/13
2013/14
2014/15
2015/16
target
-
8,000
not attended
12,000
people not in distress
10,000
7,000
6,000
5,000
8,000
4,000
6,000
3,000
4,000
2,000
2,000
1,000
1,400
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Jul-11
Oct-11
-
Apr-11
0
chart 2 : monthly
600
not attended
1,200
people not in distress
1,000
500
400
800
300
600
200
400
100
200
Jan-16
Oct-15
Jul-15
Apr-15
Jan-15
Oct-14
Jul-14
Apr-14
Jan-14
Oct-13
Jul-13
Apr-13
Jan-13
Oct-12
Jul-12
Apr-12
Jan-12
Oct-11
Jul-11
-
Apr-11
0
Page 42 of 74
LI 13 measures the number of these shut in lift releases attended. The number of incidents 2015/16
(4,894) represents a reduction of over 45 per cent compared to the high point of the last five years for
the 12 months to April 2011 (9,230).
The table and charts opposite also show the numbers of shut in lift calls not attended as a result of call
filtering (SM 12ii).
The red line on charts 1 and 2 (using the scale on the right axis) show the numbers of people released for
lift cars who were not in distress.
From 1 January 2014, a six month amnesty from charging was introduced to recognise the efforts of lift
owners who have done everything they can to avoid lift users calling the Brigade to release them when
stuck in a lift. The amnesty was reviewed after six months and local authorities and other organisations
were included in the amnesty. The amnesty has since continued and is now reviewed every six months.
Given the success of the amnesty ‘period’, it is likely that this will feature as a permanent part of the shut
in lift strategy in future.
Since August 2014, monthly attendances to persons shut in lifts have been between 4,700 and 4,900 per
month and end of year performance is well within target and is significantly better than performance in
previous years. Officers continue to work closely with Capita and other stakeholders to bring about
enhancements to the method used to filter calls on the new mobilising system to ensure that this
performance continues to improve throughout 2016/17.
The following table shows the invoices issued and the value of invoices together with the income derived
from the charging policy for the last four quarters:
Invoices
raised
2015/16
Quarter 1
Quarter 2
Quarter 3
Quarter 4
346
314
203
295
Total value of
invoices issued in
quarter
£123,348
£112,268
£72,495.60
£105,414.00
Amount received
in quarter
£74,809
£70,228
£84,814
£58,599.60
Page 43 of 74
(This page is left intentionally blank)
Page 44 of 74
Appendix 2
Fire fatalities, October 2015 – March 2016
At the request of the Committee at the November 2015 meeting, these details of fire fatalities now
include (a) the time the first appliance arrived at the incident; (b) the number of pumping appliances on
the initial attendance and subsequent attendances (excluding reliefs); and (c) the time between
discovery of the fire and calling the Brigade.
LONDON BOROUGH OF BRENT
Date
13/10/2015
Time of call
01:23
Time first appliance
arrived
01:28
Total number of
appliances
Time between
discovery of fire and
calling Brigade
Number of fatalities
victim - age
victim - gender
2
Not known
1
90
Male
victim - ethnicity
White – British
Premises Type
House – single
occupancy
Motive
Location of fire start
Item first ignited
Accidental
Living room
Not known
smoking materials or a
tea light candle
Main cause Careless handling
Ignition source
Mr E was 90 years old and lived alone in his privately owned
semi-detached house in the London Borough of Brent. Mr E
had recently been diagnosed as living with dementia and he
suffered from a number of age related medical conditions. He
was still relatively mobile but relied on a walking stick for
support. Mr E’s daughter was concerned about her father’s
deteriorating mobility and suggested he convert the downstairs
living/dining room into a bedroom, however the family had not
yet made the changes.
Mr E was in receipt of a formal care plan, this was provided by
Aquaflow Care and consisted of a daily visit from a care
professional. He also wore a telecare pendent alarm which was
provided by Age UK. The telecare alarm was not activated at
the time of the fire and was not linked to smoke detection. Mr E
was a heavy smoker and would regularly use tea light candles
to light his cigarettes. This behaviour had been reported by his
carer but it is unclear what action was taken to reduce the fire
risk.
The main area of fire was located in the living room and
following a post fire scene investigation the remains of fire
damaged items were found in the kitchen. These items were
not noted by the carer during his evening visit, however we
cannot confirm that they are linked to the fire in the lounge.
The cause of the fire has been determined as careless disposal
of either smoking materials or a tea light candle. The property
was fitted with battery powered smoke detection in the hallway
and landing, these actuated at the time of the fire.
Mr E met the criteria of a priority person but did not live in a
priority postcode. He was referred to the Brigade for a home
fire safety visit in September 2013, however this was declined
by Mr E.
Officers believe that Mr E would have benefitted from a home
fire safety visit which would have provided tailored advice on
safer smoking, safe candle use and fire safety interventions to
minimise risk. This would have included the fitting of smoke
alarms in all areas of risk, and a recommendation to link smoke
detection to his telecare system which would have raised the
alarm and summoned assistance sooner.
Page 45 of 74
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
14/01/2016
00:53
00:59:15
2
>10 mins
1
75
Female
Black or Black British –
Caribbean
Other Building/use not
Premises Type
known
victim - ethnicity
Motive
Item first ignited
Ignition source
Main cause
Accidental
Kitchen
Cooking Oil or fat
Cooking Appliance
Cooking
Mrs G was 75 years old and lived alone in her privately owned,
semi-detached house in the London Borough of Brent, for the
past 40 years. She was an active member of the church and
would regularly cater for church events. Her detached garage
at the rear of the property had been converted to a kitchen to
allow her to cook for a large number of people.
Mrs G suffered from multiple medical conditions. She was
fitted with a prosthetic leg but remained mobile and
independent. She was not in receipt of a care package but was
supported by her daughter, who was in regular contact with
her mother.
At the time of the fire Mrs G was cooking in the garage .
Medical professionals believe that Mrs G had suffered from a
medical episode, which may have rendered her unconscious
and incapable of responding to, or escaping from the fire. Mrs
G’s daughter was unable to contact her mother and, concerned
about her welfare went to the property. She was unable to gain
entry and called the police for assistance. On arrival, the police
forced entry to the property, discovered a fire in the garage,
and called the Brigade. Firefighters extinguished the fire which
was confined to a cooking pot and rescued Mrs G who was
found unconscious and not breathing. Mrs G was admitted to
St Mary’s Hospital where she died later that day. The cause of
the fire is cooking oil being left unattended.
Mrs G did not live in a priority postcode area but she did meet
the criteria of a priority person. She was known to the Brigade
as a home fire safety visit had been carried out at the property
in 2007. Fire safety advice was delivered and two smoke
detectors were fitted in the house. Brigade records indicate
that two previous fires had also taken place at the address. One
of which happened in 2008, was the result of a cooking fire and
occurred in the garage.
Officers believe that Mrs G would have benefitted from a
further home fire safety visit as due to her medical conditions,
her circumstances had changed since the last visit , safety
advice regarding cooking would have been provided, including
recommendation for fitting of a heat alarm. Although Mrs G
suffered a medical episode and the fire may have started as a
result, a heat alarm may have alerted neighbours to the fire and
Mrs G may have been found earlier.
Page 46 of 74
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
victim - ethnicity
Premises Type
Motive
Item first ignited
Ignition source
Main cause
31/03/2016
19:48
19:54:19
2
>10 mins
1
78
Male
Mixed – White & Asian
Nursing/CareHome/Hospice
Deliberate
Bedroom
Bedding
Cigarette Lighter
Heat source and
combustibles deliberately
brought together
Mr R was 78 years old and lived in semi detached house
which had been converted into a residential care home,
in the London borough of Brent. The home was privately
run and managed by Lee Valley Care Services who
provided 24 hour care to people suffering with mental
health issues. It is registered with the Care Quality
Commission and housed a maximum of seven residents
at any one time.
Mr R suffered from a number of medical and mental
health conditions. Carers report that he was a heavy
smoker, and there was evidence of previous careless
disposal in his bedroom, outside his window and the rear
door to the garden. Carers report that they asked Mr R to
smoke outside but he insisted on smoking in his room. A
care plan was in place, which incorporated the associated
risk assessment of Mr R’s health issues and smoking
habit, this was evaluated quarterly.
A member of staff noticed smoke issuing from the front
bedroom window on the ground floor and went to
investigate. They discovered a well developed fire and
Mr R on his bed. They removed him to the rear garden
and called the Brigade . Firefighters extinguished the fire
and administered first aid until the arrival of the London
Ambulance Service. He was taken to hospital suffering
from smoke inhalation and burns. Mr R was treated at
Chelsea and Westminster Hospital Intensive Care Unit
where he died on 15 May 2016.
The most probable cause of the fire was determined as
being the application of a naked flame to bedding and
has been recorded as a deliberate act.
There was an automatic fire detection system installed in
the property, with smoke detection in all bedrooms and
communal areas, which actuated at the time of the fire.
Officers believe that Mr R was at a significantly increased
risk of fire and would have benefitted from additional
measures such as the use of fire retardant bedding.
The Brigade works to ensure compliance with the
Regulatory Reform Order. The building received a fire
safety audit in November 2015 and a ‘notice of
deficiencies’ was issued. A fire audit was carried out
following the incident and an enforcement notice has
been issued. Brent Council have initiated a safeguarding
review process to look at the circumstances of Mr R’s
death.
Page 47 of 74
LONDON BOROUGH OF BROMLEY
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
victim - ethnicity
Premises Type
15/10/2015
21:46
21:58:18
1
>10 mins
1
45
Male
White – British
Road Vehicle
Deliberate –own
property
Location of fire start Other
Motive
Mr H was 45 years old. He was found in his burning car which
was parked in a public house car park in the London Borough
of Bromley. The Metropolitan Police reported that Mr H had
been suffering from depression for the last three years and his
father had died just under a year ago. It has been confirmed by
CCTV footage that Mr H had visited the public house prior to
the fire
A customer of the public house discovered a car alight and
alerted the landlord of the public house who called the
Brigade. When Firefighters arrived they encountered a well
developed fire, confined to the rear area of the car. They
fought the fire and rescued Mr H from the front of the vehicle,
he was unconscious and not breathing. Attempts were made
by crews to resuscitate him until the arrival of the London
Ambulance Service who then took over. He was admitted to St
Georges Hospital in Tooting where he died two days later.
The most probable cause of fire was ignition of the rear bumper
trim of the vehicle by naked flame. It is most likely that this was
a deliberate act and no third party involvement is suspected.
Unspecified external
fitting/part of structure
Ignition source Cigarette lighter
Item first ignited
Main cause
Heat source and
combustibles brought
together deliberately
Page 48 of 74
LONDON BOROUGH OF BROMLEY
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
victim - ethnicity
15/01/2016
06:55
07:01:59
3
> 10 mins
1
74
Male
White – British
House – single
occupancy
Motive Accidental
Premises Type
Bedroom
Household
paper/cardboard
Ignition source Candles/ Tealights
Item first ignited
Main cause
Too Close to heat
Source
Mr G was 74 years old and lived with his two brothers in their
privately owned three bedroom house in the London Borough
of Bromley. Mr G lived in the upper level of the property and
his brothers occupied the main living room on the ground
floor. The property was cluttered and there was significant
amounts of hoarded materials within some of the rooms. A
large number of candles were located on the floor of the main
bedroom which is where the fire started. A friend of Mr G
reported that a few days before the incident Mr G had
extinguished a small fire in the main bedroom which involved
candles and a pan of wax located on the floor. This was not
reported to the Brigade.
Mr G was in good health, a non smoker and had no mobility
issues.
The Brigade was called after a passer by noticed smoke
issuing from the property. He investigated and was able to
alert Mr G’s brothers to the fire and assist them out of the
property but was unable to re-enter the property due to the
intensity of the fire. It appears that Mr G became aware of the
fire and tried to escape before being overcome by fumes and
heat. Due to the extent of the fire and Mr G’s injuries it is
likely that he had already died before the Brigade had arrived.
The cause of the fire has been determined as the unsafe
positioning of candles in Mr G’s bedroom.
No smoke detection was found in the property. Officers
believe that Mr G had a significant increased risk from fire and
would have benefitted from a home fire safety visit, with
tailored advice around safer candle use, alongside the
installation of smoke detectors in all areas of risk. Smoke
detection would have given early warning of the fire and
raised the alarm.
Page 49 of 74
LONDON BOROUGH OF CAMDEN
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
26/10/2015
10:43
10:56:32
2
Immediately
1
85
Male
Other Asian or Asian
British
Self contained
Premises Type
Sheltered Housing
victim - ethnicity
Deliberate – unknown
owner
Location of fire start Kitchen
Motive
Household paper/
Cardboard
Lighted paper or card,
Ignition source
or other naked flame
Item first ignited
Main cause
Heat source and
Mr Y was 85 years old and was originally from China. He
moved to Britain in 1970 and worked as a chef until he retired.
He had lived alone in his third floor flat within a sheltered
housing facility in the London Borough of Camden since
1997. The facility is owned by Origin Housing Association
who provide an onsite scheme manager from Monday to
Friday between the hours of 09.00 and 17.00 and a deputy
manager working 09.00 and 13.00 weekends. Mr Y had been
a regular visitor to the local Chinese community centre,
however in the last year his attendance had declined.
Mr Y was known to be a likable and happy person. He relied
on sign language and drawing pictures to communicate as his
English was extremely limited. He had a hearing impairment
and although he had mobility issues caused by a fractured leg
which he sustained 10 years ago, he was relatively mobile. He
was not in receipt of a care package but was supported by a
friend who reported that two weeks prior to the incident Mr Y
had been taken to hospital suffering from Bell’s Palsy. Care
staff and friends of Mr Y reported that on the day of the fire
his behaviour was out of character. He became agitated when
staff were not able to assist him. And evidence within the flat
appeared to indicated recent destructive behaviour carried
out by Mr Y.
The main area of fire was located in the kitchen with a further
small fire in the living room of the third floor flat. Mr Y was
found outside in the garden below the window of his flat,
unconscious and unaffected by the fire. Attempts were made
by crews to resuscitate Mr Y. Unfortunately Mr Y did not
respond and he was pronounced dead at the scene by
attending London Ambulance crews. The cause is believed to
be a deliberate human act.
Page 50 of 74
ROYAL BOROUGH OF GREENWICH
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
01/10/2015
15:00
15:03:33
2
< 10 mins
1
66
Male
British
Premises Type Mosque
victim - ethnicity
Motive
Accidental
Roof
Mr Y was a 66 year old Asian British man who was an active
and well respected member of the mosque community in the
London Borough of Greenwich. He regularly volunteered his
services carrying out maintenance work around the building.
It has been confirmed by CCTV footage that Mr Y and
another adult male had been carrying out separate
maintenance work to the roof of the Mosque shortly before
the fire started. The Brigade was called after a number of
witnesses noticed smoke rising from the roof and observed
Mr Y who was on his own and in distress. Members of the
Mosque assisted Mr Y down from the roof until the arrival of
the Police. He was removed to the specialist burns unit at
Broomfield Hospital suffering from 60% burns. He died 28
days later on 29 October 15.
The cause of the fire was accidental involving a chemical
reaction of the top coat, resin and hardener. Due to the rapid
fire development and extent of his injuries, subject to the
outcome of the coroners court, it is believed that it is unlikely
the Brigade could have been prevented Mr Y’s death.
Paint, varnish, resins,
creosote
Ignition source Flammable chemicals
Item first ignited
Main cause
Accumulation of
flammable material
Page 51 of 74
ROYAL BOROUGH OF GREENWICH
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
victim - ethnicity
Premises Type
Motive
Item first ignited
Ignition source
Main cause
14/02/2016
23:16
23:22:44
4
>10 mins
1
77
Male
White - British
Flats/Maisonettes
Accidental
Living room
Other item
Cigarette
Careless Handling
Mr S was 77 years old and lived alone in a one bedroom flat in
the Royal Borough of Greenwich; he had lived there since
May 2006. The purpose built block is owned by the local
authority and provided housing to those over 50 years of age.
Mr S was a popular resident and received frequent visits from
his neighbour.
Mr S was a heavy smoker and user of alcohol. He was known
to a number of agencies as he had been visited by the
Greenwich Contact Assessment Team and the police,
following reported concerns regarding his welfare. Following
the visits, no further issues were raised. Mr S was in good
health, had no physical or cognitive impairments and was not
in receipt of a care plan.
The fire was discovered by a neighbour after they heard
noises coming from the affected flat. They alerted the Brigade
and on arrival crews encountered a well developed fire in the
living room. Mr S was discovered in the bedroom,
unconscious and not breathing. The most probable cause is
accidental ignition by Mr S whilst refilling a butane lighter. It
is believed that Mr S tried to escape the fire, but became
disorientated and moved to the bedroom where he was
overcome by smoke. There were no working smoke alarms
fitted in the property.
Mr S met the criteria of a priority person, lived in a priority
postcode and had been referred to the Brigade in June 2007
for a home fire safety visit by Age Concern. However despite
several attempts the Brigade were unable to establish contact
with Mr S and a visit did not take place.
Officers believe that Mr S had a significant increased risk from
fire and would have benefitted from a home fire safety visit,
with specific advice on fire risks tailored to his needs,
alongside the installation of smoke detectors in all areas of
risk.
Following a post fire inspection of the property, some fire
safety issues were noted and the Brigade issued a Level 2
“Notice of Deficiency” under the Regulatory Reform Order.
Page 52 of 74
LONDON BOROUGH OF HACKNEY
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
victim - ethnicity
02/12/2015
20:08
20:12:59
2
<10 mins
1
80
Female
White – British
House – single
occupancy
Motive Accidental
Premises Type
Bedroom
Item first ignited
Bedding
Ignition source
Cigarette
Main cause
Careless Handling
Mrs P was 80 years old and lived with her two daughters and
grandson in their three bedroom house in the London
Borough of Hackney. The property is owned and managed by
London & Quadrant Housing association. Mrs P was visually
impaired and suffered from severe mobility difficulties. She
spent the majority of her time in bed but with assistance from
her family she would use a wheelchair and Zimmer frame to
get around.
Mrs P was supported by her daughter who was her full time
registered carer. Mrs P was a heavy smoker and there was
extensive evidence of careless disposal of smoking materials
in her bedroom, where the fire occurred. There was clutter
and high levels of hoarded household materials throughout
the property.
In March 2008, the Brigade were called to a fire at the
property which was caused by careless disposal of smoking
materials onto bedding. Attempts were made by the Brigade
to arrange a home fire safety visit following the fire, but the
family were unable to be contacted and the visit did not take
place. However, a visit was carried out in June 2010, during
which fire safety advice was delivered and two single point
smoke alarms where fitted in the hallway and landing. There
were no disability or mobility issues recorded at the time of
this visit.
After being alerted to the fire Mrs P’s family had attempted to
rescue her, but they were unable to do so and called the
Brigade. On arrival firefighters found Mrs P in her bedroom.
Evidence indicates that she made an attempt to escape when
she became aware of the fire but the impact of her reduced
mobility meant she was quickly overcome by heat and fumes.
The cause of the fire has been determined as careless disposal
of smoking materials onto bedding.
Mrs P met the criteria of a priority person but did not live in a
priority postcode. Officers believe that she had a significant
increased risk from fire and would have benefitted from
additional fire safety interventions to minimise risk such as a
domestic sprinkler and fire retardant bedding.
Page 53 of 74
LONDON BOROUGH OF HAMMERSMITH & FULHAM
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
12/10/2015
16:21
16:25:08
2
>10 mins
1
74
Male
Caribbean
Converted Flats - 3 or
Premises Type
more storeys
victim - ethnicity
Motive
Item first ignited
Accidental
Living room
Clothing
candle or smoking
materials
Main cause Careless Handling
Ignition source
Mr B was 74 years old, he had lived alone for over 12 years in
a one bedroom flat located on the third floor within a
converted four storey house. The flat was owned by the local
authority in the London Borough of Hammersmith and
Fulham.
Mr B suffered from a number of medical conditions, had been
diagnosed as living with dementia and had recently started
using a walking stick due to a decline in his mobility. He had
refused a formal care plan but did receive support from staff
from the ‘Parkview District Nursing Service’. This consisted of
two daily visits from the district nurse to monitor his personal
care and prescription of his medication.
A neighbour from the flat above observed smoke issuing from
the window of the affected flat. Upon hearing the smoke
alarm they left the building and alerted the Brigade. On arrival
firefighters entered the property and discovered a well
developed fire and his clothes alight in the living room. They
extinguished the fire and commenced first aid until the arrival
of London Ambulance Service. Mr B was removed to Chelsea
and Westminster burns unit but died as a result of his injuries
the following day.
Mr B was a smoker and within the property there were a
significant number of candles. The most probable cause of
the fire is either candles or smoking materials coming into
contact with Mr B’s clothing.
Mr B met the criteria of a priority person but did not live in a
priority postcode area. He was known to other agencies but
was not known to the Brigade. The property was fitted with a
hard wired smoke alarm in the living room which was linked
to a heat detector in the kitchen.
The Brigade works closely with partners to help identify those
who display high fire risk characteristics and behaviours.
Brigade officers believe Mr B would have benefitted from fire
safety interventions such as a home fire safety visit with
tailored advice around safer smoking and candle use,
alongside the installation of a telecare system with smoke
alarms linked to a call monitoring centre that would facilitate
assistance to be summoned quickly in the event of an
emergency.
Page 54 of 74
LONDON BOROUGH OF HAVERING
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
11/03/2016
06:32
06:41:05
Not known
Time between
calling Brigade
2
1
victim - age
victim - gender
victim - ethnicity
91
Male
White –British
House –single
occupancy
Motive Accidental
Premises Type
Item first ignited
Ignition source
Main cause
Living room
Other Textiles
Candles/Tea lights
Too close to heat
source
Mr R was 91 years old and lived alone in his well kept,
privately owned three bedroom terraced house, in the
London Borough of Havering. He had lived there for
approximately 50 years with his wife until, she was moved to a
care home. Mr R suffered from various health conditions, had
mobility issues and had experienced a number of falls.
Mr R was in receipt of a care plan which consisted of two daily
visits. Carers reported that he had recently been spending
most of his time sitting and sleeping in his chair in the living
room. Mr R was also receiving a ‘meals on wheels’ service
twice a day. A member of the ‘meals on wheels’ team
reported that he opted not to use the electric or gas heating
and would wear several layers of clothes as instead of using
the heating.
The fire occurred in the front living room. It is believed Mr R
became aware of the fire and went to the kitchen to get water
in order to tackle it but he was over come by smoke. A
neighbour discovered the fire and called the Brigade. On
arrival firefighters forced entry and rescued Mr R from the
property, although he was pronounced dead at the scene by
attending paramedics.
There were a significant number of candles within the
property and the cause of the fire was unsafe use of a candle
or match which came into contact with the duvet Mr R was
using to keep warm.
Mr R did not live in a priority postcode but did meet the
criteria of a priority person. He had received a home fire
safety visit in July 2010 that was delivered by an established
partnership who carry out visits on behalf of the Brigade. Fire
safety advice was delivered and two smoke detectors were
fitted in the property. Following the fire only one smoke
detector was located on the first floor landing and actuated at
the time of the fire.
Officers believe that Mr R was at an increased risk of fire and
would have benefitted from a further home fire safety visit as
his circumstances had changed since the last visit. In
particular Mr R would have benefited from the provision of a
fire retardant blanket and the installation of smoke detection
in all areas of risk. Advice would also have been delivered
regarding prevention, detection, escape and safer candle use.
Page 55 of 74
LONDON BOROUGH OF ISLINGTON
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
victim - ethnicity
21/02/2016
00:06
00:15:33
2
>10 mins
1
86
Male
White – British
House –single
occupancy
Motive Accidental
Premises Type
Item first ignited
Bedroom
Bedding
Ignition source
Other Lights
Main cause
Overheating
Mr L was 86 years old and lived alone in his privately owned
three bedroom terrace house in the London Borough of
Islington. He was a retired electrician who had previously
served in the Hussars regiment in the British Army and had
also worked for a national newspaper.
Mr L suffered from arthritis and had received an offer for a
mobility assessment from the local authority. He declined this
option as he felt in good health, was mobile and still able to
use the local transport network. Mr L was not in receipt of a
care package and was in regular contact with his daughter,
who described her father as an independent person. He was
also fondly regarded by his neighbours and was well known
within the local community.
The fire occurred in the front bedroom and the cause was a
table lamp coming into contact with bed/bedding materials.
On the evening when the fire occurred, a neighbour smelled
smoke but assumed this was due to the fact Mr L used a coal
fire. Approximately one hour later the neighbour noted the
increase in smoke and upon investigation discovered smoke
issuing from a rear first floor window of Mr L’s property. On
trying to alert Mr L and no response being received the
Brigade were alerted. On arrival firefighters located Mr L on
the stairs, unconscious and not breathing. Medical
intervention was administered by crews until they were
relieved by the London Ambulance Service. Despite all efforts
Mr L was pronounced dead at the scene sometime later.
Evidence suggests that Mr L discovered the fire, tried to
escape and collapsed on the stairs.
Mr L’s home had one smoke detector in the basement which
was remote to the origin of the fire and the battery had been
removed. The rest of the property did not have smoke
detection to provide an early warning of the fire to Mr L or
neighbouring properties.
Mr L did not meet the criteria of a priority person, did not live
in a priority postcode and was not known to the Brigade
although officers believe he would have benefitted from a
home fire safety visit, providing fire safety advice and working
smoke detection in all areas of risk.
Page 56 of 74
LONDON BOROUGH OF ISLINGTON
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
victim - ethnicity
16/03/2016
01:38
01:43:08
4
>10 mins
1
47
Female
White – British
Converted Flats – 3 or
more storeys
Motive Accidental
Premises Type
Item first ignited
Ignition source
Main cause
Living room
Other item
Cigarette
Careless Handling
Dr S was 47 years old and lived alone in her privately owned
one bedroom flat in the London Borough of Islington. She
worked as a consultant Paediatric Anaesthetist at the Royal
London Hospital and enjoyed sports and travelling. She was a
highly respected doctor who was one of those who attended
to casualties wounded in the 7/7 bombing attacks and for the
last six years she also worked as a tutor for the Royal College
of Anaesthetists. Dr S was well known and liked in her local
area, neighbours described Dr S as quiet and friendly.
Dr S smoked and unsafe handling of smoking materials was
evident within the property. There was clutter and significant
storage of mixed household materials throughout the
property. The hoarded materials hindered the firefighters’
excess to the property, reduced their ability to fight the fire
and increased the severity of the fire.
The fire was discovered by a neighbour who raised the alarm.
The fire is believed to have started on the sofa in the living
room and spread to the roof and neighbouring flat below.
Upon arrival firefighters encountered a well developed fire in
the living room. Firefighters rescued Dr S from the building
and first aid was provided by the London Ambulance Service.
She was removed to hospital where she was later pronounced
dead. It is believed that Dr S was overcome by smoke while
resting and was unable to escape. The cause of the fire was
accidental unsafe disposal of smoking materials.
Dr S did meet the criteria of a priority person but did not live
in a priority postcode area and was not known to the Brigade.
A single point smoke detector was found on the table in the
hallway and there was no battery inside.
Brigade officers believe that Dr S would have benefitted from
a home fire safety visit where she would have received advice
about safer smoking and the increased fire risks associated
with hoarding behaviour. The home fire safety visit would
also have included the installation of working smoke alarms to
alert the occupant or neighbours to the fire.
Page 57 of 74
ROYAL BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON & CHELSEA
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
09/02/2016
03:17
03:22:24
3
Immediately
1
41
Male
British
Premises Type Other
victim - ethnicity
Motive
Item first ignited
Deliberate -Own
Outdoors
Clothing
Liquid; petrol/oil
related
Main cause Self immolation
Ignition source
Mr A was 41 years old. He was registered with the Royal
College of Nursing and was due to attend a disciplinary
hearing on the day of the incident. According to reports
provided by the Metropolitan Police Service, Mr A was a
patient at St Charles Hospital, in the Royal Borough of
Kensington and Chelsea. He was a day release patient,
receiving treatment for depression and had recently made
suicidal threats. Staff raised concerns regarding Mr A’s
whereabouts to the Police when he did not return to the
hospital that evening. They conducted a search within the
local area, however they were unsuccessful in locating him.
The premises where the incident occurred only permits public
access from 06:00 to 17:30 and is monitored remotely by
security officers. In the early hours of the morning, Mr A was
seen on CCTV. Security officers went to investigate and
discovered Mr A who emerged from the bushes with his
clothing alight. They called the Brigade and extinguished the
fire. On arrival fire crews provided first aid but Mr A was
pronounced dead at the scene by attending paramedics.
The most probable cause of fire was ignition of ignitable liquid
vapours by Mr A. It is likely that this was a deliberate act and
no third party involvement is suspected. A petrol can and
lighter were found nearby by the Brigade’s Fire Investigation
Team.
Page 58 of 74
ROYAL BOROUGH OF KENSINGTON & CHELSEA
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
victim - ethnicity
13/03/2016
09:03
09:09:18
2
>10 mins
1
79
Female
Mixed – White & Asian
Licensed HMO – 3 or
more storeys
Motive Accidental
Premises Type
Bedsitting room
Household
paper/cardboard
Ignition source Heating/Fire
Item first ignited
Main cause
Too close to heat
source
Ms O was 79 years old and lived alone in her one roomed
bedsit in the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea; she
had lived there for 32 years. The property is situated in the
basement and is managed by Brandenburg Management Ltd.
Ms O described herself as fiercely independent and prior to
retirement she had worked as a classically trained actress.
Ms O suffered from a number of mobility and health
conditions including chronic obstructive pulmonary disease,
for which she was taking medication. She managed to get
around with the aid of a Zimmer frame, however due to her
illnesses she was relatively housebound. Ms O was in receipt
of a care plan which consisted of one visit a week to assist
with shopping and medical care. In November 2015, Ms O
was admitted to hospital and was discharged a few weeks
later. Social services and the management company offered
to support her increasing needs but she was reluctant to
accept these offers of assistance.
The night before the fire, Ms O had experienced a fall and
when attempting to stand up she unintentionally knocked
over a number of items which landed near the heater. Ms O
remained on the floor until the following morning when she
eventually managed to lift herself up on to the bed. A short
while later, she noticed smoke developing within her flat, she
called for help and a neighbour assisted her to the adjacent
flat. A fire alarm in the communal hallway actuated and the
Brigade were called. On arrival, crews assisted Ms O from the
building. She was removed to Chelsea and Westminster
Hospital suffering smoke inhalation. Her condition
deteriorated and subsequently she died on 15 March. The
cause of the fire is an electric radiant heater being too close to
combustible items.
The property was cluttered, with a moderate level of hoarded
material apparent in the room. There were no smoke alarms
fitted within the flat of origin, however hardwired smoke
detection was fitted in the communal areas of the building.
Ms O did not live in a priority postcode area but did meet the
profile of a priority person. In 2012, the Brigade received a
home fire safety visit referral for Ms O from Independent
Living Association. Several attempts to arrange a home fire
safety visit were made without success and a visit did not take
place.
Brigade officers feel that Ms O would have benefitted from a
home fire safety visit with specific tailored advice on what
actions to take in the event of a fire, the increased fire risks
associated with hoarding behaviour and would also have
included the installation of working smoke alarms to alert the
occupant or neighbours to the fire.
Page 59 of 74
LONDON BOROUGH OF LEWISHAM
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
03/03/2016
10:59
11:05:12
2
>10 mins
1
60
Male
Other Black or Black
British
Flat Maisonette – up to
Premises Type
3 storeys
victim - ethnicity
Deliberate – unknown
Motive
owner
Location of fire start Living room
Item first ignited
Clothing and Cushions
Mr T was 60 years old and lived alone in his one bedroom flat
owned by Phoenix Community Housing in the London
Borough of Lewisham; he had lived there for five years. Mr T
had a history of mental health issues, he had no mobility
issues and was not in receipt of a care plan.
The day before the incident, family members and neighbours
raised concerns regarding Mr T’s wellbeing. As a result both
the London Ambulance Service (LAS) and Police were called
to the property and the LAS raised a referral to his GP.
The fire occurred in the living room and was discovered by a
passer by who noticed smoke. Firefighters found Mr T in the
bedroom, unconscious and not breathing. Mr T was taken to
University of Lewisham Hospital where he died on 4 March
2016.The most likely cause of the fire is the deliberate
application of a naked flame to items of clothing and cushions
located on the living room floor.
Mr T lived in a priority postcode area and met the criteria for a
priority person but was not previously known to the Brigade.
The flat was fitted with hardwired smoke detection in the
hallway and a combined heat/carbon monoxide alarm in the
kitchen.
Main cause Heat source and
Ignition source
Page 60 of 74
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
13/03/2016
12:07
12:11:54
2
Not known
1
69
Male
Caribbean
Premises Type Outdoors
victim - ethnicity
Motive
Accidental
In open area next to
housing
Item first ignited Clothing
Ignition source
Main cause
Cigarette
Careless Handling
Mr S was 69 years old and lived in a nursing home in
Lewisham, which is owned and run by BUPA. The site
consists of 85 rooms and provides 24 hour care for residents.
Mr S suffered from a number of health conditions and had
reduced mobility and he had used a wheelchair since 2006.
Mr S was a heavy smoker and carers reported that he would
often spend time smoking in the designated smoking area,
which was outside. There was also evidence of cigarettes
burns on clothing found in Mr S’s bedroom.
The fire occurred in the smoking shelter situated in the rear
garden of the nursing home. A member of staff discovered
the fire, and along with other care assistants, they
extinguished the fire. On arrival firefighters worked with
paramedics to deliver medical care until Mr S was removed to
hospital where upon he was pronounced dead. The fire was
caused by smoking materials coming into contact with
clothing Mr S was wearing at the time.
Mr S met the criteria of a priority person, however he did not
live in a priority postcode area and was not known to the
Brigade.
Officers believe that Mr S was at a significantly increased risk
of suffering from fire and would have recommended the use
of fire retardant blankets and clothing. The Brigade works in
partnership with external agencies to ensure they comply with
the Regulatory Reform Order.
Page 61 of 74
LONDON BOROUGH OF NEWHAM
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
25/12/2015
04:42
04:47:22
2
Not known
Mr R was 60 and lived in privately rented accommodation in
the London borough of Newham. The property was being
used as a House of Multiple Occupancy (HMO) by three
residents. During the fire, one tenant and four visitors
managed to escape from the flat above.
A man has subsequently been arrested and charged with Mr
R’s murder and arson with intent to endanger life. This
incident is subject to an ongoing police investigation and as
such limited details can be released at this time.
1
60
Male
victim - ethnicity
Asian or Asian British Indian
Premises Type
Unlicensed HMO - Up
to 2 storeys
Deliberate - others
property
Location of fire start Corridor/Hall
Motive
Item first ignited
Petrol/Oil products
Main cause Homicide/attempted:
setting fire to other
person/s
Ignition source
Page 62 of 74
LONDON BOROUGH OF RICHMOND UPON THAMES
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
19/01/2016
18:15
18:21:50
3
Time between
discovery of fire
and calling Brigade
Not known
1
victim - age
victim - gender
victim - ethnicity
63
Male
White - British
Housing – single
occupancy
Motive Accidental
Premises Type
Living room
Item first ignited
Bedding
Ignition source
Cigarette
Main cause
Careless Handling
Mr P was 63 years old and lived alone in his three bedroom house,
owned by Richmond Housing Partnership, in the London Borough
of Richmond. Mr P suffered from multiple medical conditions. In
2012 there was a decline in his health and Mr P was confined to
bed. Consequently, his living room had been adapted to make
provision for a medical bed with a pressure relieving air mattress.
Mr P was known to Richmond social services. He was in receipt of a
local authority care plan provided by Mears Health providers,
which consisted of two carers attending Mr P’s home four times per
day. He also received two visits a week from the district nurse and
regular visits from the occupational therapists and social workers.
Mr P was provided with a telecare pendant alarm from Richmond
Care Line but refused to wear it around his neck. It did not operate
during the fire and was not linked to smoke detection.
There was evidence of unsafe disposal of cigarettes and matches
on the bed and in the area where Mr P spent the majority of his
time. Carers had also reported seeing burns to his bedding.
Welfare concerns regarding his smoking habits had been reported
by all professionals involved in Mr P’s care and a referral to the
Brigade was made by social services. A HFSV was carried out in
June 2014 which included fire safety advice, and the installation of
two single point smoke alarms. In June 2015, the Brigade were
called to a fire at his property and Mr P was removed to hospital.
The fire was caused by the unsafe disposal of smoking materials
and prior to his discharge, fire retardant bedding was provided. He
was subsequently referred for a further HFSV where fire safety
advice around safer smoking was delivered. However, social
services reported that Mr P was reluctant to accept advice
regarding his smoking habits.
A few days before this incident London Ambulance service were
called to Mr P’s property. Following their visit they raised an adult
safeguarding referral regarding his self neglect. This was followed
up by social services who visited the property and discovered that
the fire retardant bedding was not on the bed and Mr P refused to
use it.
The fire was discovered by a neighbour after they noted smoke
issuing from the property. They alerted the Brigade and on arrival
crews encountered a well developed fire .The most probable cause
is thought to be unsafe disposal of smoking materials, however this
is pending the scientific report on a mattress air pump removed
from the scene.
Mr P did not live in a priority postcode, however he did meet the
criteria of a priority person. Officers believe that he would have
benefitted from smoke detection linked to his Telecare system and
the installation of an automatic fire suppression system.
A safeguarding review is going to be conducted to review the
circumstances of Mr P’s death.
Page 63 of 74
LONDON BOROUGH OF WALTHAM FOREST
Date
Time of call
arrived
Total number of
appliances
Time between
calling Brigade
victim - age
victim - gender
victim - ethnicity
Premises Type
Motive
17/03/2016
14:37
14:43:05
2
Not known
1
51
Male
Other White
Camping Tent
Accidental
Other
Item first ignited
Bedding
Ignition source
Cigarette
Main cause
Careless Handling
Mr L was a 51 years old Polish national. Police reports indicate
that he had moved to the UK with his family approximately
eight years ago. Following the separation from his wife three
years ago, he became homeless and was sleeping rough. It is
believed for the previous seven months Mr L had been living
in a tent on scrubland in the London Borough of Waltham
Forest.
According to police reports Mr L was a smoker and heavy
drinker. He was in regular contact with his family who
reported that Mr L suffered from a number of health
conditions. In 2014, Adult Social Care became aware of Mr L
after he was admitted to hospital by London Ambulance
Service displaying disorientated behaviour. He was diagnosed
with a brain aneurysm, however he discharged himself a few
days later. Mr L was also known to local homeless services
and regularly attended a soup kitchen. However, Mr L had
not been seen for several days before the incident.
A member of the public was out walking their dog when they
discovered evidence of a fire and the body of Mr L. The
Police were called who in turn requested Brigade attendance.
Evidence suggests Mr L was in a tent when the fire started
and was unable to escape. Widespread unsafe disposal of
smoking materials was apparent in the area of the
encampment and is believed to be the cause of the fire.
A friend of the Mr L reported that he had experienced a fire in
a previous tent several months ago. Fire damaged remains of
several objects were discovered nearby. The fire was not
reported to the Brigade, however it is believed to have been
caused by unsafe disposal of smoking materials.
Brigade officers are working with local partners to proactively
identify those living in areas unsuitable for use as
accommodation, aiming to raise fire safety awareness and
reduce risk.
Page 64 of 74
(This page is left intentionally blank)
Page 65 of 74
Appendix 3
Fire safety prosecutions, October – March 2016
This appendix includes details of prosecutions undertaken for contravention of fire safety legislation (the
Regulatory Reform (Fire Safety) Order 2005 or ‘RRO’). The details presented are according to the date of the court
appearance as the outcome is usually determined at this point.
LONDON BOROUGH OF BEXLEY
Date of offence
/inspection
19 February 2011
Premises
Milton Lodge, 6 Hadlow Rd
Sidcup
Borough
Bexley
Type of
premises
Sheltered housing
Offence
 Article 8 General fire
precautions.
 Article 32 Noncompliance with an
Enforcement Notice.
Date/place of
trial
Bexleyheath Magistrates
Court, 1 February 2016
Sentence
£5,600 – fine
£14,000 - costs
Milton Lodge is a sheltered housing unit of 35 flats. At the
relevant time it was managed by Countrywide Residential
Lettings Ltd (it is now under new management that has no
connection to the prosecution).
On 19 April 2011 there was a fire in a flat at Milton Lodge. A
91-year old woman had to be rescued and was hospitalised. A
post-fire audit revealed significant fire safety regulatory
deficiencies. Fire doors were routinely wedged open and had
poor maintenance so that they would not be effective enough.
The single escape route had an automatic smoke ventilation
system but it was broken. There was insufficient structural
separation of the escape route from a large storage area so that
fire/smoke could spread easily. The fire risk assessment had
failed to take account of the frailty of the elderly residents.
An Enforcement Notice was served on countrywide requiring
various improvements by 5 November 2011. On a return visit
on 4 November 2011 officers noted repairs to the vents but
few other remedial actions.
Countrywide were asked to account for the failure to rectify
the deficiencies. They indicated they would appeal the Notice
(albeit out of time) but ultimately did not do so. They claimed
correspondence had not reached their head office – and
required copies. They required time to conduct their own
investigations. They refused to attend an Interview under
Caution. They then refused to comment because they had
been removed from managing the premises by the landlord.
Ultimately they simply refused to acknowledge
correspondence and returned it to LFB unopened.
It was therefore decided to prosecute. Countrywide denied
any liability and contested several procedural points before the
case could reach the courts. Officers had to prepare a full set
of case papers for a contested trial, only to have Countrywide
agree to enter two guilty pleas at a late stage.
Page 66 of 74
Date of offence
/inspection
On 4 February 2011
Marine Tower is a purpose built block of flats at Abinger
Grove, Deptford, London, SE8 5UY. The premises has 17
storeys: ground floor and 16 floors above. There is no
residential accommodation on the ground floor.
At all material times, Lewisham Homes Limited was responsible
for managing Marine Tower. Lewisham Homes Limited is
wholly owned by Lewisham Council and is managed by a
board of directors.
On 4 February 2011, there was a fire at Marine Tower.
Seventy-four calls were made to the London Fire Brigade. The
first of these calls was made at 14:43hrs. Ten fire appliances
attended the incident. Including reliefs, a total of 17 front line
fire appliances, 13 support vehicles and 130
firefighters/officers were deployed from across London to deal
with this incident.
At 14:47:53hrs, the London Fire Brigade received a call that
was later traced to Flat 63. By 15:00hrs, the caller could no
longer be heard. Firefighters found two women in Flat 63.
Both were unconscious. Both were taken to the 14th floor, and
were later pronounced dead by the Helicopter Emergency
Medical Services
A post fire investigation was carried out at the premises.
Investigators concluded that two entirely separate fires had
started within Flat 61 Marine Tower, one in the bedroom and
one in the living room. Flat 61 was opposite flat 63.The fires
were likely to have been deliberately started.
The accuracy of that conclusion was confirmed by the
conviction of the occupant of flat 61 in May 2012 for
manslaughter.
Page 67 of 74
LONDON BOROUGH OF SOUTHWARK
Date of offence
/inspection
From February 2012
including several follow up
dates
Premises
Good Intent Public House
23 East St
Borough
Southwark
Type of
premises
Pub with HMO above
Offence
Date/place of
trial
Sentence
The premises are a pub with an HMO above. In January 2012,
the premises had been subject to a joint raid by licensing
officers at Southwark Borough Council and the Police. At the
time of the raid, one of the licencing officers had concerns
about fire safety issues at the premises and this information
was passed to the LFB. The LFB attended the premises in
February 2012 to carry out an inspection.
During the inspection, it was noted that there were a number
of fire safety issues, including:- no fire risk assessment,
insufficient/inadequate fire detectors/alarms, no viable
Art 9 (1)Failure to make a
escape route from the upper floor, lack of fire doors. This was
suitable and sufficient fire
paired with the fact that there were a number of ignition
risk assessment
sources such as overloaded electrical sockets, and combustible
Art 13(1)(a) Failure to
material present in rooms and hallways. There was also poor
provide an adequate system management of fire safety in the premises in that there was
of fire detection and
considerable evidence that smoking was taking place inside
adequate fire fighting
the premises. An Enforcement Notice was issued which
equipment
detailed what work needed to be carried out to address the fire
safety issues identified.
14(2)(b) - Failure to
preserve the integrity of the
A second inspection was carried out in March 2012 to
means of escape
determine whether a prohibition notice should be issued.
Art 14(2)(f) - Failure to
During the inspection, it was noted that there were a number
ensure that the door along
of fire safety breaches throughout the residential areas of the
the means of escape could
premises which put the residents at risk of serious injury or
easily and immediately be
death. These included:- Inadequate smoke detection
opened in an emergency
equipment/fire alarm, inadequate fire fighting equipment,
15(1)(a) - Failure to provide inadequate fire instruction notices, inadequate emergency
an emergency plan,
lighting, absence of fire doors, and trip hazards present in the
evacuation strategy and
means of escape, combustible materials being stored in the
implement any safety drills
means of escape, and there was evidence that the emergency
in respect of the premises
door was locked at certain times during the day/night.
Art 18(1) - Failure to appoint
In light of the fire safety issues, a Prohibition Notice was also
a competent person
issued in respect of the premises which prohibited use of the
Art 32(2)(h) - breach of a
upper floor for residential accommodation whilst the
prohibition notice .
prohibition notice was in place.
Inner London Crown Court
25 January 2016
Subsequent to the issue of the prohibition notice, LFB carried
out a follow up inspection of the premises. It was noted that
while the other residents of the premises had left, the Pub
16 months prison
Manager, Michael Carolan, was using the upper floor of the
(suspended)
premises in breach of the prohibition notice. Accordingly, the
The sentencing judge stated decision was taken to prosecute.
that a fine and costs award
Michael Carolan pleaded guilty to six offences but disputed
would also have been
appropriate but Mr Carolan the breach of prohibition charge. The Authority was not willing
already had debts in excess to drop this charge and he eventually also pleaded guilty to
of his assets, so no order
that.
was made.
Page 68 of 74
Appendix 4
April 2015 – March 2016 – Metropolitan fire and rescue services
comparison2
This appendix provides data about the performance of the metropolitan fire and rescue services (FRSs)
and shows a comparison with performance in London. The measures chosen are ones where data is
readily available from the other metropolitan fire services. As well as providing a total for the numbers for
each of the categories (i.e. incidents, fatalities and injuries), there is also a comparison for each by an
appropriate denominator. For example, for fire fatalities per head of 100,000 population is used, and for
fires in non-domestic buildings, it is fires per 1,000 non-domestic buildings. This allows a more direct
comparison between metropolitan fire services areas of very different sizes. In addition, data for
attendance times has been added, as requested by the Committee.
Graph 1 : ALL INCIDENTS ATTENDED (rate per 100,000 population)
600.0
London
South Yorkshire
West Yorkshire
500.0
Tyne & Wear
Greater Manchester
400.0
Merseyside
All fires
All false alarms
Merseyside
GM
West Midlands
Tyne & Wear
WY
SY
London
Merseyside
Greater Manchester
West Midlands
Tyne & Wear
West Yorkshire
South Yorkshire
London
Merseyside
West Midlands
Tyne & Wear
0.0
London
100.0
West Yorkshire
200.0
Greater Manchester
300.0
South Yorkshire
rate per 100,000 population
West Midlands
All special services
London
South
Yorkshire
West
Yorkshire
Tyne &
Wear
West
Midlands
Great
Merseyside
Manchester
Fires
20,773
5,795
9,066
5,743
10,260
12,381
7,183
False Alarms
48,699
4,382
10,446
6,255
9,031
12,820
4,643
Special
Services
30,018
2,794
2,626
2,379
5,351
6,774
2,746
The above graph and table shows data regarding the number of fire related fatalities experienced by the
metropolitan fire services in 2015/16.
2
All data covers the period 01/04/15 to 31/03/16
Page 69 of 74
FATALITIES DUE TO FIRE ARISING FROM PRIMARY FIRES
Graph 2 : FIRE RELATED FATALITIES (rate per 100,000 population)
1.40
rate per 100,000 population
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
London
Fatalities
South
Yorkshire
West
Yorkshire
Tyne & Wear
West
Midlands
London
South
Yorkshire
West
Yorkshire
Tyne &
Wear
West
Midlands
36
15
20
2
16
Greater
Manchester
Merseyside
Great
Merseyside
Manchester
20
16
The above graph and table shows data regarding the number of fire related fatalities experienced by the
Data on fire fatalities per 100,000 population is shown on in graph 2, with numbers of fatalities in the
table below.
London normally experiences more fatalities arising from primary fires than any other metropolitan fire
service. However, the numbers for the year show that London has the second lowest fatality rate per
100,000 population compared with other metropolitan fire services.
Page 70 of 74
NON DOMESTIC PRIMARY FIRES
Graph 3 : NON DOMESTIC PRIMARY FIRES (rate per 1,000 non domestic properties)
rate per 1000 non domestic properties
30.0
25.0
20.0
15.0
10.0
5.0
0.0
London
Fires
South
Yorkshire
West
Yorkshire
Tyne & Wear
West
Midlands
London
South
Yorkshire
West
Yorkshire
Tyne &
Wear
West
Midlands
2,052
217
445
244
612
Greater
Manchester
Merseyside
Great
Merseyside
Manchester
699
300
The above graph and table shows data regarding the number of non domestic primary fires attended by
the metropolitan fire services in 2015/16.
Data on fires per 1,000 non domestic properties is shown on in graph 3, with numbers of fires in the table
below.
Across the six metropolitan fire services, London has 43 per cent of the total number of non domestic
properties, and experienced 45 per cent of the incident volume, considerably more than any other
metropolitan fire services.
The data for the current year indicates that numbers are fairly static (2,052) and although London has the
highest volume, it does not have the highest rate (23.2 compared to Greater Manchester’s rate of 25.7)
across the services.
Page 71 of 74
NON DOMESTIC FALSE ALARMS FROM AFAs
Graph 4 : NON DOMESTIC AFAs (rate per 1,000 non domestic properties)
80
rate per 1000 non domestic properties
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
London
AFAs
South
Yorkshire
West
Yorkshire
Tyne & Wear
West
Midlands
Greater
Manchester
London
South
Yorkshire
West
Yorkshire
Tyne &
Wear
West
Midlands
21,160
1,230
3,243
1,817
1,672
Merseyside
Great
Merseyside
Manchester
5,086
593
The above graph and table shows data regarding the number of non domestic AFA calls attended by the
Data on AFAs per 1,000 non domestic properties is shown on in graph 4, with numbers of AFAs in the
table below.
Across the six metropolitan fire services, London has 43 per cent of the total number of non domestic
properties, and experienced over 62 per cent of the incident volume.
The number of non-domestic AFA incidents in London is still considerably more than the other
metropolitan fire services combined. The data for the current period indicates that numbers have
increased slightly over past year (from 20,636 to 21,160) and London also has the highest rate (73)
across the services.
Page 72 of 74
ATTENDANCE TIMES3
Graph 5 : FIRST APPLIANCE ATTENDANCE TIMES
08:00
07:00
06:00
Time
05:00
04:00
03:00
02:00
01:00
00:00
London
1st
appliance
South
Yorkshire
West
Yorkshire
London
South
Yorkshire
West
Yorkshire
05:34
07:45
06:52
Tyne & Wear
Tyne &
Wear
05:16
West
Midlands
West
Midlands
05:23
Greater
Manchester
Merseyside
Greater
Merseyside
Manchester
05:34
05:35
The above graph and table shows data regarding the average first appliance times (from mobilisation to
attendance at incident) for metropolitan fire services for 2015/16.
Across the six metropolitan fire services, London has the joint third fastest average first appliance times
with Greater Manchester (05:34), the fastest being West Midlands (05:23).
3
Each service has its own methodology for how it calculates attendance times – the data is included for indicative purposes
only.
Page 73 of 74
ATTENDANCE TIMES
Graph 6 : SECOND APPLIANCE ATTENDANCE TIMES
10:00
09:00
08:00
07:00
Time
06:00
05:00
04:00
03:00
02:00
01:00
00:00
London
2nd
appliance
South
Yorkshire
West
Yorkshire
Tyne & Wear
West
Midlands
London
South
Yorkshire
West
Yorkshire
Tyne &
Wear
West
Midlands
06:55
09:37
08:17
06:17
06:21
Greater
Manchester
Merseyside
Greater
Merseyside
Manchester
Data not
08:05
collected
The above graph and table shows data regarding the average second appliance times (from mobilisation
to attendance at incident) for metropolitan fire services in 2015/16.
Across the six metropolitan fire services (that we have data for), London has the third fastest average
second appliance times (06:55), the fastest being Tyne & Wear (06:17).
Page 74 of 74
Report title
Annual Governance Statement 2015/16
Meeting
Date
11 July 2016
Report by
Document Number
FEP 2611
Public
Summary
The Authority is required to prepare an Annual Governance Statement (AGS) in accordance with the
Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015. The Authority’s statement – which covers the previous
financial year ending March 2016 (2014/15) – sets out how the Authority follows the principles of
good governance and uses the principles as described by CIPFA/SOLACE in their Delivering Good
Governance in Local Government Framework which brings together an underlying set of legislative
requirements, governance principles and management processes.
Members may wish to note that the AGS should be considered alongside the Statement of Accounts,
which is on the agenda for today’s Governance, Performance and Audit Committee (GPAC) meeting.
Recommendations
That the Committee:
(1)
Approves the AGS on behalf of the Authority1 to meet the requirements of the Accounts and
Audit Regulations; and
(2)
Notes the annual reviews that have taken place with regard to the Regulation of Investigatory
Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), Confidential Reporting Policy (Whistleblowing) and the Bribery Act
2010.
1
GPAC’s terms of reference: “on behalf of the Authority and as necessary (where the Authority itself is not to determine
this matter), to approve the Authority’s annual accounts and to determine all associated matters.”
1 of 17
Background
1. The Authority “must, each financial year, conduct a review of the effectiveness of the system of
internal control” and “prepare an annual governance statement” to meet the statutory
requirement set out in Regulation 6(1) of the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015. For the
Authority, this takes the form of the Annual Governance Statement (AGS). Regulation 6(1) of the
updated Accounts of Audit Regulations 2015 also requires the Authority to take account of
regulation 3 which places further duties on the Authority to “ensure that it has a sound system of
internal control which:



facilitates the effective exercise of its functions and the achievement of its aims and
objectives;
ensures that the financial and operational management of the authority is effective; and
includes effective arrangements for the management of risk.”
2. The Authority’s AGS, presented with this report at appendix 1, addresses these areas and
includes wider management structures and proper practices. The Authority follows the
CIPFA/SOLACE guidance on proper practices. To this extent, the AGS for the Authority also
picks up the annual reviews relating to Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA),
confidential reporting (‘whistleblowing’), and the Bribery Act 2010.
3. The Authority is also required to “provide annual assurance on financial, governance and
operational matters” under the Fire and Rescue Service National Framework for England. To
provide assurance, “fire and rescue authorities must publish an annual statement of assurance”.
As part of the approach paper presented to Committee on 7 March 2016, Members agreed that
the Statement of Assurance (SoA) should be presented separately to the Authority following the
precedent set in the previous two years, whereby the statement has been deferred to the full
Authority for a decision (FEP2564). The SoA is expected to be presented to the October meeting
of the Authority.
4. Members will be aware that the Home Office previously announced the government’s intention
to bring forward legislation to abolish the Authority and give the Mayor of London direct
responsibility for the fire and rescue service in the capital. Members recommended this change
during the consultation process, as did the Mayor of London, London Councils and the London
Assembly.
5. The Government published the Policing and Crime Bill on 10 February 2016. The Bill changes the
governance arrangements for fire and rescue services in London by abolishing the London Fire
and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) and creating the London Fire Commissioner as a
corporation sole having the functions of the fire and rescue authority for Greater London under
the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004. The London Fire Commissioner is to be appointed by the
Mayor of London who will also have power to give directions and guidance to the Commissioner
relating to the exercise of his/her functions. The Bill also provides the option for the Mayor to
create a Deputy Mayor for Fire and sets out that the Mayor may arrange for a Deputy Mayor for
Fire to exercise any function of the Mayor relating to fire and rescue. It also places a duty on
police, fire and rescue and ambulance services to collaborate, and enables PCCs outside of
London to take on responsibility for fire and rescue services in England and Wales. The Bill was
carried over to the 2016-17 Parliamentary session and is subject to change as it passes through
the Parliamentary process.
6. It is anticipated that the current 2016/17 financial year therefore, will be the final year of the
current LFEPA governance arrangements before the transfer to the statutory London Fire
2 of 17
Commissioner. There is a new action in this year’s AGS action plan to ensure that the Brigade
manages the transition and puts appropriate governance arrangements in place under the new
legislation.
Governance improvements – Progress against the Action Plan for 2014/15
7. The 2014/15 statement included an action plan with six actions which focused on actions which
were considered “to improve the governance arrangements which the Authority wishes to
declare in the statement”, and did not seek to replicate any of the Authority’s other reporting
arrangements.
8. The end of year position on the action plan is also on the agenda for today’s Committee meeting
(End of year reporting on risk, continuity and governance). Progress against the action plan
shows that two actions (pension changes - higher turnover of staff, and delivering a staff
engagement programme) have been closed, with four items still open.
9. The new statement represents an opportunity to review the outstanding items to ensure that
they remain timely and appropriate to improving governance arrangements for the Authority.
The national fire role action has been amended slightly to focus on determining the future of the
National Operational Guidance programme. The promoting equality and diversity action has
been revised so that it focusses on delivering the actions arising from the new inclusion strategy.
10. Four new actions have also been added to the action plan regarding focussing on our people,
driving local and national resilience, safety leadership, and managing the transition and
developing appropriate governance arrangements to implement the new regime which will
come into place when the Policing and Crime Bill comes into force.
11. This means the new statement for 2015/16 will have eight items and progress against these
items will continue to be reported to the Committee.
RIPA, confidential reporting (‘Whistleblowing’) and the Bribery Act 2010
12. In September 2013, the Committee agreed that the annual reviews relating to Regulation of
Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA), confidential reporting (‘whistleblowing’), and the Bribery
Act 2010 should be undertaken at the same time as the preparation of a new governance
statement.
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA)
13. By virtue of RIPA, the Authority may use various covert information gathering techniques that
would otherwise amount to an infringement of the Human Rights Act 1998 provisions to
safeguard privacy. These techniques are “Directed Surveillance” and the use of a “Covert
Human Intelligence Source” (CHIS). The Brigade’s use of these techniques is subject to a policy
that was approved by Authority in November 2012 (FEP2011). The policy is subject to annual
review and was last reviewed as current on 27 October 2015. Officers are not proposing any
amendment to the policy this year. The Authority has no history of authorising covert
investigation techniques under RIPA, and again, there have been no applications for a RIPA
authorisation this year.
14. In accordance with a resolution of the Governance, Performance and Audit Committee on 14
September 2015 (FEP2495), a new procedure has been developed for authorisation of the use of
covert surveillance outside RIPA. This will cover the use of private investigators to conduct
covert surveillance of Brigade staff or former staff, such as in cases of employment or personal
injury legal disputes. The procedure came into effect on 25 February 2016. It mirrors the policy
3 of 17
for use of RIPA in requiring the prior authorisation of the Head of Legal and Democratic Services.
Authorisation is only given in cases where it is necessary and proportionate and there is evidence
of criminal activity or equivalent malpractice. There have been no authorisations under this
procedure since it came into operation.
15. Under the requirements of the policy, the Authority has a Senior Responsible Officer (SRO) and
Authorising Officers. During 2015/16, the Director of Safety and Assurance was the SRO, with
the Head of Legal and Democratic Services as the Authorising Officer. The Commissioner is also
able to act as the Authorising Officer should the need arise to consider using a juvenile or
vulnerable person as a ‘Covert Human Intelligence Source’.
Confidential Reporting Policy (Whistleblowing)
16. The Authority has a Confidential Reporting Policy (Whistleblowing) which dates from March
2008. It was last reviewed as current on 2 December 2014.
17. Between 1 April 2015 and 31 March 2016, the Head of Legal and Democratic Services received
two complaints which were dealt with as confidential reporting (whistleblowing) cases. Both
were passed to the Director of Operations for investigation.
18. The two cases were:


Complaint from a member of the public who believed that he had been followed and
subjected to surveillance by the Brigade following intelligence he had given to the police
about a crime many years earlier. Lack of information made it difficult to identify any Brigade
staff or appliances in his area at the time. The complainant was contacted by letter and asked
for further information but did not respond. He was informed by letter that his complaint
was not being taken further.
Complaint from senior health service employee about perceived fire safety failings by the
landlord in supported living accommodation in south London. The complainant was
contacted by telephone and an audit arranged which demonstrated that the premises was
broadly compliant. The outcome of this audit was confirmed in writing to the complainant.
Bribery Act 2010
19. The Authority continues to take action to address the requirements of the Bribery Act 2010. The
Authority’s intranet includes information for staff and managers on bribery, and policies reflect
the requirements of the Bribery Act. Key staff, including those in the Legal and Procurement
departments, have previously attended a briefing on the Act, and bribery is now included in
fraud awareness sessions.
20. The Head of Legal and Democratic Services has reviewed this report and has no comments.
21. The requirement to publish the Annual Governance Statement will be met when it is published
with the Authority’s Statement of Accounts. The Director of Finance and Contractual Services has
reviewed this report and has no further comments.
22. The assurance gathering process underlying production of the statement should identify any
weaknesses in our governance arrangements which may affect our ability to deliver our
4 of 17
sustainability objectives. Should any significant shortcomings be identified, the actions necessary
to address them will be included within the statement’s action plan
Staff Side consultations undertaken
23. Staff side consultation will be taken as appropriate as specific governance improvements are
implemented from the action plan.
24. Fairness, equality and diversity are promoted and supported by actions arising from the AGS. Any
significant shortcomings in our governance arrangements which impact on our ability to meet our
equalities objectives will be included within the statement’s action plan.
1. Appendix 1 – Annual Governance Statement 2015/16
1. FEP2564 - Approach to the Annual Governance Statement and Statement of Assurance
2015/16
2. FEP2495 – Annual Governance Statement 2014/15
2. FEP2448 and 2541 – Reconstitution of Committees, Standing Orders, Allowances, Delegations
and Related Matters
3. Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015
4. Delivering Good Governance in Local Government Framework CIPFA/SOLACE
5. FEP2356 – Risk Management Strategy 2014 – 2017 – Re-submission
6. FEP2531 – Annual Governance Statement Action Plan Monitoring
7. FEP2091 – The Fifth London Safety Plan 2013/16
8. Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA)
9. Confidential Reporting Policy
10. Bribery Act 2010
Proper officer
Contact officer
Telephone
Email
Daniel Ingram
020 8555 1200 Ext. 30071
[email protected]
5 of 17
Appendix 1
London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority
ANNUAL GOVERNANCE STATEMENT 2015/16
Scope of responsibility
1. The London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (the Authority) is responsible for ensuring
that its business is conducted in accordance with the law and appropriate standards, and that
public money is safeguarded and properly accounted for, and used economically, efficiently and
effectively. The Authority also has a duty to make arrangements to secure continuous
improvement in the way in which its functions are exercised, having regard to a combination of
economy, efficiency and effectiveness.
2. In discharging this overall responsibility, the Authority is also responsible for putting into place
suitable arrangements for the governance of its affairs (ensuring that there is a sound system of
internal control) which facilitates the effective exercise of its functions and which includes
arrangements for the management of risk.
3. This statement explains how the Authority meets the requirements of regulations 3 and 6 (1) of
the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015 in relation to the publication of an Annual Governance
Statement.
The purpose of the governance framework
4. The Authority’s governance framework comprises the systems and processes, and culture and
values, by which the Authority is directed and controlled and the activities through which it
accounts to, engages with and leads the community. It enables the Authority to monitor the
achievement of its strategic objectives and to consider whether those objectives have led to the
delivery of appropriate, cost-effective services.
5. The governance framework is underpinned by our Corporate Code of Governance which sets out
how the Authority discharges its governance responsibilities based on the six core principles
defined in the CIPFA/SOLACE Delivering Good Governance in Local Government guidance
which was updated with an addendum during 2012/13. This includes defining our scrutiny
arrangements; maintaining effective policies and procedures on whistleblowing and complaint
handling (on the London Fire website); and engaging with all sections of the local community
through our community safety strategies and partnerships to ensure accountability. The
Corporate Code of Governance was last updated and approved by the Authority on 27
September 2012.
6. The system of internal control is also a significant part of the Authority’s governance framework
and is designed to manage risk to a reasonable level. It cannot eliminate all risk of failure to
achieve policies, aims and objectives; it can therefore only provide reasonable and not absolute
assurance of effectiveness.
7. The system of internal control is based on an ongoing process designed to identify and prioritise
the risks to the achievement of the Authority’s policies, aims and objectives, to evaluate the
likelihood of those risks being realised and the impact should they be realised, and to manage
them efficiently, effectively and economically.
8. The governance framework has been in place at the Authority for the year ended 31 March 2016
and supports the annual budget report and statement of accounts.
6 of 17
The governance framework
9. The key elements of the governance framework are set out in the following paragraphs.
Effective exercise of our functions and the monitoring and achievement of the Authority’s
objectives
10. Members have met regularly to consider strategic direction, plans and progress of the Authority
in various Committees and the Authority itself. Decision making arrangements were confirmed
for 2015/16 following reconstitution of the Authority at the meetings in June and December 2015
(FEP2448 and 2541). The reconstitution confirmed the roles and duties of the following
Committees:




Resources Committee - with responsibilities for budgets, staffing and assets, and performance
related to those responsibilities;
Strategy Committee - with responsibilities for policy and strategy for the service delivery
functions of emergency response, prevention and protection, including responsibility for
community engagement;
Governance, Performance and Audit Committee - with responsibilities for service delivery
performance (excluding performance related specifically to the functions of the Resources
Committee) and for all audit and governance matters, including the Annual Governance
Statement; and
Appointments and Urgency Committee - to meet on an ad hoc basis as and when urgent
matters or appointments dictate.
11. The Authority also established a Local Pensions Board during 2015/16 for the firefighter pension
schemes to support it on scheme governance and administration in its role as a Scheme Manager.
12. The Mayor of London has powers to direct the Authority to take (or not to take) action. Mayoral
directions were received on the following matters during 2015/16:







Disposal of 8 Albert Embankment;
Disposal of Southwark Fire Station Site
Recruitment of Commissioner
Budget options and the permanent removal of thirteen appliances
Property Services Review
Provision of Fire Consultancy Services
Disposal of Kingsland Fire Station Site
13. The Authority’s Fifth London Safety Plan (LSP5) – which is the Authority’s corporate plan and its
Integrated Risk Management Plan as required by the government’s fire and rescue service
national framework - sets out the Authority’s plans for improvement in services to address the
risks facing Londoners, together with the management arrangements required to implement
them. LSP5 was approved by the Authority on 12 September 2013 (FEP2143). Details of the
public consultation undertaken can be found in the covering report to the Fifth London Safety
Plan (FEP2091). The Plan was extended during 2015/16 to run for another year and effectively
will be in place until the end of March 2017 (at which time it is anticipated that a new London
Safety Plan (LSP6) will be approved).
14. Key performance indicators and targets are included in the London Safety Plan and the relevant
committees review indicators and targets on an annual basis.
15. All key LSP targets and commitments as well as key projects, are subject to close scrutiny and
monitoring by the Resources, Strategy, and Governance, Performance and Audit Committees.
7 of 17
16. The Authority has performed well against its targets for 2015/16. This information is available
online in the annual end of year performance report on the London Fire website via the following
link: Our Performance 2015-16. Detailed commentaries against performance can also be found in
the end of year performance reports to the Governance, Performance and Audit Committee and
the Resources Committee.
17. The Governance, Performance and Audit Committee reviews the effectiveness of the internal
control framework by monitoring the work of internal audit, considering both internal and
external audit reports and reviewing the corporate risk management framework, including the
arrangements for business continuity.
Effective arrangements for the management of risk
18. The risk management strategy 2014-17 contains a number of actions to develop the use of risk
management information within the Authority. The strategy was updated and approved by the
Strategy Committee on 18 November 2014 (FEP2356). The strategy has been refreshed to
incorporate the Authority’s risk appetite statement (which was formerly included as part of this
statement).
19. The Authority’s corporate risk register is subject to regular reviews by the Governance,
Performance and Audit Committee. The corporate risks are summarised in each London Safety
Plan and were last approved by full Authority in September 2013 as part of appendix one to LSP5.
The register is reviewed regularly in full consultation with the Commissioner and Directors and
identifies key risks that could prevent the Authority achieving its aims and objectives. Controls are
in place to mitigate these risks and both risks and controls are subject to regular review and
scrutiny, which is evidenced in the form of external inspections and internal audits, reports to
Authority Committees, the Commissioner’s Corporate Management Board, including at its regular
dedicated performance meetings, and by heads of service assurances through the risk
management process.
20. In December 2015, an updated approach to the assessment of risk (AOR) in London (FEP2544)
was presented to the Authority. The Authority has a requirement to understand the risks in its
area as part of the Integrated Risk Management Plan (IRMP) – the Authority’s IRMP is the London
Safety Plan. As part of the development of the current London Safety Plan (LSP5), it became clear
that some external stakeholders did not understand how their concerns locally (sometimes
articulated as ‘risks’) had been taken into account. To make this consideration of risk more explicit
and transparent, it was agreed that officers should annually prepare an assessment of risk in
London. This latest iteration of the assessment of risk, which builds on previous approaches, has
been developed to cover the wide range of ‘concerns’ that the public and stakeholders might
have about their local area (often articulated as ‘risks’), how those ‘concerns’ translate into actual
risks that the Brigade has to deal with, and the response, prevention and protection activity (i.e.
‘controls’) the Authority has in place to manage or mitigate those risks. It was agreed by Members
that the methodology should be further developed, and that key external stakeholders, like the
London borough councils, should have an opportunity to feed into this process as part of
developing an AOR 2016. The AOR will also inform the development of the Sixth London Safety
Plan (LSP6).
Ensuring compliance with established policies, procedures, laws and regulations
21. The system of internal control comprises a network of policies, procedures, systems, reports,
processes and meetings. These arrangements are in place to verify the Authority’s objectives, risk
management arrangements, performance management processes and financial controls. These
controls are in place to:
8 of 17









establish and monitor the achievement of the Authority’s objectives through regular
monitoring reports to members;
facilitate policy and decision making via , for example Standing Orders, and the service
planning process;
ensure compliance with established policies, procedures, processes, laws and regulations,
as underpinned by regular reviews carried out by internal and external auditors;
ensure the delivery of high quality services in an efficient and effective manner through
established policies and procedures and the monitoring of performance through
Directorate Management Boards, the Commissioner’s Corporate Management Board, the
Corporate Management Team, the Top Management Group performance meetings, the
Contracts Oversight Board, the Governance, Performance and Audit Committee, the
Resources Committee and the Strategy Committee;
identify, assess and manage the risks to the Authority’s objectives including risk
management;
ensure the economical, effective and efficient use of resources, and for securing
continuous improvement in the way in which the Authority’s functions are exercised,
through the Authority’s medium term financial forecasting and budget processes,
strategic and annual internal audit plans, and the budget review process;
provide appropriate financial management of the Authority and the reporting of financial
management to the Resources Committee;
provide adherence to the Authority’s values and ethical standards through the application
of the leadership model and equality framework; and
ensure proper performance management of the Authority and the reporting of
performance management through the Governance, Performance and Audit Committee,
the Resources Committee and the Strategy Committee.
22. The internal audit function is conducted by the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC)
for the Authority via a shared service agreement and provides independent assurance on risk
management internal controls and governance arrangements within the Authority. MOPAC
completed 37 audits during 2015/16. From the work undertaken during the year, internal audit
has concluded that the internal control framework was adequate, with controls to mitigate key
risks, generally operating effectively. For 2015/16, external auditors have concluded that they can
continue to place reliance on the work carried out by the Authority’s internal audit function.
23. During 2015/16, the Head of Legal and Democratic Services was the Authority’s Monitoring
Officer and the duties of this role were discharged in line with the Monitoring Officer Protocol
agreed by the Authority on 26 March 2009 (FEP1339).
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act and confidential reporting (‘whistleblowing’)
24. As required by the RIPA Codes of Practice, the Authority undertakes an annual review of the
Brigade’s use of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA). A policy governing
LFEPA’s use of RIPA was approved by the Authority on 22 November 2012 (FEP 2011). LFEPA
was inspected by the Office of Surveillance Commissioners in December 2012. The RIPA policy
was reviewed and revised by the Authority on 27 October 2015 (FEP2326). There were no
applications for any RIPA authorisations in 2015/16, nor were there any previous authorisations
that continued into 2015/16. LFEPA therefore continues to make no use of RIPA powers.
25. There were two complaints identified as confidential reporting (whistleblowing) cases in 2015/16.
One concerned an allegation of surveillance and the other concerned an allegation over the
appropriateness of fire safety measures in a premises. Both were dealt with by the Director of
Operations.
9 of 17
The Bribery Act 2010
26. The Authority continues to take action to address the requirements of the Bribery Act 2010. The
Authority’s intranet includes information for staff and managers on bribery, and policies reflect
the requirements of the Bribery Act. Key staff, including those in the Legal and Procurement
departments, have previously attended a briefing on the Act, and bribery is now included in fraud
awareness sessions.
Review of effectiveness
27. Regulation 6(1) of the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015 requires the Authority to conduct a
review of the effectiveness of the system of internal control. This review is informed by the work
of the internal auditors and Authority officers who have responsibility for the development and
maintenance of the internal control environment, and also by comments made by the external
auditors and any other review agencies and inspectorates.
28. Throughout 2015/16, the Authority has maintained and reviewed its systems of internal control in
a number of ways. In particular:








the Authority received regular performance reports on its LSP commitments, performance
against performance indicators, and key projects through its Governance, Performance
and Audit Committee, Resources Committee and Strategy Committee;
comprehensive performance reports covering corporate performance indicators,
corporate risks, key projects, as well as departmental performance were considered
regularly by the Commissioner’s Corporate Management Board;
progress reports submitted to the Commissioner’s corporate management board on the
implementation of health and safety policy and the submission of a full annual report to
the Resources Committee;
the regular review of the outcomes from the Authority’s dynamic and intelligent
operational training (DIOT) process coordinated through the officer-level Operational
Directorates Coordination Board chaired by the Director of Operations. The DIOT
process supports the Authority in its commitment to protecting the health, safety and
welfare at work of all its employees by learning from the performance of staff and crews at
operational incidents, via the incident monitoring process, accident investigations,
thematic audits, etc.;
monitoring the development, implementation and delivery of services provided by third
parties and key contractual arrangements through the Contracts Oversight Board;
the Authority’s internal audit shared service provider working to defined professional
standards and the preparation of the internal audit plan on the basis of a formal risk
assessment. The plan, annual performance and main outcomes and recommendations
arising from audit work were reported to the Governance, Performance and Audit
Committee. The external auditor has relied on the work of internal audit in supporting its
risk assessment and understanding of the entity’s level of controls;
the external auditor’s plan and audit memorandum on the year’s audit reported to the
Governance, Performance and Audit Committee and the Independent auditor’s opinion
and certificate to the full Authority;
a review of the effectiveness of the system of internal control informed by the work of
senior management, who continually reviewed the identification and management of risks
at all levels across the Authority, providing assurance that controls are in place and the
extent to which they were effective. Our review is also informed through the work of
internal auditors as described above, and the external auditors in their annual audit letter
and other reports;
10 of 17



the Authority agreed to participate in the Local Government Association (LGA) Fire Peer
Challenge (FEP2305) concentrating on four focus areas: value for money; information
collection and use; industrial relations; and operational competence. The site visit and
information gathering by the peer team was conducted during March and April 2015. The
LGA report was finalised in August 2015 and confirmed that the Brigade is a well run and
well resourced organisation, providing a first class service, with some outstanding staff
members. The report also concluded that the Brigade leads in several areas of good
practice, notably its leadership role in the UK for fire and rescue services, especially in
terms of national resilience. Innovative approaches to procurement and shared services
are delivering long term savings, and value for money is recognised as a necessity in
organisational culture, with analysis of benefits realisation from projects. The peer
challenge was a useful space to consider how the Brigade provides its services, and much
of the discussion held with the peer team representatives will feed into other strategic
developments such as the Sixth London Safety Plan;
the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014 has led to requirements for local authorities
to prepare and publish their accounts earlier from 2017/18. The Authority continues to
work to prepare its accounts to an earlier timetable, and now provides its draft accounts to
its auditors at the beginning of June.
responsibility for the fire and service transferred from the Department for Communities
and Local Government(DCLG) to the Home Office during 2015/16. The Government
published the Policing and Crime Bill on 10 February 2016. The Bill changes the
governance arrangements for fire and rescue services in London by abolishing the
London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) and creating the London Fire
Commissioner as a corporation sole having the functions of the fire and rescue authority
for Greater London under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004. The London Fire
Commissioner is to be appointed by the Mayor of London who will also have power to
give directions and guidance to the Commissioner relating to the exercise of his/her
functions. The Bill also provides the option for the Mayor to create a Deputy Mayor for
Fire and sets out that the Mayor may arrange for a Deputy Mayor for Fire to exercise any
function of the Mayor relating to fire and rescue. It also places a duty on police, fire and
rescue and ambulance services to collaborate, and enables Police and Crime
Commissioners (PCCs) outside of London to take on responsibility for fire and rescue
services in England and Wales. The Bill was carried over to the 2016-17 Parliamentary
session and is subject to change as it passes through the Parliamentary process.
Statement of accounts
29. As required by the Authority’s financial regulations, the Director of Finance and Contractual
services approves all systems used to record Authority financial transactions. Assurance that the
financial data used to produce the Authority’s statement of accounts is accurate and complete is
obtained through regular central finance reconciliation routines of all financial systems and
monthly officer monitoring of all expenditure and income recorded on the Authority’s approved
general ledger system. Periodic member level review of financial records and forecast outturn add
to the scrutiny carried out by both the Authority’s internal and external audit. The statement of
accounts is authorised by the Director of Finance and Contractual Services as being true and fair
within the current statutory deadline of 30 June each year. The accounts are then fully audited by
the Authority’s external auditor who issues an audit opinion by the end of the following
September.
30. The statutory deadline for producing the accounts will be brought forward for the financial year
2017/18 from 30 June to 31 May, with the publishing deadline brought forward from 30
September to 31 July. The Director of Finance and Contractual Services has signed off the
11 of 17
Authority accounts by 31 May for the last three years and officers are working with external audit
to target an audited and published set of accounts by 31 July this year.
The role of the Chief Finance Officer
31. CIPFA’s Statement on the Role of the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) in public service organisations
sets out the key principles that define the core activities and behaviours that belong to the CFO in
public service organisations. The CIPFA statement sets out that the CFO in a public service
organisation:

is a key member of the leadership team, helping it to develop and implement strategy and
to resource and deliver the organisation's strategic objectives sustainably and in the public
interest;
must be actively involved in, and able to bring influence to bear on, all material business
decisions to ensure immediate and longer term implications, opportunities and risks are
fully considered, and alignment with the organisation's financial strategy; and
must lead the promotion and delivery by the whole organisation of good financial
management so that public money is safeguarded at all times and used appropriately,
economically, efficiently and effectively.


32. To deliver these responsibilities the CFO:


must lead and direct a finance function that is resourced to be fit for purpose; and
must be professionally qualified and suitably experienced.
33. The principles are supported by a range of governance requirements that are used to
demonstrate compliance. The role of the CFO is undertaken by the Director of Finance and
Contractual Services who is the Authority’s section 127 (Greater London Authority Act 1999)
officer and is a member of the Authority’s Corporate Management Board reporting directly to the
Commissioner.
Other governance arrangements
34. This section highlights other noteworthy governance arrangements that the Brigade has either
put in place or maintained during the 2015/16 financial year.
National resilience
35. The National Resilience Programme is one part of the Department for Communities and Local
Government’s contribution to the Government’s Civil Contingencies Capabilities Programme. The
strategic aim is to continue to enhance preparedness and resilience of the fire and rescue services
in England and Wales by maintaining and improving the capability of the National Assets. The
programme consists of a number of distinct capabilities. These are:




Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and Explosive CBRN(E);
Urban Search and Rescue (USAR);
Water and High Volume Pumping (HVP); and
Command and Control.
36. Twenty per cent of the National Resilience assets are located within the Brigade area reflecting
the importance of the capital city to national resilience in providing these capabilities to both the
London region and the rest of the country. London also hosts the Fire and Rescue Service’s
National Co-ordination Centre (FRSNCC) at the London Operations Centre (LOC), where all
requests for national assistance at large scale incidents are dealt with.
12 of 17
37. The Brigade has a full USAR capability, as part of the resilience programme, for providing fire and
rescue services with a national capability to respond and effectively manage large-scale structural
collapses and heavy transportation type incidents. This national capability is designed to augment
existing local and specialised planning arrangements within Brigades or regions. As part of this
national capability, the LFB provides USAR trained personnel to respond to incidents outside of
the Brigade area.
38. Following the assessment and assurance of the Brigade’s multi-capability in the previous year, the
National Resilience Assurance Team (NRAT) undertook an assessment of the Brigade’s high
volume pump (HVP) capability in February 2016. The assurance process has been developed as a
long term procedure to ensure that the fire and rescue services which have received National
Resilience assets, achieve and maintain an efficient, robust and effective operational capability to
respond to national and major emergencies.
39. NRAT concluded that the Brigade satisfactory discharges its statutory duties relating to national
resilience under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004 and the Statutory Instrument 3193 Fire
and Rescue Services (Emergencies) Order 2007. However, there were five instances of nonconformity and seven instances of unsatisfactory outcomes resulting from the practical
assessment of key HVP skills. The assessors were however pleased to note the willingness of
Brigade personnel to take immediate corrective action for the non-conformities and since the
assessment, NRAT has now received evidence and also confirmed (in May 2016) that the Brigade
has adequately addressed all outstanding actions.
40. Brigade staff also lead the fire and rescue service nationally in terms of the sector’s role in the
government CONTEST strategy. This involves working collaboratively with colleagues from the
other blue light agencies as well as government departments to develop multi-agency operational
capabilities for responding to a wide range of terrorist related threats. London has successfully
introduced the concept of inter-agency liaison officers (ILOs) to UK fire and rescue services and
the National ILO coordinator is a London officer. The London Fire Commissioner is the Chief Fire
Officers Association (CFOA) National Resilience Lead Officer for Chemical, Biological,
Radiological and Nuclear (Enhanced Explosives) (CBRN(E)).
Equality, diversity and inclusion
41. A review of equality, diversity and inclusion was initiated by the Commissioner during 2015/16
and is being directed by the Head of Strategy and Inclusion. An advisory group has been
established, to guide the development of a new, 10 year Inclusion Strategy. Officers have
interviewed inclusion leads from organisations cited for best practice in the public, private and
not-for-profit sectors, and engaged with senior managers, trades unions and support groups to
inform the new strategic inclusion objectives and consequent action plan. Members received a
draft strategy (FEP2590) at the Authority meeting in March 2016, with information about the
Authority’s Public Sector Equality Duty, and the Members’ Equalities Working Group has
subsequently received an update about the continuing development of the strategy. The final
strategy will be represented to the Authority in June 2016 with an accompanying action plan to
facilitate the change in approach.
42. The Brigade’s equality, diversity and inclusion performance is regularly reported to Members
through the HR Digest.
Information security
43. The Authority maintains an information security strategy which complies with the ISO/IEC 27001
standard for information security. This standard represents ‘best practice; within the security
industry. The strategy exists to protect Authority information against any type of accidental loss,
13 of 17
damage or abuse, including that relating to its staff as well as third party clients and partners. In
addition it maintains a safeguard to ICT systems that process, store, display and transmit
information.
44. The strategy is facilitated through the information security policy which has been approved and
maintained by the Information Governance Group (the IGG) and has been applied consistently
across all parts of the Authority.
45. The Head of Strategy and Inclusion is the Authority’s Senior Information Risk Owner (SIRO), and,
as Chair of the IGG, is responsible for the effective implementation of a consistent framework for
the management of information security across the Authority. This includes the ownership,
development, maintenance and communication of the information security policy. The SIRO is
also required to review and challenge any non-compliance with the information security policy as
highlighted by compliance reports, dispensations, audit findings or the incident management
processes. In conjunction with the Head of ICT, the SIRO ensures that Business Contingency
Plans (BCP) and IT Disaster Recovery (IT DR) plans respectively are developed implemented and
tested to protect all critical information, information systems and functions of LFEPA. There were
no issues of non-conformity during 2015/16.
Health and safety
46. Good health and safety management remains a critical (business) issue for the Authority. During
2015/16, preventive initiatives and improved working practices have contributed to the
continued reduction in injuries to staff.
47. Throughout 2015/16 the Authority has maintained and reviewed its systems of internal control in
a number of ways, including:






Regular reports on health and safety performance to the Commissioner’s Corporate
Management Board and to Resources Committee;
Continuing the cycle of health, safety and environmental audit and focussed slips and trips
risk assessments of our stations;
Introducing a system for the early assessment of impact on the health, safety and welfare
of staff from new policy or corporate projects;
MOPAC completed an audit of health and safety management in 2015/16, identifying that
the control framework was adequate and that controls to mitigate key risks are generally
operating effectively;
The established Dynamic Intelligence Operational Training (DIOT) process continues to
identify trends in both operational effectiveness and safety management, which allows
targeted intervention to make safety improvements through briefings (e.g. Operational
News), operational training, procedures and equipment, and
Monitoring progress against actions identified through serious accident investigations
(SAI), Coroner’s Prevention of Future Death reports and other internal reviews.
48. Additionally health and safety performance was the subject of external review in 2015/16 as part
of the Local Government Association (LGA) Fire Peer Challenge (FEP2305). Health and safety is a
key assessment area of the peer review process and the review team reported that they had
observed continuous improvement in health and safety and a positive health and safety culture.
Significant internal control issues
49. The action plan below comprises actions required to address any significant failings in the
Authority’s governance framework and supporting systems and any other significant actions
14 of 17
being undertaken to improve the governance arrangements which the Authority wishes to
declare. The plan will typically focus on issues of non-compliance or any other significant action
planned or being undertaken to improve governance. It does not seek to replicate any of the
Authority’s other reporting arrangements. The criteria used to determine items for inclusion are:










actions arising from the annual assessment of performance against our Code of
Governance;
significant causes for concern identified in the auditor’s annual letter;
performance failings or significant concerns relating to governance identified by external
assessment;
significant failings identified by any internal audit and review processes including: internal
audits, health and safety audits and accident investigations, risk audits;
significant failings identified by the Incident Management Policy team;
significant failings identified by internal management assurance processes, with particular
reference to the annual assurance statement provided by each Head of Service assessing
the effectiveness of the controls for which they are responsible;
significant failings identified by any peer review;
any significant improvements or additions to the Authority’s control framework needed in
order to bring the Authority’s risk profile in line with its risk appetite;
any other significant actions being undertaken to improve the governance arrangements
which the Authority wishes to declare in the statement, and
any actions outstanding from the previous year’s action plan.
50. In the action plan for the coming year, the actions are considered to arise from the criterion: “any
other significant actions being undertaken to improve the governance arrangements which the
Authority wishes to declare in the statement”.
51. Four actions have been carried forward from the previous year’s action plan. They are largely
substantial challenges to be managed over the long term, relating to the National Fire Role,
realising the full potential of the new mobilising system, promoting inclusion (building on from
delivery of the new strategy), and working towards the new statutory financial reporting
deadlines.
52. Four new actions have also been added to the plan this year regarding focussing on our people,
driving local and national resilience, safety leadership and the governance changes being
proposed under the Policing and Crime Bill. The complete list of actions is therefore as follows:
(i) National Fire Role - LFEPA to take a proactive role on policy direction nationally by working
with others on a range of matters to secure improvement of the fire service to the public. This
will include:


taking a leading role in supporting the National Joint Council’s position on conditions of
service;
determining the future arrangements for the National Operational Guidance programme
following phase two of the programme.
How progress will be reported - Matters requiring the attention of Members will be reported
to GPAC through the risk, business continuity and governance report.
15 of 17
(ii) New mobilising system –Deliver further efficiencies in service provision through full
utilisation of the new mobilising system.
How progress will be reported – Progress on delivering the new mobilising system will be
reported to Strategy Committee through the quarterly commitments and key projects report
and to GPAC through the risk, business continuity and governance report.
(iii) Promoting inclusion – Deliver the inclusion strategy action plan for the Authority and
implement a step change process, working with all departments and the support groups to
drive the equalities agenda forward within the Brigade.
How progress will be reported – Action plan proposals and progress will be reported to the
Resources Committee.
(iv) Statutory financial reporting deadlines – To work to prepare the statement of accounts to
earlier timescales, and to work with the Authority’s external auditors to be ready for the new
deadlines from 2017/18.
How progress will be reported – Progress on meeting the new statutory financial reporting
deadlines will be reported to GPAC.
(v) Focus on our people – To refresh our principles and join up our work on people,
behavioural framework, succession planning, inclusion strategy, staff engagement
programme, retention rates and the stress survey outcomes to ensure a supportive and
progressive workplace
How progress will be reported – Progress will be reported to the Resources Committee
through regular update reports. A summary of activity will also be reported to GPAC through
the risk, continuity and governance report.
(vi) Driving national and local resilience – To drive improvements at a national, London, and
Brigade level in terms of resilience to reassure the public and key stakeholders at a time when
the national threat level remains severe.
How progress will be reported – Progress will be reported to GPAC through the risk,
continuity and governance report.
(vii) Safety leadership - Improve health and safety for our staff by focussing on promoting
effective safety leadership with senior managers, and making improvements to our systems
and training for accident investigation.
How progress will be reported: Progress will be reported to the Resources Committee
through regular update reports. A summary of activity will also be reported to GPAC through
the risk, continuity and governance report.
(viii) Policing and Crime Bill – New governance arrangements – To manage the transition
and develop appropriate governance arrangements to implement the new regime which will
come into place when the Policing and Crime Bill comes into force.
How progress will be reported – Progress will be reported to Authority. A summary of activity
will also be reported to GPAC through the risk, continuity and governance report.
16 of 17
Conclusion
53. We are satisfied that the appropriate internal systems of control are in place with regards to the
Authority’s governance arrangements, and that adequate processes are in place to ensure
compliance with the Corporate Code of Governance.
Ron Dobson CBE FIFireE QFSM
Jack Hopkins
Commissioner for Fire and Emergency Planning
Chair, Governance Performance and Audit
Committee
Dated: July 2016
17 of 17
Report title
2015/16 Statement of Accounts and Statutory Determinations
Meeting
Date
11 July 2016
Report by
Document Number
Director of Finance and Contractual Services
FEP 2612
Public
Summary
This report presents the Authority’s external auditor’s, Ernst and Young, Audit Results Report
(attached at appendix A), the Authority’s updated Statement of Accounts (attached at appendix B)
and a Letter of Representation to the Authority’s external auditor Ernst and Young (attached at
Appendix C) for formal approval and adoption by the Committee, and seeks formal determination by
the Committee in respect of set-asides for credit liabilities in form of a Minimum Revenue Provision.
Currently the Accounts and Audit regulations require Members to approve and publish the audited
accounts by 30 September. The regulations also require that the Authority’s statutory Chief Financial
Officer certify the accounts by 30 June. However with effect from 2017/18 the equivalent dates will
be 31 July and 31 May. This year, as in the last two years, the Director of Finance and Contractual
Services has been able to sign the accounts by 31 May and hand the accounts to the external auditor
to carry out their work in time to meet a July Committee date.
The period for the public inspection of the Authority’s accounts will close on14 July 2016. As such
the audit of accounts cannot conclude until the inspection period is closed and the auditor receives
the Authority’s Letter of Representation. It is therefore proposed that should further matters arise
during the course of the audit that require reporting, that the Chair of the Governance, Performance
and Audit Committee receive the report on behalf of the Authority.
The auditor cannot formerly conclude the audit with the issuing of an audit certificate until they have
completed the work necessary to issue their assurance statement in respect of the Authority’s Whole
of Government Accounts (WGA) return. The auditor is satisfied that this work should not have a
material effect on the financial statements or on their value for money conclusion. HM Treasury have
had technical issues in issuing the template for the WGA return, which was only issued on 4 July
2016, with a submission date delayed from 30 June 2016 to 12 August 2016.
Recommendations
1. That the Committee agree:
(i) to note any uncorrected audit misstatements shown at appendix 1 of Ernst and Young’s Audit
Results Report attached at appendix A ,
(ii) to approve the proposed content of a letter of representation (appendix C), which provides
Authority assurances and a response to the auditor about any uncorrected misstatement within
the accounts, as identified in the Audit Results Report,
(iii) that the Director of Finance and Contractual Services and the Chair of the Governance,
Performance and Audit Committee will sign the letter of representation on behalf of the
Authority.
(iv) that should further matters arise during the course of the audit that require reporting, that the
chair of the Governance, Performance and Audit Committee receive the report on behalf of the
Authority.
(v) the 2015/2016 Statement of Accounts as amended, attached at appendix B to this report
certified by the Director of Finance and Contractual Services and audited to date by the
Authority’s external auditor as presenting a true and fair financial position of the Authority as at 31
March 2016 and its income and expenditure for the year then ended, be approved and adopted,
(vi) following approval the person presiding at the Committee meeting signs and dates the
statement of accounts,
(vii) the Authority determine, under section 21(1), of the Local Government Act 2003, the sum of
£6.365m being deemed prudent as the minimum revenue provision calculation, as adopted by
the Authority’s MRP policy statement (FEP 2412 Authority 26 March 2015) be set aside from
revenue as provision to meet credit liabilities.
Introduction/Background
2. The Accounts and Audit Regulations currently require Members to approve the accounts once
the Audit of accounts has been completed and in any case prior to the 30 September. The
regulations do require that the Statement of Accounts is certified by the statutory Chief
Financial Officer by 30 June. For the purposes of this Authority the accounts were certified by
the Director of Finance and Contractual Services, being the appropriate statutory officer, on 31
May 2016 and handed to the Authority’s external auditor, Ernst and Young, to commence their
audit on 1 June 2016.
3. The updated accounts attached at appendix B have addressed all audit issues raised to date,
which are mainly presentational with some additional disclosure relating to property valuation.
The accounts include a copy of the Authority’s Annual Governance Statement, which is to be
published with the final accounts. A separate report regarding the statement is included on the
same agenda.
Statutory Accounting Framework
4. All local authority accounts are required to adopt `proper accounting practice’ based on either
statutory requirements or the Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the UK (the
Code) as published by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA).
These specify the principles and practices of accounting required to prepare a Statement of
Accounts that ‘present a true and fair view’.
5. The statutory provisions and the Code determine how the accounts are to be compiled. If
there is any conflict between the two then it is the statutory provisions that prevail. Whilst
every effort is made to achieve consistency of presentation and inclusion there is scope for
differing professional interpretations. It is also important that the costs of individual services
are defined in accordance with the CIPFA Service Reporting Code of Practice for Local
Authorities (SERCOP) to ensure consistency of treatment when items such as unit costs are
compared between authorities. The statement of accounts is presented in a prescribed format
that complies with SERCOP.
6. This report provides Members with the final outturn position for the Authority and provides
explanations of the figures and key issues in the accounts as submitted. It is hoped that the
report will give Members an understanding of the accounts and the primary statements
included within.
Statement of accounting policies
7. The accounting policies form part of the Audit Opinion. The policies are the principles, bases,
conventions, rules and practices applied by the Authority that specify how the effects of
transactions and other events are to be reflected in its financial statements. The use of such
policies effectively secures consistency in the financial figures being reported year on year.
Final position
Service Expenditure and Income
8. The statement of accounts include accounting adjustments required by the Code of Practice on
Local Authority Accounting in the UK. These provide for the inclusion of accounting adjustments
for pensions liabilities under International Accounting Standard 19 (IAS19) Retirement Benefits
(see statement of accounts core statement note 30), depreciation, impairment and revaluation
charges.
9. The figure for net service expenditure for 2015/16, shown in the table below excludes these
accounting adjustments and shows a £382.1m spend against a budgeted net expenditure sum of
£394.5m. The outturn position after application of reserves and grants was £11.4m less than the
approved Authority budget.
10. After the net movement between general fund and earmarked reserves, the Authority’s General
fund balance increased by £6.8m from £12.6m as at 31 March 2015 to £19.4m as at 31 March
2016 and the Authority’s earmarked reserves increased by £7.1m from £6.5m as at 31 March
2015 to £13.6m as at 31 March 2016.
11. The £11.4m under spend in year was a combination of under and over spends. The table below
provides a summary comparison of the actual and budgeted figures for the year. Business
Continuity costs incurred during the year were unbudgeted and relate to the cost of the provision
of fire cover that was held in preparation for strike action as a result of the pension dispute. The
figures exclude charges made in the Authority’s main accounts for depreciation and pension
liabilities as these costs are purely technical accounting adjustments and do not impact on the
Authority’s funding requirements through GLA grant. Members will receive a separate detailed
report on outturn at the July Resources Committee
Service Expenditure and Income 2015/16
2015/16
Service Expenditure
Operational Staff
Annual
Budget
Outturn
Outturn
variance
£000
£000
£000
241,574
234,092
(7,482)
Other Staff
48,571
48,376
(195)
Employee Related
23,337
23,906
569
Pensions
21,601
20,681
(920)
Premises
33,301
31,831
(1,470)
Transport
17,302
16,237
(1,065)
Supplies and Services
26,422
25,825
(597)
Third Party Payments
1,969
2,136
167
Capital Financing Costs
9,978
10,011
33
Central Contingency
1,439
555
(884)
0
1,153
1,153
Revenue Service Expenditure
425,494
414,803
(10,691)
Income
(31,038)
(32,701)
(1,663)
Net Service Expenditure
394,456
382,102
(12,354)
1,238
1,238
0
245
1,199
954
395,939
384,539
(11,400)
(13,539)
(13,547)
(8)
(382,400)
(382,400)
0
0
(11,408)
(11,408)
Business Continuity
Transfer to General Reserves
Transfer to Earmarked Reserves
Financing Requirement
Financed by
Specific grants
GLA funding
Total Net Expenditure
Capital expenditure
12. In 2015/16, total spending on the capital programme for tangible and intangible assets was
£43.9m, of which £9.2m was capital expenditure incurred by the Authority and £34.7m under the
property PFI arrangement. The spend included the rebuilding and modernising of fire stations
and other buildings (£41.1m), upgrading equipment (£2.6m) and the purchase of fleet vehicles
(£0.2m). Capital expenditure on Authority assets (£43.9m) was financed in accordance with the
Prudential Code on the following basis - Government capital grant (£0.7m), Capital receipts
(£8.5m) and finance lease borrowing (£34.7m).
13. The Authority took no external borrowing during the year. Settlement of maturing principal debt
during 2015/16 totalled £6m. As a result, as at 31 March 2016, the level of outstanding principal
debt totalled £92.725m (£98.725m 2014/15). The average interest payable on outstanding loans
as at 31 March 2016 was 4.34% (4.36% 31 March 2015).
14. Disposal of property during the year resulted in £30.8m of capital receipts
Balance Sheet
Significant movements
15. The Net Pensions Deficit, recorded in the Balance Sheet, for both the Local Government Pension
Scheme (LGPS) and the Firefighters’ Pension Schemes is £5.6bn as at 31 March 2016 (£6.3bn as
at 31 March 2015). This is the sum of the Authority’s liabilities in the schemes arising from
pension benefits earned by employees, less the assets of the LGPS. Although this is a significant
amount, it represents the future cost of pension benefits earned by employees rather than the inyear cost to the Authority.
16. The movement in the pension liability between years relates to a £0.7bn reduction in the long
term liability for the firefighter schemes, as assessed by the Authority’s actuary. This due mainly
to the introduction of the new 2015 scheme, which operates on a Career Average basis rather
than a final salary basis .
17. There has been a significant change in the valuation of the Authority’s Assets following an upward
revaluation of Land and Buildings ,reflecting the Authority’s Valuer’s reported trend observed in
Replacement Cost values in the Greater London area. The revaluation is not based on a formal
revaluation of the Authority’s property portfolio, which will be subject to a full revaluation
exercise by the Authority’s Valuer in 2016/17.
18. There has also been a significant increase in the level of debtors between years, mainly due to the
increase of pension grant monies due to the Authority from the Department of Communities and
Local Government.
19. Cash and Cash equivalents have increased by £30.9m, which reflects the level of cash balances
held as at 31 March 2016 due to the phasing of grant income and capital receipts received and
held in the GLA Group Investment Syndicate.
Audit Results Report
20. The Authority’s external auditor has produced an Audit Results Report (ARR), attached as
appendix A, that shows audit findings following their audit of accounts to date. During the course
of the audit the Director of Finance and Contractual Services has considered the accounting and
material nature of each issue raised under the audit and given a management response to the
matters arising. The responses have been formally discussed with the external auditor based on
professional judgement, materiality and significance. It should be noted that for an item to be of
material accounting significance it should be 1% or more of total relevant expenditure. i.e. at
Authority level in excess of £5m. The Director of Finance and Contractual services has agreed
amendments and/or future actions with the external auditor on all matters arising from the audit
to date.
21. The report includes a Audit opinion on the accounts, which proposes an unqualified opinion
subject to receipt of the Authority’s letter of representation. It also provides a Value For Money
view on the Authority’s arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use
of resources for the year ended 31 March 2016, on which the auditor expects to issue an
unqualified value for money conclusion.
22. Members are further asked to agree that should further matters arise during the course of the
audit that require reporting that the chair of the Governance, Performance and Audit Committee
receive the report on behalf of the committee.
Audit and Public Inspection
23. Ernst and Young commenced their audit on 1 June 2016 and the Authority’s accounts are
currently open to public inspection with effect from 3 June to 2016 to 14 July 2016. This means
that any person interested may inspect and make copies of the accounts of the Authority, and any
related books, deeds, contracts, bills, vouchers and receipts. An opportunity for electors to raise
any objections to the accounts was given during this inspection period. To date no person or
elector raised any objection to the Authority’s accounts.
24. Given the inspection closes on 14 July 2016 should further matters arise during the course of the
inspection period that may require a report by the auditors, it is proposed that the chair of the
Governance, Performance and Audit Committee receive any subsequent report on behalf of the
Authority.
Letter of Representation
25. As part of the standard closing of accounts process a general letter of representation, which is
formally acknowledged by the committee responsible for the approval of the statement of
accounts is to be sent to Ernst and Young. The letter, attached as appendix C, represents a formal
response to the auditor and provides a management response to the uncorrected item raised as
part of the audit.
26. In considering the letter, members are advised that the letter itself does not diminish the
responsibilities of the Director of Finance and Contractual Services or the external auditor
concerning the Authority accounts. The matters covered are usually routine oral representations
and by putting them in writing the possibility of misunderstandings between both parties is
reduced.
Statutory Determination
27. The Authority is required to make a determination under regulation 27 and 28 of the Local
Authorities (Capital Finance and Accounting) (England) Regulations 2003[SI 3146 as amended],
of the amount (being not less than the required minimum revenue provision (MRP) for the year)
which is to be set aside from the revenue account as provision for credit liabilities (i.e. to repay
external loans and the principal element of finance leases). Prior to its amendment by the 2008
regulations, regulation 4(1) of the Local Authorities (Capital Finance and Accounting) (England)
(Amendment) Regulation 2008 set out the method Authorities were required to follow in
calculating MRP.
28. MRP calculations are based on capital financing requirements (CFR), essentially capital
expenditure that requires borrowing to fund it. MRP takes effect the year after the spend on the
relevant asset is complete and the asset is operational, therefore for financial year 2015/16 the
calculation will be based on the value of 2014/15 completed assets.
29. The Authority adopted method of calculating MRP as set out in the Authority’s approved MRP
policy (FEP2227) is based on 4% of the Authority’s Capital Financing Requirement for years prior
to 2008/09. For subsequent years it is based upon 4% for any capital expenditure within
Government grant Supported Capital Expenditure set, by CLG, as part of the capital financing
element of Fire Formula grant, with any subsequent CLG unsupported capital expenditure based
on asset life. On this basis the MRP for 2015/16 has been calculated to be £6.365m .
Conclusions
30. That approval is given to the recommendations as now submitted.
31. Under section 127 of the Greater London Authority Act 1999 the Authority is required to make
arrangements for the proper administration of its financial affairs. The Director of Finance and
Contractual Services as the statutory Chief Finance Officer under the same section is the officer
who has responsibility for the administration of those affairs.
32. The Authority has discretion when making arrangements for the administration of its financial
affairs. It must however act reasonably and with regard to all relevant considerations. These
include the professional advice of its Chief Financial Officer and the advice and stated
expectations of government and appropriate professional and regulatory bodies as set out in the
report.
33. Regulation 7 of the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015 provides that a functional body such as
LFEPA is a body required to prepare an annual statement of accounts. Regulation 27 of the Local
Authorities (Capital Finance and Accounting) (England) Regulations 2003 require the Authority to
make a minimum revenue provision.
34. The report is presented by the Director of Finance and Contractual Services and there are no
further comments.
35. There are no direct sustainable development implications.
Staff Side Consultations Undertaken
36. No consultations were undertaken.
Equalities Implications
37. There are no equalities implications.
1. Appendix A - Ernst and Young Audit Results Report
2. Appendix B - Updated Authority Statement of Accounts 2015/16
3. Appendix C - Letter of Representation
1. CIPFA Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the UK
2. CIPFA Service Reporting Code of Practice
3. CIPFA Prudential Code
4. Audit Commission Act 1998
5. Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015
6. Local Authorities (Capital Finance and Accounting) (England) Regulations 2003
7. Local Authorities (Capital Finance and Accounting) (England) (Amendment) Regulation 2008
8. Local Government Act 2003 (as amended)
9. Greater London Authority Act 1999
Proper officer
Contact officer
Telephone
Email
Steve Knight
0208555 1200 x31368
[email protected]
Appendix A
London Fire & Emergency
Planning Authority
Audit Results Report - ISA (UK and Ireland) 260
for the year ended 31 March 2016
10 July 2016
Contents
Deliberately left blank for printing purposes
Contents
Contents
1.
Executive summary......................................................................................................... 0
2.
Responsibilities and purpose of our work ................................................................... 2
3.
Financial statements audit ............................................................................................. 3
4.
Value for money ............................................................................................................... 8
Appendix A – Corrected audit differences ........................................................................... 9
Appendix B – Outstanding matters ..................................................................................... 10
Appendix C – Independence ................................................................................................ 11
Appendix D – Auditor fees ................................................................................................... 12
Appendix E – Draft audit report ........................................................................................... 13
Appendix F – Management representation letter .............................................................. 17
Appendix G – Required communications with the audit committee ............................... 21
In April 2015 Public Sector Audit Appointments Ltd (PSAA) issued ‘‘Statement of responsibilities of auditors and
audited bodies 2015-16’. It is available from the Chief Executive of each audited body and via the PSAA website
(www.psaa.co.uk)
The Statement of responsibilities serves as the formal terms of engagement between appointed auditors and audited
bodies. It summarises where the different responsibilities of auditors and audited bodies begin and end, and what is
to be expected of the audited body in certain areas.
The ‘Terms of Appointment from 1 April 2015’ issued by PSAA sets out additional requirements that auditors must
comply with, over and above those set out in the National Audit Office Code of Audit Practice (the Code) and statute,
and covers matters of practice and procedure which are of a recurring nature.
This Audit Results Report is prepared in the context of the Statement of responsibilities. This report is intended solely
for the use of the Members of the audited body. We, as appointed auditor, take no responsibility to any third party.
Our Complaints Procedure – If at any time you would like to discuss with us how our service to you could be
improved, or if you are dissatisfied with the service you are receiving, you may take the issue up with your usual
partner or director contact. If you prefer an alternative route, please contact Steve Varley, our Managing Partner,
1 More London Place, London SE1 2AF. We undertake to look into any complaint carefully and promptly and to do
all we can to explain the position to you. Should you remain dissatisfied with any aspect of our service, you may of
course take matters up with our professional institute. We can provide further information on how you may contact
our professional institute.
EY  i
Executive summary
1.
Executive summary
The National Audit Office’s Code of Audit Practice (the Code) requires us to report to those charged
with governance – the Governance Performance and Audit Committee – on the work we have carried
out to discharge our statutory audit responsibilities together with any governance issues identified.
This report summarises the findings from the 2015/16 audit which is substantially complete. It
includes messages arising from our audit of your financial statements and the results of the work we
have undertaken to assess your arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in
your use of resources.
Below are the results and conclusions on the significant areas of the audit process.
Status of
the audit
We have substantially completed our audit of the financial statements of London Fire &
Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) for the year ended 31 March 2016. Subject to
satisfactory completion of the outstanding items included in Appendix B we will issue an
audit opinion in the form which appears in Appendix E by the end of July 2016.
We have performed the procedures outlined in our Audit Plan and anticipate issuing an
unqualified opinion on the Authority’s financial statements.
We expect to conclude that you have put in place proper arrangements to secure value for
money in your use of resources.
HM Treasury have produced a revised timetable for the completion and submission of the
Whole of Government Accounts submission for local government. This means that
unaudited submissions for local government bodies are not required until 12 August 2016.
We have therefore not been able to perform the procedures required by the National Audit
Office (NAO) regarding the Whole of Government Accounts submission. Consequently we
will be unable to issue the audit certificate at the same time as the audit opinion. We expect
to certify completion of our audit by the end of September 2016.
Audit
differences
There are no unadjusted audit differences.
Our audit identified some audit differences which our team have highlighted to
management for amendment. These have been corrected during the course of our work and
further details of significant adjustments are provided at Appendix A.
These adjustments have not had an impact on useable reserves or the financial standing of
the Authority.
Scope and
materiality
In our audit plan presented at the 7 March 2016 Governance Performance and Audit
Committee meeting, we communicated that our audit procedures would be performed
using a materiality of £12.6 million. We have reassessed this based on the actual results
for the 2015/16 financial year and have decreased this amount to £11 million. The reason
for the reduction in planning materiality was lower operating expenditure in 2015/16
comparing to the Authority’s 2014/15 outturn.
The threshold for reporting audit differences which impact the financial statements has also
decreased from £629,115 to £550,424. The basis of our assessment is 2% of gross
operating expenditure, as compared to 1.5% in the prior year. We were able to increase the
percentage because the risk profile has improved due to the increase in usable reserves
available to the Authority.
For the Firefighters’ Pension Fund we establish a separate materiality. The level of
materiality was £3.6 million based on 2% of benefits payable in 2015/16.
EY  0
Executive summary
We carried out our work in accordance with our Audit Plan with the following amendments
to our assessment of significant risks:

Significant audit
risks
In our audit plan we identified asset valuations as an ‘other risk’. Following receipt of
the draft financial statements, we observed a material revaluation gain and a valuation
method that differed from prior years. We therefore elevated asset valuations to a
‘significant risk’ and expanded our audit procedures..
We identified the following audit risks during the planning phase of our audit, and reported
these to you in our audit plan:



Risk of revenue expenditure recognition.
Risk of management override.
Milne vs Government Actuaries Department - Significant risk related to accounting for
backdated commutations.
The ‘addressing audit risks’ section of this report sets out how we have gained audit
assurance over those issues and others identified during the audit.
Other reporting
issues
We have no other matters we wish to report.
Control observations We have adopted a fully substantive approach and have therefore not tested the operation
of controls.
We would like to take this opportunity to thank the staff of London Fire Brigade for their cooperation
and assistance during the course of our work.
Neil Harris
Executive Director
For and on behalf of Ernst & Young LLP
EY  1
Responsibilities and purpose of our work
Responsibilities and purpose of our work
2.
The Fire Authority’s responsibilities
The Authority is responsible for preparing and publishing its Statement of Accounts, accompanied by
the Annual Governance Statement (AGS). In the AGS, the Authority reports publicly on the extent to
which it complies with its own code of governance, including how it has monitored and evaluated the
effectiveness of its governance arrangements in the year, and on any planned changes in the coming
period.
The Authority is also responsible for putting in place proper arrangements to secure economy,
efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources.
Purpose of our work
Our audit was designed to:




Express an opinion on the 2015/16 financial statements and the consistency of other
information published with them;
Report on an exception basis on the Annual Governance Statement;
Consider and report any matters that prevent us being satisfied that the Authority had put in
place proper arrangements for securing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in the use of
resources (the value for money conclusion); and
Discharge our statutory duties and responsibilities as established by the Local Audit and
Accountability Act 2014 and Code of Audit Practice.
In addition, this report contains our findings related to the areas of audit emphasis and any views on
significant deficiencies in internal control or the Authority’s accounting policies and key judgments.
Alongside our work on the financial statements, we also review and report to the National Audit Office
on your Whole of Government Accounts return. The extent of our review and the nature of our report
are specified by the National Audit Office.
EY  2
Financial statements audit
3.
Addressing audit risks
We identified the following audit risks during the planning phase of our audit, and reported these to
you in our Audit Plan. Here, we set out how we have gained audit assurance over those issues.
A significant audit risk in the context of the audit of the financial statements is an inherent risk with
both a higher likelihood of occurrence and a higher magnitude of effect should it occur and which
requires special audit consideration. For significant risks, we obtain an understanding of the entity’s
controls relevant to each risk and assess the design and implementation of the relevant controls.
Significant Risks
(including fraud risks)
Milne
v
Government
Actuaries Department (GAD)
In
May
2015
the
Pension
Ombudsman,
an
independent
organisation
that
investigates
complaints
about
pension
administration, published Mr Milne’s
Determination for the Firefighters’
Pension
Scheme
regarding
commutation factors. The Pension
Ombudsman ruled that Government
Actuary’s Department (GAD) failed to
review commutation factors within the
firefighters’ pension scheme.
The ombudsman ordered that a new
commutation factor be prepared as if
a factor review had been carried out in
December 2004.
The London Pension Fund Authority
has used the calculator provided by
GAD to determine the additional
payments required. The sum of these
payments was estimated to be £15.4
million which is material to the
Authority.
Audit procedures performed

We reviewed and tested the
Authority’s arrangements for
ensuring the accuracy and
completeness of payments

We re-performed the calculation
of payments for a sample,
including an assessment of the
accuracy of the inputs

We reviewed the associated
disclosures in the financial
statements
to
ensure
compliance with the Code of
Practice on Local Government
Accounting, and appropriate
accounting standards.
Assurance gained and issues
arising
Additional payments of £15.4 million
resulting from the Milne v GAD ruling
were made by the Authority in
advance of year-end. The associated
grant was also received by the
Authority in advance of year-end. This
significantly reduced the risk of
disclosure error.
We tested a sample of payment
calculations,
and
tested
the
completeness of payments made.
We have no matters to report from
this work.
The manner of the disclosure was not
subject to additional guidance,
however, the lump sum and interest
payments have been appropriately
disclosed within the pension fund
account. Since these are material
transactions,
they
have
been
appropriately shown as separate line
items within the account.
The Authority received funding from
DCLG to make these payments.
Although the intention was for these
payments to have been made before
the 31st March 2016, at the time of
writing the audit plan, payments have
not yet been made to firefighters.
The status of these payments as at
31st March 2016 would have impacted
on the required accounting treatment
in the statement of accounts.
EY  3
Risk
of
override
management
As identified in ISA (UK and Ireland)
240, management is in a unique
position to perpetrate fraud because
of its ability to manipulate accounting
records directly or indirectly and
prepare
fraudulent
financial
statements by overriding controls that
otherwise appear to be operating
effectively. We identify and respond to
this fraud risk on every audit
engagement.

Tested the appropriateness of journal
entries recorded in the general ledger
and other adjustments made in the
preparation
of
the
financial
statements
Our testing of journal entries did not
identify adjustments which were
outside of the normal course of
business. All journals tested had an
appropriate business rationale.

Reviewed accounting estimates for
evidence of management bias;

Evaluated the business rationale for
any significant unusual transactions;
and

The most significant accounting
estimates in the financial statements
relates to the net pension liability and
property valuations. We found no
indication of management bias in
these estimates.
Reviewed capital expenditure on
property, plant and equipment to
ensure it meets the relevant
accounting requirements to be
capitalised.
We identified one significant unusual
transaction,
which
was
the
reclassification in-year of capital
expenditure from a previous year from
property plant and equipment to
intangible assets.
We
have
confirmed
the
appropriateness of the business
rationale for this reclassification.
behind this transaction. Management
has added a narrative explanation for
this
change
to
the
financial
statements to ensure that it can be
easily understood by a user of the
financial statements.
We did not
identify any evidence of management
override or fraudulent activity.
Risk of fraud in revenue
recognition
Under ISA240 there is a presumed
risk that revenue may be misstated
due to improper recognition of
revenue.
In the public sector, this requirement
is modified by Practice Note 10,
issued by the Financial Reporting
Council, which states that auditors
should also consider the risk that
material misstatements may occur by
the manipulation of expenditure
recognition.

Reviewed and tested revenue and
expenditure recognition policies;

Reviewed and discussed with
management
any
accounting
estimates on revenue or expenditure
recognition for evidence of bias;

Developed a testing strategy to test
material revenue and expenditure
streams; and
Reviewed and tested revenue cut-off at
the period end date Reviewed the
appropriateness of capital expenditure
The main sources of income for the
Authority are grant income and
Metropolitan Fire Brigade Act income.
We identified a greater level of risk
associated with the latter during our
planning. We also confirmed during
our planning that other income
streams were not material and
therefore did not present a material
risk.
We have no matters to bring to your
attention regarding inappropriate
revenue recognition of income, or
expenditure.
We tested significant capital additions
and confirmed that they were
appropriately capital in nature.
EY  4
Risk of error in Property
Valuations
Auditing standards (ISA 620) require
us to gain particular assurances when
an expert has been engaged by an
audited body and where this
influences material figures in the
financial statements. The Authority
engages a professional valuer to
provide it with asset valuations.
These assets represent a material
figure in the Authority’s Accounts.
In 2015/16, the Authority engaged its
valuation expert to provide an
appropriate index in order to
determine the increase in valuation in
land and building assets.
This
resulted in a material valuation gain in
2015/16.

Assessed the competency and
objectivity of management’s valuer

Assessed whether the scope of work
undertaken by the valuer is sufficient

Reviewed how the Authority satisfies
itself that the valuations given provide
it with the level of information it needs
to provide reliable data for the
statement of accounts

Reviewed the asset valuations, their
valuation basis, and the assumptions
behind them

Evaluated whether the substance of
the expert’s findings is appropriately
reflected in the financial statements

Considered of the accuracy and
completeness
of
the
source
documents used by the valuer
We confirmed that the valuer was a
member and registered valuer of
RICS.
We
reviewed
the
valuation
instructions provided to the valuer
against the requirements of the Code
of Accounting Practice for Local
Government and found no issues.
For land assets valued by indexation,
we engaged our internal expert to
assess the reasonableness of the
indices provided.
The indices
provided by the valuer gave a range
of 10 – 25% increase in land values
depending on the location of the site.
Our internal expert concluded that the
ranges
indicated
were
not
unreasonable.
The Authority has used the mid-point
of indices provided by its valuer.
For building assets valued by
indexation, we set an expectation for
building value increases based on an
index provided by our internal expert
and found that the uplift applied by
the
Authority
was
materially
consistent with our expectation.
We have confirmed that the
information
provided
by
management’s expert has been
appropriately reflected in the financial
statements.
We have required enhanced narrative
disclosure in the financial statements
around the judgements employed
both by management’s expert and by
management in determining its
valuation. We have also required
disclosure
of
the
estimation
uncertainty involved in valuation of
the Authority’s assets.
We also identified the following audit risks during the planning phase of our audit, and reported these
to you in our Audit Plan. Here, we set out how we have gained audit assurance over those issues.
Other Risks
Audit procedures performed
Assurance gained and issues
arising
Pension Liability Valuation
We assessed the competency and
objectivity of management’s actuaries
At time of writing, our procedures
relating to the pension liability
valuation are not complete. The main
element outstanding is our assurance
from the pension fund auditor which
we anticipate receiving in advance of
the Governance Performance and
Audit Committee on 11 July 2016.
We reviewing management’s assessment
of whether the actuarial assumptions
employed are appropriate
We considered the accuracy and
completeness of data provided to the
actuaries
We evaluated whether the substance of
the IAS 19 report is accurately and
completely reflected in the financial
statements.
We have identified no issues with the
competency
and
objectivity
of
management’s actuaries, and have
confirmed that the IAS 19 reports are
appropriately reflected in the financial
statements.
EY  5
Property PFI Contract
We ensured that the assumptions implicit
within the accounting model (including the
completion date of the fire stations in
2015/16) remained valid, or, that the
model has been appropriately updated
where these assumptions have changed.
We reviewed journal entries to ensure that
the accounting model is correctly reflected
in the general ledger.
We reviewed the PFI disclosures in the
financial
statements
for
accuracy,
completeness, and compliance with the
Code of Practice on Local Authority
Accounting.
We compared the model used to
prepare
the
2015/16
financial
statements with the audited model
from 2014/15 and identified the
changes.
We then reviewed these changes
against source documentation to
ensure that they had been included
appropriately.
The changes noted were phasing of
building completion and indexation,
and therefore in line with our
expectation.
Journal entries were consistent with
the model and PFI disclosures were
found to be accurate and complete.
Other matters
As required by ISA (UK&I) 260 and other ISAs specifying communication requirements, we are
required to communicate to you significant findings from the audit and other matters that are
significant to you oversight of the Authority’s financial reporting process, including the following:

Qualitative aspects of your accounting practices; estimates and disclosures;

Matters specifically required by other auditing standards to be communicated to those charged
with governance. For example, issues about fraud, compliance with laws and regulations,
external confirmations and related party transactions;

Any significant difficulties encountered during the audit; and

Other audit matters of governance interest
We have no matters we wish to report.
Control themes and observations
It is the responsibility of the Authority to develop and implement systems of internal financial control
and to put in place proper arrangements to monitor their adequacy and effectiveness in practice. Our
responsibility as your auditor is to consider whether the Authority has put adequate arrangements in
place to satisfy itself that the systems of internal financial control are both adequate and effective in
practice.
We have adopted a fully substantive approach and have therefore not tested the operation of
controls.
We have reviewed the Annual Governance Statement and can confirm that it is not misleading or
inconsistent with other information forthcoming from the audit or our knowledge of the Authority.
Request for written representations
We have requested a management representation letter to gain management’s confirmation in
relation to a number of matters, as outlined in Appendix F.
EY  6
Whole of Government Accounts
Alongside our work on the financial statements, we also review and report to the National Audit Office
on your Whole of Government Accounts return. The extent of our review and the nature of our report
are specified by the National Audit Office.
Due to delays at HM Treasury, the Authority has been unable to complete the Whole of Government
accounts unaudited submission in July.
We will therefore conclude our work in this area when it is available and report any matters that arise
to the Governance Performance and Audit Committee at its meeting in September.
EY  7
Value for money
4.
Value for money
We are required to consider whether the
Authority has put in place ‘proper
arrangements’
to
secure
economy,
efficiency and effectiveness on its use of
resources. This is known as our value for
money conclusion.
Proper arrangements are defined by
statutory guidance issued by the National
Audit
Office.
They
comprise
your
arrangements to:
►
►
►
Take informed decisions;
Deploy resources in a sustainable
manner; and
Work with partners and other third
parties.
Overall conclusion
We did not identify any significant risks in relation to these criteria.
We therefore expect to conclude that you have put in place proper arrangements to secure value for
money in your use of resources.
Significant risks
We are required to determine whether there are any risks that we consider significant, which the
Code of Audit Practice which defines as:
“A matter is significant if, in the auditor’s professional view, it is reasonable to conclude that the
matter would be of interest to the audited body or the wider public”
This is our fourth year auditing London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority, and we have a good
understanding of the Authority and its arrangements.
The Authority has a history of partnership working, and this year led Exercise Unified Response
which saw fire services from across the UK and Europe, as well as other public services in the UK
come together for the largest multi-agency training exercise of its kind in Europe.
Over recent years the Authority’s level of available general fund reserves has increased, and this
supports its financial resilience over the short to medium term. The Authority has a good track record
of its delivery of savings through the fifth London Safety Plan, and is now commencing work on its
sixth.
Having completed our risk assessment, we identified no significant risks. We have completed work to
validate this assessment and have no matters to report.
EY  8
Appendix A – Corrected audit differences
Appendix A – Corrected audit differences
The following corrected difference, which is greater than £8 million, has been identified during the
course of our audit and warrant communicating to you:
We identified that an asset held for sale’s expected completion date was greater than 12 months from
the balance sheet date. It is therefore required to be disclosed as non-current rather than a current
asset. Assets of this nature are held at the lower of carrying value and fair value. Our procedures
confirmed that the asset was valued appropriately; however, the classification was incorrect. The
balance sheet has been adjusted to transfer £26.5 million from current assets to non-current assets.
This item has been corrected by management within the revised financial statements.
Disclosures
The draft accounts presented for audit were of a good quality. A number of minor disclosure errors
were identified for correction by management; however, these are not significant enough for us to
bring them to the attention of those charged with governance. Property valuations were identified as
a significant risk during the course of our audit, and enhanced disclosure in this area was required, as
noted below:
Disclosure
Description of difference
Property, Plant and Equipment
The disclosures were expanded to include policies
regarding valuation of fair value (under IFRS 13), and the
valuation method and key assumptions adopted by
management’s expert in 2015/16. The inherent
uncertainty in the valuation method adopted should also
be disclosed.
EY  9
Appendix B – Outstanding matters
Appendix B – Outstanding matters
The following items relating to the completion of our audit procedures are outstanding at the date of
the release of this report
Item
Actions to resolve
Responsibility
Management
representation letter
Receipt
of
representation
of
Management and Governance
Performance and Audit
Committee
Accounts
Update of and review of accounts for
any audit adjustments identified since
st
1 July
Approval of accounts by Governance
performance and Audit Committee
Accounts re-certified by Director of
Finance and Contractual Services
EY, management and
Governance Performance and
Audit Committee
Subsequent events review
Completion of the subsequent events
procedures to the date of signing the
audit report
EY and management
Pension Liability Valuation
Receipt and evaluation of assurance
from the Pension fund administrator’s
auditor
EY and LPFA auditor
Whole
of
Accounts
Government
Preparation
of
submission
by
management, and review of the
submission by EY
EY and management
Final completion of audit
procedures
and
Engagement
Partner
review
Management and EY to work
together to complete any outstanding
work. In particular this will include
final reviews of audit documentation
and work papers from Audit Manager
and Engagement Partner.
EY and management
signed
letter
EY  10
Appendix C – Independence
Appendix C – Independence
We confirm there are no changes in our assessment of independence since our confirmation in our
Audit Plan dated 7 March 2016.
We complied with the Auditing Practices Board’s Ethical Standards for Auditors and the requirements
of the Public Sector Audit Appointments Ltd (PSAA)’s Terms of Appointment. In our professional
judgement the firm is independent and the objectivity of the audit engagement partner and audit staff
has not been compromised within the meaning of regulatory and professional requirements.
We confirm that we are not aware of any relationships that may affect the independence and
objectivity of the firm that we are required by auditing and ethical standards to report to you.
We consider that our independence in this context is a matter that should be reviewed by both you
and ourselves. It is therefore important that you consider the facts of which you are aware and come
to a view. If you wish to discuss any matters concerning our independence, we will be pleased to do
so at the forthcoming meeting of the Governance Performance and Audit Committee on 11 July 2016.
We confirm that we have met the reporting requirements to the Audit Committee, as ‘those charged
with governance’ under International Standards on Auditing (UK and Ireland) 260 – Communication
with those charged with governance. Our communication plan to meet these requirements was set
out in our Audit Plan of 7 March 2016.
EY  11
Appendix D – Auditor fees
Appendix D – Auditor fees
The table below sets out the scale fee and our final proposed audit fees.
Description
Total Audit Fee – Code work
Proposed final
Fee
2015/16
£
67,482
Scale Fee
2015/16
£
67,482
Variation comments
-
Our actual fee is in line with the scale fee set by the PSAA at this point in time, subject to satisfactory
clearance of the outstanding work.
We confirm we have not undertaken any non-audit work outside of the PSAA’s requirements.
EY  12
Appendix E – Draft audit report
Independent auditor’s report to the members of London Fire and
Emergency Planning Authority
Opinion on the Authority financial statements
We have audited the financial statements of London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority
for the year ended 31 March 2016 under the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014. The
financial statements comprise the:
 Movement in Reserves Statement;
 Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement;
 Balance Sheet;
 Cash Flow Statement and the related notes 1 to 36; and
include the firefighters’ pension fund financial statements comprising the:
 Fund Account;
 Net Assets Statement and the related note 1.
The financial reporting framework that has been applied in their preparation is applicable
law and the CIPFA/LASAAC Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United
Kingdom 2015/16.
This report is made solely to the members of London Fire and Emergency Planning
Authority, as a body, in accordance with Part 5 of the Local Audit and Accountability Act
2014 and for no other purpose, as set out in paragraph 43 of the Statement of
Responsibilities of Auditors and Audited Bodies published by Public Sector Audit
Appointments Limited. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we do not accept or assume
responsibility to anyone other than the Authority and the Authority’s members as a body, for
our audit work, for this report, or for the opinions we have formed.
Respective responsibilities of the Director of Finance and Contractual Services and
auditor
As explained more fully in the Statement of the Director of Finance and Contractual
Service’s Responsibilities set out on page 14, the Director of Finance and Contractual
Service is responsible for the preparation of the Authority’s financial statements in
accordance with proper practices as set out in the CIPFA/LASAAC Code of Practice on
Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom, and for being satisfied that they give a
true and fair view. Our responsibility is to audit and express an opinion on the financial
statements in accordance with applicable law and International Standards on Auditing (UK
and Ireland). Those standards require us to comply with the Auditing Practices Board’s
Ethical Standards for Auditors.
EY  13
Scope of the audit of the financial statements
An audit involves obtaining evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements sufficient to give reasonable assurance that the financial statements are free
from material misstatement, whether caused by fraud or error. This includes an assessment
of: whether the accounting policies are appropriate to the Authority’s circumstances and
have been consistently applied and adequately disclosed; the reasonableness of significant
accounting estimates made by the Director of Finance and Contractual Services; and the
overall presentation of the financial statements. In addition, we read all the financial and
non-financial information in the Statement of Accounts 2015/16 to identify material
inconsistencies with the audited financial statements and to identify any information that is
apparently materially incorrect based on, or materially inconsistent with, the knowledge
acquired by us in the course of performing the audit. If we become aware of any apparent
material misstatements or inconsistencies we consider the implications for our report.
Opinion on financial statements
In our opinion the financial statements:


give a true and fair view of the financial position of London Fire and Emergency Planning
Authority as at 31 March 2016 and of its expenditure and income for the year then ended;
and
have been prepared properly in accordance with the CIPFA/LASAAC Code of Practice on
Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom 2015/16.
Opinion on other matters
In our opinion, the information given in the Statement of Accounts 2015/16 for the financial
year for which the financial statements are prepared is consistent with the financial
statements.
Matters on which we report by exception
We report if:






in our opinion the annual governance statement is misleading or inconsistent with other
information forthcoming from the audit or our knowledge of the Council;
we issue a report in the public interest under section 24 of the Local Audit and
Accountability Act 2014;
we make written recommendations to the audited body under Section 24 of the Local Audit
and Accountability Act 2014;
we make an application to the court for a declaration that an item of account is contrary to
law under Section 28 of the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014;
we issue an advisory notice under Section 29 of the Local Audit and Accountability Act
2014;or
we make an application for judicial review under Section 31 of the Local Audit and
Accountability Act 2014.
We have nothing to report in these respects
EY  14
Conclusion on London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority’s
arrangements for securing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in the use of
resources
Authority’s responsibilities
The Authority is responsible for putting in place proper arrangements to secure economy,
efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources, to ensure proper stewardship and
governance, and to review regularly the adequacy and effectiveness of these arrangements.
Auditor’s responsibilities
We are required under Section 20(1)(c) of the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014 to
satisfy ourselves that the Authority has made proper arrangements for securing economy,
efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources. The Code of Audit Practice issued by
the National Audit Office (NAO) requires us to report to you our conclusion relating to proper
arrangements.
We report if significant matters have come to our attention which prevent us from concluding
that the Authority has put in place proper arrangements for securing economy, efficiency
and effectiveness in its use of resources. We are not required to consider, nor have we
considered, whether all aspects of the Authority’s arrangements for securing economy,
efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources are operating effectively.
Scope of the review of arrangements for securing economy, efficiency and
effectiveness in the use of resources
We have undertaken our review in accordance with the Code of Audit Practice, having
regard to the guidance on the specified criterion issued by the Comptroller and Auditor
General (C&AG) in November 2015, as to whether the [name of body] had proper
arrangements to ensure it took properly informed decisions and deployed resources to
achieve planned and sustainable outcomes for taxpayers and local people. The Comptroller
and Auditor General determined this criterion as that necessary for us to consider under the
Code of Audit Practice in satisfying ourselves whether the [name of body] put in place
proper arrangements for securing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of
resources for the year ended 31 March 2016.
We planned our work in accordance with the Code of Audit Practice. Based on our risk
assessment, we undertook such work as we considered necessary to form a view on
whether, in all significant respects, the [name of body] had put in place proper arrangements
to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources.
Conclusion
On the basis of our work, having regard to the guidance issued by the C&AG in November
2015, we are satisfied that, in all significant respects, London Fire and Emergency Planning
Authority put in place proper arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness
in its use of resources for the year ended 31 March 2016.
EY  15
Delay in certification of completion of the audit
We cannot formally conclude the audit and issue an audit certificate until we have
completed the work necessary to issue our assurance statement in respect of the
Authority’s Whole of Government Accounts consolidation pack. We are satisfied that this
work does not have a material effect on the financial statements or on our value for money
conclusion.
Neil Harris
for and on behalf of Ernst & Young LLP, Appointed Auditor
Luton
Xx July 2016
EY  16
Appendix F – Management representation letter
Mr Neil Harris,
Date 18 July 2016
Ernst & Young LLP
400 Capability Green
Luton
LU1 3LU
Dear Mr Harris,
London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority Audit for the year ended 31 March
2016
This representation letter is provided in connection with your audit of the financial
statements of London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (“the Authority") for the
year ended 31 March 2016. We recognise that obtaining representations from us
concerning the information contained in this letter is a significant procedure in
enabling you to form an opinion as to whether the financial statements give a true and
fair view of the financial position of London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority as
of 31 March 2016 and of its expenditure and income for the year then ended in
accordance with the CIPFA LASAAC Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting
in the United Kingdom 2015/16.
We understand that the purpose of your audit of our financial statements is to express
an opinion thereon and that your audit was conducted in accordance with
International Standards on Auditing (UK and Ireland), which involves an examination
of the accounting system, internal control and related data to the extent you
considered necessary in the circumstances, and is not designed to identify – nor
necessarily be expected to disclose - all fraud, shortages, errors and other
irregularities, should any exist. Accordingly, we make the following representations,
which are true to the best of our knowledge and belief, having made such inquiries as
we considered necessary for the purpose of appropriately informing ourselves:
A. Financial Statements and Financial Records
1. We have fulfilled our responsibilities, under the relevant statutory authorities, for the
preparation of the financial statements in accordance with the Accounts and Audit
Regulations 2015 and CIPFA LASAAC Code of Practice on Local Authority
Accounting in the United Kingdom 2015/16.
2. We acknowledge our responsibility for the fair presentation of the financial
statements. We believe the financial statements referred to above give a true and fair
view of the financial position and of its expenditure and income of the Authority in
accordance with the CIPFA LASAAC Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting
in the United Kingdom 2015/16 and are free of material misstatements, including
omissions. We have approved the financial statements.
EY  17
3. The significant accounting policies adopted in the preparation of the financial
statements are appropriately described in the financial statements.
4. We believe that the Authority has a system of internal controls adequate to enable
the preparation of accurate financial statements in accordance with the CIPFA
LASAAC Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom
2015/16 that are, free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
5. There are no unadjusted audit differences identified during the current audit and
pertaining to the latest period presented.
B. Fraud
1. We acknowledge that we are responsible for the design, implementation and
maintenance of internal controls to prevent and detect fraud.
2. We have disclosed to you the results of our assessment of the risk that the financial
statements may be materially misstated as a result of fraud.
3. We have no knowledge of any fraud or suspected fraud involving management or
other employees who have a significant role in the Authority's internal controls over
financial reporting. In addition, we have no knowledge of any fraud or suspected fraud
involving other employees in which the fraud could have a material effect on the
financial statements. We have no knowledge of any allegations of financial
improprieties, including fraud or suspected fraud, which could result in a misstatement
of the financial statements or otherwise affect the financial reporting of the Authority.
C. Compliance with Laws and Regulations
1. We have disclosed to you all known actual or suspected noncompliance with laws
and regulations whose effects should be considered when preparing the financial
statements.
D. Information Provided and Completeness of Information and Transactions
1. We have provided you with:
 Access to all information of which we are aware that is relevant to the preparation of
the financial statements such as records, documentation and other matters as agreed
in terms of the audit engagement.
 Additional information that you have requested from us for the purpose of the audit
and
 Unrestricted access to persons within the entity from whom you determined it
necessary to obtain audit evidence.
2. All material transactions have been recorded in the accounting records and are
reflected in the financial statements.
3. We have made available to you all minutes and papers of the meetings of the
Authority, its Resources Committee; Governance, Performance and Audit Committee;
Strategy Committee and Appointments and Urgency Committee held through the year
to the most recent meeting held on 11 July 2016.
4. We confirm the completeness of information provided regarding the identification of
related parties. We have disclosed to you the identity of the Authority's related parties
and all related party relationships and transactions of which we are aware, including
EY  18
sales, purchases, loans, transfers of assets, liabilities and services, leasing
arrangements, guarantees, non-monetary transactions and transactions for no
consideration for the period ended, as well as related balances due to or from such
parties at the year end. These transactions have been appropriately accounted for
and disclosed in the financial statements.
5. We have disclosed to you, and the Authority has complied with, all aspects of
contractual agreements that could have a material effect on the financial statements
in the event of non-compliance, including all covenants, conditions or other
requirements of all outstanding debt.
E. Liabilties and Contingencies
1. All liabilities and contingencies, including those associated with guarantees,
whether written or oral, have been disclosed to you and are appropriately reflected in
the financial statements.
2. We have informed you of all outstanding and possible litigation and claims, whether
or not they have been discussed with legal counsel.
3. We have recorded and disclosed all liabilities, related litigation and claims, both
actual and contingent. The Authority has not provided any guarantees to any third
parties.
4. No other claims in connection with litigation have been or are expected to be
received.
F. Subsequent Events
1. Other than.the events described in Note 5 to the financial statements, there have
been no events subsequent to period end which require adjustment of or disclosure in
the financial statements or notes thereto.
G. Accounting Estimates
1. We believe that the significant assumptions we used in making accounting
estimates, including those measured at fair value, are reasonable.
2. Accounting estimates recognised or disclosed in the financial statements:
 We believe the measurement processes, including related assumptions and models,
we used in determining accounting estimates is appropriate and the application of
these processes is consistent.
 The disclosures relating to accounting estimates are complete and appropriate in
accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework.
 The assumptions we used in making accounting estimates appropriately reflects our
intent and ability to carry out specific courses of action on behalf of the entity, where
relevant to the accounting estimates and disclosures.
 No subsequent event requires an adjustment to the accounting estimates and
disclosures included in the financial statements.
H Retirement benefits
On the basis of the process established by us and having made appropriate
enquiries, we are satisfied that the actuarial assumptions underlying the scheme
liabilities are consistent with our knowledge of the business. All significant retirement
EY  19
benefits and all settlements and curtailments have been identified and properly
accounted for.
I Use of an expert
We agree with the findings of the experts engaged to evaluate the valuation of assets
included in the financial statements and have adequately considered the qualifications
of the experts in determining the amounts and disclosures included in the financial
statements and the underlying accounting records. We did not give or cause any
instructions to be given to the experts with respect to the values or amounts derived'
in an attempt to bias their work, and we are not otherwise aware of any matters that
have had an effect on the independence or objectivity of the experts.
Yours Faithfully,
…………………………….............
Sue Budden
I confirm that this letter has been discussed and agreed at the Governance,
Performance and Audit Committee on 11 July 2016
………………………………………..
Chair of Governance, Performance and Audit Committee
EY  20
Appendix G – Required communications with the audit committee
Appendix G – Required communications with the audit
committee
There are certain communications that we must provide to the Audit Committee of UK clients. These
are detailed here:
Required communication
Reference
Planning and audit approach
Audit Plan
Communication of the planned scope and timing of the audit, including any
limitations.
Significant findings from the audit
►
Our view about the significant qualitative aspects of accounting practices
including accounting policies, accounting estimates and financial
statement disclosures
►
Significant difficulties, if any, encountered during the audit
►
Significant matters, if any, arising from the audit that were discussed with
management
►
Written representations that we are seeking
►
Expected modifications to the audit report
►
Other matters if any, significant to the oversight of the financial reporting
process
Going concern
Events or conditions identified that may cast significant doubt on the entity’s
ability to continue as a going concern, including:
►
Whether the events or conditions constitute a material uncertainty
►
Whether the use of the going concern assumption is appropriate in the
preparation and presentation of the financial statements
►
The adequacy of related disclosures in the financial statements
Misstatements
►
Uncorrected misstatements and their effect on our audit opinion
►
The effect of uncorrected misstatements related to prior periods
►
A request that any uncorrected misstatement be corrected
►
In writing, corrected misstatements that are significant
Fraud
►
Enquiries of the audit committee to determine whether they have
knowledge of any actual, suspected or alleged fraud affecting the entity
►
Any fraud that we have identified or information we have obtained that
indicates that a fraud may exist
►
A discussion of any other matters related to fraud
We have made enquiries of
management. We have not
becaome aware of any fraud or
illegal acts during our audit.
Related parties
Significant matters arising during the audit in connection with the entity’s
related parties including, when applicable:
►
Non-disclosure by management
►
Inappropriate authorisation and approval of transactions
►
Disagreement over disclosures
►
Non-compliance with laws and regulations
►
Difficulty in identifying the party that ultimately controls the entity
We have no matters we wish to
report.
EY  21
Appendix G – Required communications with the audit committee
Required communication
Reference
External confirmations
►
Management’s refusal for us to request confirmations
►
Inability to obtain relevant and reliable audit evidence from other
procedures
Consideration of laws and regulations
►
Audit findings regarding non-compliance where the non-compliance is
material and believed to be intentional. This communication is subject to
compliance with legislation on tipping off
►
Enquiry of the audit committee into possible instances of non-compliance
with laws and regulations that may have a material effect on the financial
statements and that the audit committee may be aware of
Independence
Communication of all significant facts and matters that bear on EY’s
objectivity and independence
We have not identified any material
instances of non-compliance with
laws and regulations.
Audit Plan and Audit Results
Report
Communication of key elements of the audit engagement partner’s
consideration of independence and objectivity such as:
►
The principal threats
►
Safeguards adopted and their effectiveness
►
An overall assessment of threats and safeguards
►
Information about the general policies and process within the firm to
maintain objectivity and independence
Significant deficiencies in internal controls identified during the audit
Fee Information
►
Breakdown of fee information at the agreement of the initial audit plan
Audit Plan
►
Breakdown of fee information at the completion of the audit
Annual Audit Letter if
considered necessary
EY  22
EY | Assurance | Tax | Transactions | Advisory
Ernst & Young LLP
© Ernst & Young LLP. Published in the UK.
All rights reserved.
The UK firm Ernst & Young LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales
with registered number OC300001 and is a member firm of Ernst & Young Global Limited.
Ernst & Young LLP, 1 More London Place, London, SE1 2AF.
ey.com
Appendix B
LONDON FIRE AND EMERGENCY PLANNING
AUTHORITY
Statement of Accounts 2015/2016
(UPDATED SUBJECT TO APPROVAL)
Contents
page
Narrative Statement
1
Statement of Responsibilities for the Statement of Accounts
14
Independent Auditor’s Report
15
Statement of Accounting Policies
18
Core Accounting Statements
Movement in Reserves Statement
22
Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement
23
Balance Sheet
24
Cash Flow Statement
25
Notes to Core Accounting Statements
26
Supplementary Statements
Firefighters’ Pension Schemes Fund Account
100
Net Assets Statement
100
Firefighters’ Pension Schemes Fund Account note
101
Annual Governance Statement
104
Glossary of Terms
118
User feedback questionnaire
119
Narrative Statement
The London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) is part of a unique
government arrangement of organisations operating under the umbrella of the Greater
London Authority (GLA), which includes this Authority, the core GLA, the Mayor’s
Office for Policing and Crime, the Metropolitan Police Service and Transport for
London.
The London Fire Brigade (LFB) is run by LFEPA. The Mayor appoints all LFEPA’s 17
Members and chooses one of them to be the Chairman of the Authority. Eight are
nominated from the London Assembly, seven from the London Boroughs and two
Mayoral appointees. The Authority sets the strategy and policies for the provision of
fire and rescue services in London and it has adopted structures and processes to
ensure that it is regularly able to scrutinise performance against its strategies and
priorities.
The Mayor has the power to give LFEPA directions and guidance, including the manner
in which the Authority is to perform any of its duties or to conduct any legal proceedings.
However, any direction or guidance given by the Mayor must be consistent with the Fire
and Rescue National Framework and fire safety enforcement guidance. The Mayor and
Assembly are responsible for setting the Authority’s budget requirement.
We provide services across the whole of the Greater London area serving London’s 8.2
million residents as well as those who work in, or visit the city. We cover 33 unitary
authorities, all with specific political, social and geographic conditions, and are the only
regional fire and rescue service in the country.
We have 102 land fire stations and one river station. We operate a two shift; four watch
system. In 2015/16 we handled just over 171,000 emergency (999) calls and attended
99,537 incidents in London. These included 20,775 fires, 30,066 special services and
48,696 false alarms.
The Authority’s core aims and objectives are set out in its London Safety Plan, which is
then cascaded to Departmental service plans. The Authority’s risk policy statement is
included within the Plan, together with the key corporate risks. The fifth Plan originally
covered the period 2013 to 2016 and addressed budgetary requirements for the
financial years to 2015/16. On the 2nd December 2015 the Authority agreed to extend
the current Plan until such time as the Sixth London Safety Plan is approved by the
Authority, with a target that it is in place for April 2017. The fifth plan can be accessed
on the London Fire Brigade website - http://www.london-fire.gov.uk/lsp5.asp
1
Narrative Statement
150 years celebration
The London Fire Brigade is celebrating its 150th year with several commemorative
sponsored events and open days. The Brigade was formed in 1866 following the
introduction of the Metropolitan Fire Brigade Act of 1865. The history of the Brigade
and details of celebrations to be held throughout 2016 can be found on the LFB
website.
Fire services move to Home Office
On Tuesday, 5 January 2016, the government formally confirmed that responsibility for
Fire and Rescue Policy for England transferred from the Department for Communities
and Local Government (DCLG) to the Home Office. From Friday, 1 April 2016 the
group of staff working on the national fire policy function transferred to the Home
Office. This group comprises Fire Policy Division, National Resilience and Fire
Programmes Division, the Chief Fire and Rescue Advisor’s Team and staff working on
firefighter pensions.
Future of the Authority
The government has published the Policing and Crime Bill, which includes legislation
to bring fire and rescue services in London under the direct responsibility of the Mayor
of London by abolishing the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA).
It will also put in place the role of the London Fire Commissioner on a statutory footing.
LFEPA members recommended this change during a consultation about closer working
between the emergency services, as did the Mayor of London, London Councils and
the London Assembly.
Fire responsibilities will be incorporated within the existing Greater London Authority
structures, including creating a Deputy Mayor for Fire, a statutory London Fire
Commissioner and a new Committee of the London Assembly that will provide
scrutiny and oversight.
The new legislation will also see changes that will affect other fire and rescue services.
Further information about these changes and the full report on the outcome of the
consultation can be found at:
www.gov.uk/government/consultations/enabling-closer-working-between-theemergency-services
A contract has been awarded to Kellogg Brown & Root (KBR) to procure and manage
various ‘integrator’ services on behalf of the Brigade. In summary, an integrator service
is where there is a single organisation that sits between the client and a series of
specialist suppliers. The client, therefore, has one relationship with the integrating
organisation, who in turn manages the supply chain. Services provided under the
contract include the procurement, management and auditing of the facilities
management supply chain on behalf of the Brigade. Work is now underway to move to
the new service, expected to be fully in place by August 2016.
2
Narrative Statement
Local Pension Board
The introduction of the 2015 Firefighters’ Pension Scheme brought with it new
governance arrangements for all three firefighter pension schemes, including the
establishment of local pension boards. At its March 2015 meeting, the Authority
established a Local Pension Board, whose purpose is to assist the Authority to secure
compliance with relevant legislation, and to ensure effective administration of all
schemes.
The Board has no executive powers; these remain with the Authority. Terms of
reference for the Local Pension Board, were agreed at the Authority Annual General
Meeting (AGM) in June 2015. The purpose of the Board is to assist the Authority to
secure compliance with relevant legislation and to ensure the effective administration
of all schemes. The Board is required to have an equal number of employer
representatives and employee representatives, and the AGM agreed these would be
Authority members and trade union nominees respectively.
It was agreed that the employee side would be made up of three nominees from the
Fire Brigades Union, one from the Fire Officers’ Association and one from Prospect.
Therefore there will be five LFEPA members who will represent the employer side,
three from Labour and two from Conservative.
Exercise Unified Response
Exercise Unified Response (EUR), the biggest multi agency training exercise in the
Brigade’s history and the biggest of its sort ever to take place in Europe, took place
over four days from Monday 29 February to Thursday 3 March 2016. The exercise was
grant funded by the European Union and involved Fire Service colleagues from
Hungary, Italy and Cyprus. The Police, Ambulance and NHS services also played a role
in the exercise
EUR tested London's emergency services ability to work effectively with each other as
well as with other key agencies such as local authorities, Transport for London and the
utilities sector. It was also used as an opportunity to validate arrangements for
integrating assistance from specialist teams - such as those responsible for urban
search and rescue - that are based elsewhere in the UK and from other countries in the
European Union.
Firefighter industrial action
During the financial year firefighters in the Fire Brigades Union (FBU) continued their
dispute over the Government’s reforms to the Firefighters’ Pension Scheme and
declared action short of strike until further notice. Following the FBU’s commitment to
not take any further strike action in the pensions dispute until the outcome of a legal
challenge in relation to age discrimination in transitional protection is known, and with
the subsequent agreement of members, officers made arrangements to stand down
contingency arrangements, whilst the FBU’s commitment is in place.
3
Narrative Statement
The periods during the year when firefighters may have taken strike action saw the
provision of fire cover by the Authority’s retained contractor Securitas. The cost to the
Authority relating to business continuity during 2015/16 was £1.18m. The net cost to
the Authority of industrial action to date is £9.7m (£3.22m in 2013/14, £5.30m in
2014/15 and £1.18m in 2015/16).
Property PFI Scheme
The Authority has a PFI agreement with Blue3 (London) Ltd to design, build, finance
and maintain nine new fire stations. The PFI project will see the Brigade receive £51.5m
over a 25 year period, from central government, to replace and build new fire stations
at Dagenham, Dockhead, Leytonstone, Mitcham, Old Kent Road, Orpington, Plaistow,
Purley and Shadwell. The £51.5m is the agreed grant funding as at 1st August 2013
(the date of the signed agreement) which is indexed linked to cover for inflation.
PFI provides a way of funding major capital investments, without the public purse
having to find all the cost up front. This £51.5m is extra money for the Brigade.
Eight of the stations are being completely re-built on their existing sites and one station,
Mitcham, has been built on a new site. The stations at Mitcham and Old Kent Road
were completed in 2014/15 and during 2015/16 Orpington, Plaistow, Dagenham,
Leytonstone, Purley and Shadwell were completed. The last station, Dockhead, was
completed and became operational in April 2016.
Fifth London Safety Plan (LSP5)
Following the implementation of LSP5, ten fire stations were closed and the sites have
been marketed to be sold. The sale of the former fire stations at Bow, Silvertown and
Woolwich completed in 2014/15. During 2015/16 the sale of the former fire stations at
Downham, Knightsbridge, Belsize and Kingsland were completed. The disposal of the
remaining stations closed under LSP5 is ongoing and it is expected that these sales will
complete in 2016/17.
Review of Top Management Structure
The Authority approved a new top management structure at their meeting on 26
March 2015. The new structure will produce savings of £486k in a full year with
savings of £350k being achieved in 2015/16 before rising to the full amount in
2016/17.
The new structure resulted in the establishment of three Directorates and a number of
functions that report directly to the Commissioner. The three Directorates are the
Directorate of Finance and Contractual Services with a Directorate of Operations and a
Directorate of Safety and Assurance. The former posts of Deputy Commissioner,
Strategic Advisor to the Commissioner and the Head of Human Resources and
Development were deleted with effect from 1 April 2015.
Full details of the top management review can be found on the Authority’s website,
http://moderngov.london-fire.gov.uk/mgChooseDocPack.aspx?ID=339
4
Narrative Statement
London Fire Brigade Enterprises Ltd
Following a decision taken by the Authority on 26 June 2014 (FEP 2254), to establish a
LFEPA trading company, the Authority registered a company, on 23 January 2015,
called London Fire Brigade Enterprises Ltd.
The company started trading in 2015/16 in order to provide consultancy services,
training and other services associated with our expertise in fire. A dividend will be paid
to the shareholder - The Authority - who will use it to fund projects or as part of the
annual budget cycle.
The Company employs no staff directly; it operates using staff seconded by the
Authority and engaging third parties. Group accounts have not been produced for the
combined entities as the net expenditure, income, assets and liabilities of the company
do not have a material impact on the results published. The company made a small
profit (£6k) for the year end 31 March 2016.
Authority’s Key Strategic Aims and performance
Overall, performance for 2015/16 remains good, with the majority of indicators
showing achievement and a number achieving/exceeding the performance target. In
some cases, the performance targets do mask a small rise in some incident types. For
example, secondary fires increased by 6.9 per cent (due to warmer drier summer
weather in 2015) and there were increased numbers of shut in lift releases (up 3.8 per
cent) and automatic fire alarms (AFAs) in non-residential buildings (up 2.5 per cent)
attended (due to fewer callers being challenged/filtered). However, primary (more
serious) fires continued to fall in 2015/16 compared to earlier years, as did fires in
dwellings, which are the focus of the Brigade’s community safety work. The
performance highlights are:

The total number of fire fatalities as at the end of March 2016 based on the 10 year
rolling average (LI1i) was 46. The longer term trend remains one of substantial
improvement with fire fatalities over 24 per cent lower (based on the 10 year average)
compared to the highest point of the last five years (61 – October 2011); there were
36 fire deaths in 2015/16 which is over a 20 per cent reduction on the yearly figure
five years ago, although the number is slightly higher than the 2014/15 (30). Deaths in
accidental dwelling fires (the main focus of the Brigade’s community safety work)
continued to fall; deaths in deliberate fires were up compared with 2014/15.

The number of Injuries arising from primary fires (571) shows an improvement
over the same period for 2014/15. Performance over the past six months continues to
represent an improvement with a 36 per cent improvement from the high point of the
past five years (891 – 12 months to end of April 2011); and the current normal and
stretch targets are being achieved.

The number of dwelling fires continues to reduce (5,702) over the long term and
performance over the past six months is meeting the current normal and stretch
targets.
5
Narrative Statement

Time spent on community safety (CS) activity by fire station staff is at 13.9
per cent as at the end of March 2016. This represents continual improvement,
maintaining the high level of performance which continues to be above the target.

The indicator for primary fires in non-domestic properties (LI 8) was amended for
2013/14 to focus just on those property types covered by the Regulatory Reform (Fire
Safety) Order 2005 (RRO). The figure of 2,052 as at the end of March 2016 is a slight
increase over the end of year position for 2014/15 (2,050) but performance remains
within target.

The speed of attendance to incidents by both first and second fire pumping
appliances continues to remain well within the performance targets (6 minutes and 8
minutes, on average, respectively). On average, a first appliance arrived at an incident
in 5 minutes 36 seconds and a second appliance in 6 minutes 56 seconds.

The number of unwanted calls to false alarms caused by automatic fire alarms
(AFAs) in non-domestic buildings has increased; however, the figure of 21,160 as
at the end of March 2016 still represents a reduction of 20 per cent over the last five
years.

Invoice payments for all undisputed invoices continues to represent excellent
performance, and has achieved the annual target (99.9 per cent paid within 30 days;
target 98 per cent). Payment of undisputed invoices received from Small and Medium
Enterprises (SMEs), has also shown significant improvement, with annual
performance now exceeding the 95 per cent target (at 99 per cent).

Sickness absence amongst operational staff was 5.18 per cent, compared to the
target of 3.65 per cent. Sickness for non-operational (FRS) staff was 3.86 per cent
against a target of 2.48 per cent. Control staff sickness was 6.23 per cent against a
target of 4.70 per cent.

The number of road traffic accidents involving fire brigade vehicles continues
to improve over the long term. The figure of 490 accidents for the 12 months to end
March 2016 represents a slight decrease against the same period in 2014/15 (482)
although is still within the target of 509. A detailed report about health and safety,
including performance against targets, is presented to the Committee annually.

Safety events reported under RIDDOR are those more serious events and/or
those which happen to result in sickness absence over seven days required to be
reported to the Health and Safety Executive (HSE), under the Reporting of Injuries,
Diseases, and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR) 2013. The definition of
events reportable under these Regulations are listed for reference, in Appendix 2. The
figure of 93 RIDDOR reportable injuries for the 12 months to end March 2016
represents an improvement over the number of incidents reported during the same
period in 2014/15 (133).
Details of the Authority’s performance can be found on the Authority’s website at the
following link. http://www.london-fire.gov.uk/OurPerformance.asp
For more updates and information about the brigade you can follow us on social media
or visit our website www.london-fire.gov.uk
6
Narrative Statement
Accounting Statements
The Authority’s accounting statements that follow have been prepared using the
Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) Code of Practice on
Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom 2015/16, this is based on
International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS), except where interpretations or
adaptations have been made to fit the Public Sector as detailed in the Code.
Accounting policy changes arising out of the adoption of the IFRS-based Code are
accounted for retrospectively unless the Code requires an alternative treatment. The
accounts are supported by the Statement of Accounting Policies and by various notes
to the accounts.
The accounting statements that follow comprise:
 The Statement of Responsibilities for the Statement of Accounts which
sets out the respective responsibilities of the Authority and its Director of Finance
and Contractual Services for the accounts.
The following Core Accounting statements:
 The Movement in Reserves Statement which shows the movement in year on
the different reserves held by the Authority, analysed into ùsable reserves’ (i.e.
those that can be applied to fund expenditure or reduce local taxation) and other
reserves. The Surplus or (Deficit) on the Provision of Services line shows the true
economic cost of providing the authority’s services, more details of which are
shown in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement. These are
different from the statutory amounts required to be charged to the General Fund
Balance for council tax setting purposes. The net increase/decrease before transfers
to earmarked reserves line shows the statutory General Fund Balance before any
discretionary transfers to or from earmarked reserves undertaken by the Authority.
 The Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Account, which shows the
accounting cost in the year of providing services in accordance with generally
accepted accounting practices, rather than the amount to be funded from taxation.
Authorities raise taxation to cover expenditure in accordance with regulations; this
may be different from the accounting cost. The taxation position is shown in the
Movement in Reserves Statement.
 The Balance Sheet, which shows the value as at the Balance Sheet date of the
assets and liabilities recognised by the Authority. The net assets of the Authority
(assets less liabilities) are matched by the reserves held by the authority. Reserves
are reported in two categories. The first category of reserves are usable reserves,
i.e. those reserves that the authority may use to provide services, subject to the
need to maintain a prudent level of reserves and any statutory limitations on their
use (for example the capital receipts reserve that may only be used to fund capital
expenditure or repay debt).
7
Narrative Statement
The second category of reserves is those that the Authority is not able to use to
provide services. This category of reserves includes reserves that hold unrealised
gains and losses (for example the Revaluation Reserve), where amounts would only
become available to provide services if the assets are sold; and reserves that hold
timing differences shown in the Movement in Reserves Statement line Àdjustments
between accounting basis and funding basis under regulations’.
 The Cash Flow Statement, which shows the changes in cash and cash
equivalents of the Authority during the year. The statement shows how the
authority generates and uses cash and cash equivalents by classifying cash flows as
operating, investing and financing activities. The amount of net cash flows arising
from operating activities is a key indicator of the extent to which the operations of
the Authority are funded by way of taxation and grant income or from the recipients
of services provided by the Authority. Investing activities represent the extent to
which cash outflows have been made for resources which are intended to
contribute to the Authority’s future service delivery. Cash flows arising from
financing activities are useful in predicting claims on future cash flows by providers
of capital (i.e. borrowing) to the authority.
The Statement of Accounts also includes the following Accounting Statement;
 The Firefighters’ Pension Schemes Fund Account, which shows transactions
on the fund account determined by regulation for the Firefighters’ scheme for
England. The Fund is unfunded but is no longer on a pay as you go basis as far as
Fire Authorities are concerned. The Authority no longer meets the pension
outgoings directly: instead it pays an employer’s pension contribution based on a
percentage of pay into the Pension Fund. The Authority is required by legislation to
operate a Pension Fund and the amounts that must be paid in and out of the Fund
are specified by regulation. The fund is balanced to nil at year end by either
payment of the excess to, or receiving a top up grant to meet a deficit from, the
Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG).
The Annual Governance Statement (AGS) is also published in conjunction with the
Statement of Accounts. In England, the preparation and publication of the statement is
in accordance with the CIPFA/SOLACE publication `Delivering good governance in
Local Government framework’ and is necessary to meet the statutory requirement set
out in Regulation 6 of the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015 and does not form part
of the annual financial statements.
Capital Expenditure
The Local Government Act 2003 provides a prudential framework for capital finance.
As part of these arrangements a Prudential Code for Capital Finance in Local
Authorities, developed by CIPFA, provides a professional code of practice to support
local authorities in taking decisions on capital management. The key objectives of the
code are to ensure, within a clear framework, that the capital investment plans of local
authorities are affordable, prudent and sustainable.
8
Narrative Statement
In 2015/16, total spending on the capital programme for tangible and intangible assets
was £43.9m, of which £9.2m was capital expenditure incurred by the Authority and
£34.7m under the PFI arrangement. The spend included the rebuilding and
modernising of fire stations and other buildings (£41.1m), upgrading equipment
(£2.6m) and the purchase of fleet vehicles (£0.2m). Capital expenditure on Authority
assets (£43.9m) is to be financed in accordance with the Prudential Code, Government
capital grant (£0.7m), Capital receipts (£8.5m) and finance lease borrowing (£34.7m).
The Authority took no external borrowing during the year. Settlement of maturing
principal debt during 2015/16 totalled £6m. As a result, as at 31 March 2016, the level
of outstanding principal debt totalled £92.725m. The average interest payable on
outstanding loans as at 31 March 2016 was 4.34% (4.36% 31 March 2015).
Disposal of property during the year resulted in £30.8m of capital receipts.
Income and Expenditure for the year
The income and expenditure relates to monies we collect and spend on the day to day
running of the Authority’s services, such as employees, premises, supplies and services
costs and income from levies and services we supply. The balance of expenditure that
exceeds our income is funded by grant from the Greater London Authority (£382.4m)
made up of the following elements; Revenue Support Grant (£129.4m), Retained
Business Rates (£114.8m) and Council Tax (£138.2m).
Before accounting adjustments required by the Code of Practice on Local Authority
Accounting in the UK (that provides for the inclusion of accounting adjustments for
pensions liabilities under International Accounting Standard 19 (IAS19) Retirement
Benefits (see core statement note 31), depreciation, impairment and revaluation
charges), the figure for net service expenditure for 2015/16, shown in the table below,
was £382.1m against a budgted net expenditure sum of £394.5m. The outturn
position after application of reserves and grants was £11.4m less than the approved
Authority budget.
After the net movement from general fund to reserves (£7.1m), the Authority’s
General fund balance increased by £6.8m from £12.7m as at 31 March 2015 to £19.4m
as at 31 March 2016 and the Authority’s earmarked reserves increased from £6.5m as
at 31 March 2015 to £13.6m as at 31 March 2016.
The £11.4m underspend in year was a combination of under and overspends as set out
in the table below. Business Continuity costs incurred during the year were
unbudgeted and relate to the cost of the provision of fire cover should strike action
take place whilst firefighters were in dispute. No strike action took place during
2015/16.
Set out in the table below is a summary comparison of the actual and budgeted figures
for the year. The figures exclude charges made in the Authority’s main accounts for
depreciation and pension liabilities as these costs are purely technical accounting
adjustments and do not impact on the Authority’s funding requirements through GLA
grant.
9
Narrative Statement
Service Expenditure and Income 2015/16
2015/16
Service Expenditure
Operational Staff
Annual
Budget
Outturn
Outturn
variance
£000
£000
£000
241,574
234,092
(7,482)
Other Staff
48,571
48,376
(195)
Employee Related
23,337
23,906
569
Pensions
21,601
20,681
(920)
Premises
33,301
31,831
(1,470)
Transport
17,302
16,237
(1,065)
26,422
25,825
(597)
1,969
2,136
167
9,978
10,011
33
Central Contingency
1,439
555
(884)
0
1,153
1,153
425,494
414,803
(10,691)
Income
(31,038)
(32,701)
(1,663)
394,456
382,102
(12,354)
1,238
1,238
0
245
1,199
954
395,939
384,539
(11,400)
(13,539)
(13,547)
(8)
(382,400)
(382,400)
0
0
(11,408)
(11,408)
Business Continuity
Financed by
Specific grants
GLA funding
10
Narrative Statement
What we own, money we owe and money owed to us
Our Balance Sheet below shows the value of what the Authority owns, is owed, and
what it owes to others as at 31 March 2016.
The Authority’s property portfolio, which is located throughout the Greater London
area includes 102 operational land fire stations, and one river station, 2 Leasehold
Offices, 2 workshops, 1 Stores unit, 1 site under development, 3 surplus sites, 3 sites
held for sale, 3 Radio mast sites and 9 interests in other property (data back up facility,
car parking and telecommunication paging sites).
Money owed to us within the next year includes cash sums invested with financial
institutions on a short term basis totalling £55m.
Summary Balance Sheet as at 31 March 2016
Computer Software
£m
10.5
Land, Buildings, Vehicles & Equipment
Assets Held for Sale
369.8
33.3
Stock
1.0
Money owed to the Authority within the next year
Money owed to the Authority after one year
Money owed by the Authority within the next year
99.9
0.1
(65.9)
Money owed by the Authority after one year
(5,773.2)
Total
(5,324.5)
Unusable Reserves
Reserves not available for use
(236.4)
Pension Fund deficit
5,626.4
Usable Reserves
(65.5)
Total Net worth
5,324.5
11
Narrative Statement
Pension Funds
The Authority participates in four pension schemes that meet the needs of particular
groups of employees. There are three firefighter pension schemes known as the 1992
Firefighters’ Pension scheme, the 2006 Firefighters’ Pension scheme, and the 2015
Firefighters’ Pension Scheme, for which only operational firefighters are eligible.
The other scheme is the Local Government Pension Scheme, which all other
employees may join. The schemes provide members with defined benefits related to
pay and service.
The Net Pensions Obligation, recorded in the Balance Sheet, for both the Local
Government Pension Scheme (LGPS) and the Firefighters’ Pension Schemes, as at 31
March 2016, is £5.6bn (31 March 2015 £6.3bn). This is the sum of the Authority’s
liabilities in both schemes arising from pension benefits earned by employees, less the
assets of the LGPS. Although this is a significant amount, it represents the future cost of
pension benefits earned by employees rather than the in-year cost to the Authority.
The chart below shows the movement in the level of liability in the Firefighter pension
schemes and the Local Government Pension scheme (LGPS) over five years.
The movement in the pension liability between years relates to a £0.7bn reduction in the
long term liability for the firefighter schemes, as assessed by the Authority’s actuary. This
is due mainly to the introduction of the new 2015 scheme, which operates on a Career
Average basis rather than a final salary basis .
Firefighter schemes and Support staff (LGPS) Pension obligation 2011/12 to
2015/16
Billions
7
6
5
Firefighter scheme
4
LGPS
3
Trend firefighter schemes
Trend LGPS
2
1
0
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
12
Narrative Statement
Milne v GAD Firefighter pensions back dated Lump sum payments
Following a case bought by Mr Milne against the Government Actuary Department
(GAD) a determination was made by the Pensions Ombudsman that resulted in back
dated lump sum payments to firefighter pensioners. The payments were based on
revised communation factors, issued by GAD in August 2015. The Authority made back
dated payments totalling £15.4m in March 2016. These payments have been charged to
the firefighters pension fund account and are funded by grant from the Department for
Communities and Local Government (DCLG) and HM Treasury.
Further Information
Further information concerning the accounts is available from the Director of Finance
and Contractual Services, London Fire Brigade Headquarters, 169 Union Street,
London SE1 0LL.
Formal approval and adoption of the Accounts by the Authority
To be confirmed that these accounts were approved by the Authority’s Governance,
Performance and Audit Committee at the meeting held on 11 July 2016.
Signed on behalf of the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority
Chairman of Governance, Performance and Audit Committee
Dated 11 July 2016
13
Statement of Responsibilities for the Statement of Accounts
The Authority’s Responsibilities
The Authority is required:
 to make arrangements for the proper administration of its financial affairs and to
secure that one of its officers has the responsibility for the administration of those affairs.
In this Authority, that officer is the Director of Finance and Contractual Services;
 to manage its affairs to secure economic, efficient and effective use of resources and
safeguard its assets;
 to approve the Statement of Accounts.
Director of Finance and Contractual Service’s Responsibilities
The Director of Finance and Contractual Services is responsible for the preparation of the
Authority’s Statement of Accounts in accordance with proper practices as set out in the
CIPFA/LASAAC Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom
(the Code).
In preparing this Statement of Accounts, the Director of Finance and Contractual
Services has:
 selected suitable accounting policies and then applied them consistently;
 made judgements and estimates that were reasonable and prudent;
 complied with the local authority Code.
The Director of Finance and Contractual services has also:
 kept proper accounting records which were up to date;
 taken reasonable steps for the prevention and detection of fraud and other
irregularities.
Certification of the Director of Finance and Contractual Services
I hereby certify that the Statement of Accounts on pages 17 to 103 gives a ‘true and fair
view’ of the financial position of the Authority at the reporting date and of its expenditure
and income for the year ended 31 March 2016.
Signed
Sue Budden CPFA
14
Dated 31 May 2016
Audit Opinion and Certificate
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR’S REPORT TO THE MEMBERS OF LONDON FIRE AND
EMERGENCY PLANNING AUTHORITY
Opinion on the Authority financial statements (draft)
We have audited the financial statements of London Fire and Emergency Planning
Authority for the year ended 31 March 2016 under the Local Audit and Accountability
Act 2014. The financial statements comprise the:

Movement in Reserves Statement;

Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement;

Balance Sheet;

Cash Flow Statement and the related notes 1 to 36; and
include the firefighters’ pension fund financial statements comprising the:

Fund Account;

Net Assets Statement and the related note 1.
The financial reporting framework that has been applied in their preparation is applicable
law and the CIPFA/LASAAC Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the
United Kingdom 2015/16.
This report is made solely to the members of London Fire and Emergency Planning
Authority, as a body, in accordance with Part 5 of the Local Audit and Accountability Act
2014 and for no other purpose, as set out in paragraph 43 of the Statement of
Responsibilities of Auditors and Audited Bodies published by Public Sector Audit
Appointments Limited. To the fullest extent permitted by law, we do not accept or
assume responsibility to anyone other than the Authority and the Authority’s members as
a body, for our audit work, for this report, or for the opinions we have formed.
Respective responsibilities of the Director of Finance and Contractual Services
and auditor
As explained more fully in the Statement of the Director of Finance and Contractual
Service’s Responsibilities set out on page 14, the Director of Finance and Contractual
Service is responsible for the preparation of the Authority’s financial statements in
accordance with proper practices as set out in the CIPFA/LASAAC Code of Practice on
Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom, and for being satisfied that they give
a true and fair view. Our responsibility is to audit and express an opinion on the financial
statements in accordance with applicable law and International Standards on Auditing
(UK and Ireland). Those standards require us to comply with the Auditing Practices
Board’s Ethical Standards for Auditors.
Scope of the audit of the financial statements
An audit involves obtaining evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements sufficient to give reasonable assurance that the financial statements are free
from material misstatement, whether caused by fraud or error. This includes an
assessment of: whether the accounting policies are appropriate to the Authority’s
circumstances and have been consistently applied and adequately disclosed; the
reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by the Director of Finance and
15
Contractual Services; and the overall presentation of the financial statements. In addition,
we read all the financial and non-financial information in the Statement of Accounts
2015/16 to identify material inconsistencies with the audited financial statements and to
identify any information that is apparently materially incorrect based on, or materially
inconsistent with, the knowledge acquired by us in the course of performing the audit. If
we become aware of any apparent material misstatements or inconsistencies we consider
the implications for our report.
Opinion on financial statements
In our opinion the financial statements:
 give a true and fair view of the financial position of London Fire and Emergency
Planning Authority as at 31 March 2016 and of its expenditure and income for the year
then ended; and
 have been prepared properly in accordance with the CIPFA/LASAAC Code of Practice
on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom 2015/16.
Opinion on other matters
In our opinion, the information given in the Statement of Accounts 2015/16 for the
financial year for which the financial statements are prepared is consistent with the
financial statements.
Matters on which we report by exception
We report if:
 in our opinion the annual governance statement is misleading or inconsistent with
other information forthcoming from the audit or our knowledge of the Council;
 we issue a report in the public interest under section 24 of the Local Audit and
Accountability Act 2014;
 we make written recommendations to the audited body under Section 24 of the
Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014;
 we make an application to the court for a declaration that an item of account is
contrary to law under Section 28 of the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014;
 we issue an advisory notice under Section 29 of the Local Audit and Accountability
Act 2014;or
 we make an application for judicial review under Section 31 of the Local Audit and
Accountability Act 2014.
We have nothing to report in these respects
Conclusion on London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority’s arrangements
for securing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in the use of resources
Authority’s responsibilities
The Authority is responsible for putting in place proper arrangements to secure
economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources, to ensure proper
stewardship and governance, and to review regularly the adequacy and effectiveness of
these arrangements.
16
Auditor’s responsibilities
We are required under Section 20(1)(c) of the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014 to
satisfy ourselves that the Authority has made proper arrangements for securing
economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources. The Code of Audit Practice
issued by the National Audit Office (NAO) requires us to report to you our conclusion
relating to proper arrangements.
We report if significant matters have come to our attention which prevent us from
concluding that the Authority has put in place proper arrangements for securing
economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources. We are not required to
consider, nor have we considered, whether all aspects of the Authority’s arrangements
for securing economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources are operating
effectively.
Scope of the review of arrangements for securing economy, efficiency and
effectiveness in the use of resources
We have undertaken our review in accordance with the Code of Audit Practice, having
regard to the guidance on the specified criterion issued by the Comptroller and Auditor
General (C&AG) in November 2015, as to whether the [name of body] had proper
arrangements to ensure it took properly informed decisions and deployed resources to
achieve planned and sustainable outcomes for taxpayers and local people. The
Comptroller and Auditor General determined this criterion as that necessary for us to
consider under the Code of Audit Practice in satisfying ourselves whether the [name of
body] put in place proper arrangements for securing economy, efficiency and
effectiveness in its use of resources for the year ended 31 March 2016.
We planned our work in accordance with the Code of Audit Practice. Based on our risk
assessment, we undertook such work as we considered necessary to form a view on
whether, in all significant respects, the [name of body] had put in place proper
arrangements to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources.
Conclusion
On the basis of our work, having regard to the guidance issued by the C&AG in
November 2015, we are satisfied that, in all significant respects, London Fire and
Emergency Planning Authority put in place proper arrangements to secure economy,
efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources for the year ended 31 March 2016.
Delay in certification of completion of the audit
We cannot formally conclude the audit and issue an audit certificate until we have
completed the work necessary to issue our assurance statement in respect of the
Authority’s Whole of Government Accounts consolidation pack. We are satisfied that this
work does not have a material effect on the financial statements or on our value for
money conclusion.
Neil Harris
for and on behalf of Ernst & Young LLP, Appointed Auditor
Luton
XX July 2016
17
Accounting Policies
Individual specific accounting policies are included within the relevant financial note to
the accounts.
General Principles
The Statement of Accounts summarises the Authority’s transactions for the financial year
and its position at the year-end of 31 March 2016. The Financial Statements provide
information about the Authority’s financial performance, financial position and cash flow
which is useful to a wide range of users for assessing the stewardship of the Authority’s
management and for making economic decisions. The Authority has been required to
prepare an annual Statement of Accounts by the Accounts and Audit (England)
Regulations 2015, which those regulations require to be prepared in accordance with
proper accounting practices. These practices primarily comprise the Code of Practice on
Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom 2015/16 and the Service reporting
Code of Practice (SeRCOP), supported by International Financial Reporting Standards
(IFRS) and other statutory guidance.
The accounting convention adopted in the accounting statements is principally historical
cost, modified by the revaluation of certain categories of non-current assets and financial
instruments.
Accruals of Income and Expenditure
Activity is accounted for in the year that it takes place, not simply when cash payments
are made or received. In particular:
 Revenue from the sale of goods is recognised when the Authority transfers the
significant risks and rewards of ownership to the purchaser and it is probable that
economic benefits or service potential associated with the transaction will flow to the
Authority.
 Revenue from the provision of services is recognised when the Authority can
measure reliably the percentage completion of the transaction and it is probable that
economic benefits or service potential associated with the transaction will flow to the
Authority.
 Supplies are recorded as expenditure when they are consumed – where there is a
gap between the date supplies are received and their consumption they are carried as
inventories on the Balance Sheet.
 Expenses in relation to services received (including services provided by
employees) are recorded as expenditure when the services are received rather than
when payments are made.
 Interest receivable on investments and payable on borrowings is accounted for
respectively as income and expenditure on the basis of the effective interest rate for
18
the relevant financial instrument rather than the cash flows fixed or determined by the
contract.
 Where income and expenditure have been recognised but cash has not been
received or paid, a debtor or creditor for the relevant amount is recorded in the
Balance Sheet. Where debts may not be settled, the balance of debtors is written
down and a charge made to revenue for the income that might not be collected.
Charges to Revenue for Non-Current Assets
Services and support services are debited with the following amounts to record the cost
of holding non-current assets during the year:
 depreciation attributable to the assets used by the relevant service
 revaluation and impairment losses on assets used by services where there are no
accumulated gains in the Revaluation Reserve against which the losses can be written
off
 amortisation of intangible assets attributable to the service
The Authority is not required to raise funding for depreciation, revaluation and
impairment losses or amortisations. However, it is required to make annual contribution
from revenue towards the reduction in its overall borrowing requirement (equal to an
amount calculated on a prudent basis determined by the Authority in accordance with
statutory guidance).
Depreciation, revaluation impairment losses and amortisations are therefore replaced by
the contribution in the General Fund Balance (Minimum Revenue Provision), by way of
an adjusting transaction with the Capital Adjustment Account in the Movement of
Reserves Statement for the difference between the two.
Events After the Balance Sheet Date
Events after the Balance Sheet date are those events, both favourable and unfavourable,
that occur between the end of the reporting period and the date when the Statement of
Accounts are authorised for issue. Two types of events can be identified:
 Those that provide evidence of conditions that existed at the end of the reporting
period - the Statement of Accounts is adjusted to reflect such events
 Those that are indicative of conditions that arose after the reporting period - the
Statement of Accounts are not adjusted to reflect such events, but where a category
of events would have a material effect, disclosure is made in the notes of the nature of
the events and their estimated financial effect.
19
Fair Value Measurements
Fair values of financial instruments measured at amortised cost are disclosed in the
financial statements. Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid
to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the
measurement date. The fair value measurement is based on the presumption that the
transaction to sell the asset or transfer the liability takes place either:
 In the principal market for the asset or liability or
 In the absence of a principal market, in the most advantageous market for the asset
or liability
The Authority must be able to access the principal or the most advantageous market at
the measurement date. The fair value of an asset or a liability is measured using the
assumptions that market participants would use when pricing the asset or liability,
assuming that market participants act in their economic best interest.A fair value
measurement of a non-financial asset takes into account a market participant's ability to
generate economic benefits by using the asset in its highest and best use or by selling it
to another market participant that would use the asset in its highest and best use.
The Authority uses valuation techniques that are appropriate in the circumstances and
for which sufficient data are available to measure fair value, maximising the use of
relevant observable inputs and minimising the use of unobservable inputs significant to
the fair value measurement as a whole:
 Level 1 — Quoted (unadjusted) market prices in active markets for identical assets
or liabilities
 Level 2 — Valuation techniques for which the lowest level input that is significant
to the fair value measurement is directly or indirectly observable
 Level 3 — Valuation techniques for which the lowest level input that is significant
to the fair value measurement is unobservable
For assets and liabilities that are recognised in the financial statements on a recurring
basis, the Authority determines whether transfers have occurred between levels in the
hierarchy by re-assessing categorisation (based on the lowest level input that is
significant to the fair value measurement as a whole) at the end of each reporting period.
Foreign Currency Translation
When the Authority has entered into a transaction denominated in a foreign currency,
the transaction is converted into sterling at the exchange rate applicable on the date the
transaction was effective.
20
Overheads and Support Services
The costs of overheads and support services are charged to those that benefit from the
supply or service in accordance with the costing principles of the CIPFA Service
Reporting Code of Practice 2015/16 (SeRCOP). The total absorption costing principle is
used – the full cost of overheads and support services are shared between users in
proportion to the benefits received, with the exception of:
 Corporate and Democratic Core – costs relating to the Authority’s status as a multifunctional democratic organisation.
 Non Distributed Costs – the cost of discretionary benefits awarded to employees
retiring early.
These two cost categories are defined in SeRCOP and accounted for as separate
headings in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement, as a part of Net
Expenditure on Continuing Services.
VAT
Income and expenditure excludes any amounts related to Value Added Tax, as all VAT
collected on income is payable to HM Revenue and Customs and all but very few items
of VAT paid on expenditure is recoverable from it. Where VAT is not recoverable from
HM Revenue and Customs it is charged to the appropriate area of expense.
Accounting Standards that have been issued but have not yet been adopted
The Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom 2016/17
(the Code) will introduce changes in accounting policies which will be required from 1
April 2016 as detailed below.
CIPFA/LASAAC has agreed that the 2016/17 edition of this Code will adopt the
measurement requirements of the CIPFA Code of Practice on Transport Infrastructure
Assets, as amended in 2013 (or any subsequent amendments to that Code that may be
issued), ie measurement on a Depreciated Replacement Cost basis. This will represent a
change in accounting policy from 1 April 2016.
This change will not affect the Authority’s accounting policies.
21
This statement shows the movement in the year on the different reserves held by the authority, analysed into
ùsable reserves’ (i.e. those that can be applied to fund expenditure or reduce local taxation) and other reserves.
The Surplus or (Deficit) on the Provision of Services line shows the true economic cost of providing the authority’s
services, more details of which are shown in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement. These are
different from the statutory amounts required to be charged to the General Fund Balance for Grant funding
purposes. The Net Increase/Decrease before transfers to Earmarked Reserves line shows the statutory General
Fund Balance before any discretionary transfer to or from earmarked reserves undertaken by the authority .
Revenue
grants
Unapplied
Capital
Grants
Unapplied
Capital
Receipts
Reserve
£000
£000
£000
£000
(10,238)
(9,234)
(2,240)
(13,850)
0
168,747
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
168,747
0
0
Restated - Adjustments
between accounting basis &
funding basis under
regulations
(168,478)
0
Net Increase/Decrease
before Transfers to
Earmarked Reserves
269
Balance as at 1/4/14
Total
Usable
Reserves
Unusable
Reserves
Total
Authority
Reserves
£000
£000
£000
5,143,890
5,108,328
168,747
0
168,747
0
0
778,743
778,743
0
0
168,747
778,743
947,490
(606)
13,850
(4,522)
(159,756)
159,756
0
0
(606)
13,850
(4,522)
8,991
938,499
947,490
(2,686)
2,686
0
0
0
0
0
0
(2,417)
2,686
(606)
13,850
(4,522)
8,991
938,499
947,490
(12,655)
(6,548)
(2,846)
0
(4,522)
(26,571)
6,082,389
6,055,818
87,518
0
0
0
0
87,518
0
87,518
0
0
0
0
0
0
(818,845)
(818,845)
Total Comprehensive
Income and Expenditure
87,518
0
0
0
0
87,518
(818,845)
(731,327)
Adjustments between
accounting basis & funding
basis under regulations
(101,363)
0
(2,196)
(590)
(22,251)
(126,400)
126,400
0
Net Increase/Decrease
before Transfers to
Earmarked Reserves
(13,845)
0
(2,196)
(590)
(22,251)
(38,882)
(692,445)
(731,327)
7,064
(7,064)
0
0
0
0
0
0
(6,781)
(7,064)
(2,196)
(590)
(22,251)
(38,882)
(692,445)
(731,327)
(19,436)
(13,612)
(5,042)
(590)
(26,773)
(65,453)
5,389,944
5,324,491
(Surplus) or deficit on
provision of services
(accounting basis)
Other Comprehensive
Income & Expenditure
Total Comprehensive
Income and Expenditure
Transfers (to)/from
Earmarked Reserves
Increase/(Decrease) in
Year
(Surplus) or deficit on
provision of services
(accounting basis)
Other Comprehensive
Transfers(to)/from
Earmarked Reserves
Increase/(Decrease) in
Year
22
(35,562)
Note
Earmarked
£000
Reserves
General
Fund
Usable Reserves
4
6
7
4
6
7
This statement shows the accounting cost in the year of providing services in accordance with generally accepted
accounting practices, rather than the amount to be funded from taxation. Authorities raise taxation to cover
expenditure in accordance with regulations; this may be different from the accounting cost. This Authority receives
grant funding from the GLA the position of which is shown in the Movement in Reserves Statement.
31 March 2015
31 March 2016
Division of Service
Gross
Exp
Gross Income
Net
Exp
Gross
Expenditure
Gross
Income
Net
Expenditure
£000
£000
£000
£000
£000
£000
51,051
(5,585)
45,466
324,153
(33,007)
291,146
1,538
(119)
1,419
1.870
0
1,870
1,097
0
1,097
379,709
(38,711)
340,998
13,528
(21,980)
(8,452)
7,162
45,642
(6,734)
38,908
277,929
(37,325)
240,604
1,462
(88)
1,374
Corporate and Democratic Core
1,595
0
1,595
Non Distributed Costs
1,033
0
1,033
327,661
(44,147)
283,514
19
13,434
(30,817)
(17,383)
3
Fire fighting and rescue operations
Fire service emergency planning and
civil defence
Central Services
Cost of services
Other operating expenditure
Interest payable and similar charges
(377)
Firefighter pensions net Interest on
the net defined benefit liability
Support staff pension net interest on
the net defined benefit liability
7,616
(377)
8,635
Interest and investment income
221,100
235,878
Community fire safety
235,501
(389,175)
Financing and Investment Income
and Expenditure
(9,659)
10
(568)
10
192,700
29
7,994
29
209,329
GLA Grant
(466)
(568)
208,761
(382,400)
23
PFI Grant
(3,732)
23
Capital Grant
(1,242)
23
(399,300)
Taxation and Non-Specific Grant
Income
(387,374)
168,747
(Surplus) or Deficit on Provision
of Services
87,518
(57)
Surplus on revaluation of non-current
assets
(39,010)
497
Impairment losses on non-current
assets charged to revaluation reserve
411
Remeasurement of the net defined
benefit liability
778,303
778,743
947,490
Note
Other Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure
Total Comprehensive Income
and Expenditure
23
(780,246)
(818,845)
(731,327)
4
Balance Sheet
The Balance Sheet shows the value as at the Balance Sheet date of the assets and liabilities recognised by the
authority. The net assets of the authority (assets less liabilities) are matched by the reserves held by the
authority. Reserves are reported in two categories. The first category of reserves are usable reserves, i.e. those
reserves that the authority may use to provide services, subject to the need to maintain a prudent level of
reserves and any statutory limitations on their use (for example the capital receipts reserve that may only be
used to fund capital expenditure or repay debt). The second category of reserves is those that the authority is
not able to use to provide services. This category of reserves includes reserves that hold unrealised gains and
losses (for example the Revaluation Reserve), where amounts would only become available to provide services
if the assets are sold; and reserves that hold timing differences shown in the Movement in Reserves Statement
line Àdjustments between accounting basis and funding basis under regulations’.
BALANCE SHEET
31 March 2015
£000
31 March 2016
£000
£000
Note
£000
Property, Plant & Equipment
78,780
206,811
23,747
644
9,796
1,198
Land
Buildings
Vehicles, Plant and Equipment
Non Operational Assets – Surplus
Non Operational Assets – Other
Heritage Assets
Assets Held For Sale
320,976
4,269 Intangible Assets
63 Long Term Debtors
325,308 Long Term Assets
36,215
399
25,503
27,167
96,365
248,284
18,565
2,030
3,210
1,346
26,507
76
Assets Held For Sale
Inventories
Short Term Debtors
Cash and Cash Equivalents
6,738
983
41,940
58,032
89,284 Current Assets
(6,104)
(37,522)
(3,661)
(527)
(2,622)
(93,533)
(6,326,441)
9
9
13
9
12
13
14
107,693
Short Term Borrowing
Short Term Creditors
Provisions
Short Term Liabilities
(47,814) Current Liabilities
Provisions
Long Term Borrowing
Other Long Term Liabilities
(14,177)
(44,954)
(5,691)
(1,119)
10
15
16
27
(65,941)
(1,540)
(79,447)
(5,692,181)
(6,422,596) Long Term Liabilities
(6,055,818) Net Assets
(26,571)
6,082,389
396,307
10,542
76
406,925
16
11
26
(5,773,168)
(5,324,491)
(65,453)
5,389,944
Usable Reserves
Unusable Reserves
6,055,818 Total Reserves
17
18
5,324,491
24
Cash Flow Statement
The Cash Flow Statement shows the changes in cash and cash equivalents of the authority during the reporting
period. The statement shows how the authority generates and uses cash and cash equivalents by classifying cash
flows as operating, investing and financing activities. The amount of net cash flows arising from operating activities
is a key indicator of the extent to which the operations of the authority are funded by way of grant income or from
recipients of services provided by the authority. Investing activities represent the extent to which cash outflows
have been made for resources which are intended to contribute to the authority’s future service delivery. Cash
flows arising from financing activities are useful in predicting claims on future cash flows by providers of capital
(i.e. borrowing) to the authority.
CASH FLOW STATEMENT
Notes
31 March 2015
31 March 2016
£000
£000
168,747
87,518
(186,299)
(132,125)
Adjustments for items in the Net (Surplus) or Deficit on the
Provision of Services that are Investing or Financing Activities
19,156
32,060
Net cash flows from Operating Activities
1,604
(12,547)
Net (Surplus) or Deficit on the Provision of Services
Adjustments to Net (Surplus) or Deficit on the provision of
Services for Non-Cash Movements
34
Investing Activities
36
10,315
(24,794)
Financing Activities
36
3,012
6,476
Net (Increase) or Decrease in Cash and Cash
Equivalents
14,931
(30,865)
Cash and cash equivalents at the beginning of the period
(42,098)
(27,167)
Cash and Cash Equivalents at the End of Period
(27,167)
(58,032)
25
1.
Critical Judgements in Applying Accounting Policies
In applying the accounting policies, the Authority has had to make certain judgements
about complex transactions or those involving uncertainty about future events. The
critical judgements made in the Statement of Accounts are as follows:
Former Brigade HQ 8 Albert Embankment
The Authority decided to sell its old Headquarters building based at 8 Albert
Embankment, Lambeth and moved to a refurbished leased building at 169 Union Street,
Southwark. The old headquarters site was remarketed and a developer appointed in
March 2016. During 2015/16 the site was an operational property given its continued
use as an operational fire station, and included in the balance sheet as an operational
asset rather than an asset held for sale.
Property PFI project
The Authority has entered into a PFI agreement to re provide nine new fire stations over
a three year period. Eight of the stations are to be re provided on existing sites with one
on a new site. The agreement requires the Authority to provide access, under a lease
and lease back arrangement, to the various sites as and when the building works are due
to take place. The stations concerned will be non operational during the period of
construction and become operational under a lease agreement once the new stations
are completed. Therefore the sites concerned, whilst under construction, were
reclassified in the financial accounts from operational to non-operational non current
assets. The stations will revert back to Authority ownership at the end of the lease period
of twenty five years. Ownership of the land at each site remains with the Authority.
The stations at Mitcham and Old Kent Road were completed and became operational in
2014/15. During 2015/16 a further six stations were completed and became operational
at Dagenham, Leytonstone, Orpington, Plaistow, Purley and Shadwell. They have been
valued by the Authority’s valuer and included on the balance sheet as operational assets
using a Depreciated Replacement Cost valuation.
As at 31 March 2016 the remaining PFI station at Dockhead was still under construction.
It was completed and became operational in April 2016 and will be valued and included
in the balance sheet as part of the 2016/17 accounts.
Fifth London Safety Plan (LSP5)
The sites closed following the implementation of LSP5 that have not been sold have
been valued at 31st March 2016 at the lower of its carrying value and fair value less costs
to sell at initial reclassification. LFEPA is satisfied that the estimated disposal proceeds
(EDP) figures provided by Dron and Wright meet the requirements of ‘fair value’ as
deemed by the CIPFA Code of Practice for Local Government Accounting 2015/16. EDP
figures are not market valuations as they were not subject to the standards and guidance
which is contained in the RICS ‘Red Book’, as the preparation of agency advice,
including estimates of disposal proceeds, is specifically excluded from the provisions of
the ‘Red Book’.
26
Government Grants
The Authority receives government grants and contributions and under the CIPFA Code
must determine the conditions under which the grants and contributions can be applied.
Apart from funding from CLG for the firefighter pensions fund account, which is
conditional based on corresponding expenditure, all other grants and contributions have
been determined to be unconditional.
2. Assumptions made about the Future and Other Major Sources of Estimation
Uncertainty
The preparation of financial statements requires management to make judgements,
estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported for assets and liabilities as at
the balance sheet date and the amounts reported for the revenues and expenses during
the year. However, the nature of estimation means that actual outcomes could differ
from those estimates. The key judgements and estimation uncertainty that have a
significant risk of causing substantial adjustment to the carrying amounts of assets and
liabilities within the next financial year are as follows:
Effect if Actual Results Differ
from Assumptions
Item
Uncertainties
Property, Plant
and Equipment
Assets are depreciated over useful lives that
are dependent on assumptions about the level
of repairs and maintenance that will be
incurred in relation to individual assets. The
current economic climate makes it uncertain
that the Authority will be able to sustain its
current spending on repairs and maintenance,
bringing into doubt the useful lives assigned to
assets. The current carrying value of nonst
current assets as at 31 March 2016 is
£396.3m.
If the useful life of assets is reduced,
depreciation increases and the
carrying amount of the assets falls.
The valuation of land and buildings is based on
the methodology as detailed in note 9. During
2015/16 the value of operational buildings
have been increased by 10% based on building
cost indices. Land values increased by
between 10% and 25% depending on the
location of the fire station. The applied
increase was taken as a mid-point for land
based on professional advice.
It is estimated that if land and
building costs increased by an
additional 5%, the land and building
valuations would increase by £4.8m
and £12.4m respectively.
27
It is estimated that the annual
depreciation charge for buildings
would increase by £1.4m for every
year that useful lives had to be
reduced
Pensions Liability
Estimation of the net liability to pay pensions
depend on a number of complex judgements
relating to the discount rate used, the rate at
which salaries are projected to increase,
changes in retirement ages, mortality rates and
expected returns on pension fund assets. Two
firms of consulting actuaries are engaged (one
for the Local Government Pension Scheme and
another for the Firefighters scheme) to provide
the Authority with expert advice about the
assumptions to be applied. The current
st
carrying value of the pension liability as at 31
March 2016 is £5,626m.
The effects of the net pensions
liability of changes in individual
assumptions can be measured.
For instance, a 0.5% decrease in the
discount rate assumption for the
combined fire fighter pension
scheme would result in an
approximate 9% increase in the
pension liability, in the region of
£476.9m.
However the assumptions interact in
complex ways. An increase or
decrease in liability due to estimates
being corrected as a result of
experience can be offset by a
decrease or increase attributable to
updating of the assumptions. A
sensitivity analysis is included under
note 30
3. Material items of Income and Expense
The Authority collected £23.4m from the Insurance industry under the Metropolitan Fire
Brigade Act 1865. This is shown as income in the Net Cost of Services against
Community Fire Safety and Fire fighting and Rescue Operations.
Other operating expenditure/(income)
The sum shown in the CIES comprises of the following
2014/15
2015/16
£000
£000
Other operating expenditure
Non current assets impairment
6,380
6,657
Non current assets derecognised
3,295
0
Non current assets – disposed in year
3,831
6,777
22
0
13,528
13,434
0
(39)
(14,240)
(30,778)
(7,740)
0
(8,452)
(17,383)
Foreign exchange losses
Sub total
Foreign exchange gains
Sale proceeds received in year
Reversal of impairment charged in 2013/14
CIES - Other operating expenditure/(income)
28
4. Other Comprehensive income and expenditure
The sum shown in the Movement in Reserves Statement for other income and
expenditure is shown below
Surplus or deficit on revaluation of noncurrent assets
2014/15
2014/15
2015/16
2015/16
£000
£000
£000
£000
Gain on the revaluation of Property assets
(57)
(39,010)
Loss on the revaluation of Property assets
497
411
Surplus on revaluation of non current assets
Actuarial losses on Firefighter pension liabilities
Actuarial losses on LGPS pension assets/liabilities
440
(38,599)
728,400
(756,200)
49,303
(24,046)
Actuarial (gains)/losses on pension
assets/liabilities
778,303
(780,246)
Total Other Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure
778,743
(818,845)
5. Events after the Balance Sheet date
Accounts Authorised
The accounts were authorised for issue by Sue Budden, Director of Finance and
Contractual services on (tbc) and post balance sheet events have been considered up
to this date.
29
6. Adjustments between Accounting Basis and Funding Basis under
Regulations
Depreciation, amortisation and impairment of
fixed assets
£000
£000
Total
Unusable
Reserves
£000
Total Usable
Reserves
Capital
Grants
Unapplied
£000
Capital
Receipts
Unapplied
Revenue
Grants
Unapplied
2015/16 Adjustments between
Accounting Basis and Funding Basis
under Regulations
General Fund
This note details the adjustments that are made to the total comprehensive income and
expenditure recognised by the Authority in the year in accordance with proper
accounting practice to the resources that are specified by statutory provisions as being
available to the Authority to meet future capital and revenue expenditure.
£000
£000
(23,258)
0
0
0
(23,258)
23,258
30,817
0
0
(30,778)
39
(39)
6,365
0
0
0
6,365
(6,365)
Amounts of non current assets written off on
disposal as part of the gain/loss on disposal to
CIES
(6,777)
0
0
0
(6,777)
6,777
Amount by which pension costs calculated in
accordance with Code are different from
contributions due under the pension scheme
regulations
(112,659)
0
0
0
(112,659)
112,659
1,242
0
(1,242)
0
0
0
0
0
652
8,527
9,179
(9,179)
Transfer to Revenue Grants Unapplied
Account
2,196
(2,196)
0
0
0
0
Adjustment due to Accumulated Absences,
reversal of prior year charge
4,888
0
0
0
4,888
(4,888)
current year charge
(4,177)
0
0
0
(4,177)
4,177
(101,363)
(2,196)
(590)
(22,251)
(126,400)
126,400
Transfer of cash sale proceeds credits as part of
the gain/loss on disposal to the CIES and Use
of the Capital Receipts Reserve to finance new
capital
MRP for capital financing
Not debited to the Comprehensive Income and
expenditure account
Capital Grants and contributions unapplied
credited to the Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure Account
Application of capital grants, receipts and
contributions to capital financing transferred to
the Capital Adjustment Account
Total Adjustments
30
Depreciation, amortisation and impairment of
fixed assets
£000
£000
Total
Unusable
Reserves
£000
Total Usable
Reserves
Capital
Grants
Unapplied
£000
Capital
Receipts
Unapplied
Revenue
Grants
Unapplied
2014/15 - Adjustments between
Accounting Basis and Funding Basis
under Regulations
General Fund
The following table provides comparative figures for 2014/15.
£000
£000
(15,255)
0
0
0
(15,255)
15,255
Transfer of cash sale proceeds credits as part of
the gain/loss on disposal to the CIES and Use
of the Capital Receipts Reserve to finance new
capital
14,240
0
0
(14,240)
0
0
De-recognition of non current assets
(3,295)
0
0
0
(3,295)
3,295
5,894
0
0
0
5,894
(5,894)
Amounts of non current assets written off on
disposal as part of the gain/loss on disposal to
CIES
(3,832)
0
0
0
(3,832)
3,832
Amount by which pension costs calculated in
accordance with Code are different from
contributions due under the pension scheme
regulations
(176,913)
0
0
0
(176,913)
176,913
9,659
0
(9,659)
0
0
0
0
0
23,509
9,718
33,227
(33,227)
606
(606)
0
0
0
0
reversal of prior year charge
5,306
0
0
0
5,306
(5,306)
current year charge
(4,888)
0
0
0
(4,888)
4,888
(168,478)
(606)
13,850
(4,522)
(159,756)
159,756
MRP for capital financing
Not debited to the Comprehensive Income and
expenditure account
Capital Grants and contributions unapplied
credited to the Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure Account
Application of capital grants, receipts and
contributions to capital financing transferred to
the Capital Adjustment Account
Transfer to Revenue Grants Unapplied
Account
Total Adjustments
31
7. Transfers to/from Earmarked Reserves
Firefighter Ill Health
Pensions
Transfers In
Balance
as at
31/3/2015
Transfers
Out
Transfers In
Balance
as at
31/03/2014
£000
Transfers
Out
Earmarked
Reserves
Balance
as at
31/3/2016
The table below shows the in year movements between the Authority’s earmarked
reserves.
£000
£000
£000
£000
£000
£000
1,172
0
520
652
0
0
652
105
(355)
0
460
(1,263)
0
1,723
1,402
(95)
0
1,497
0
0
1,497
Sustainability Reserve
235
0
0
235
0
0
235
Hydrants
264
0
0
264
(74)
0
338
1,000
0
0
1,000
(150)
1,000
150
341
(87)
0
428
(7)
0
435
1,100
(75)
955
220
(40)
0
260
0
(1,045)
0
1,045
(2,331)
0
3,376
1,912
0
1,693
219
(26)
0
245
Salix
0
0
0
0
(195)
0
195
Review of workwear
0
(128)
0
128
0
0
128
Pension Early Release
400
0
0
400
0
400
0
LSP6 Implementation
5,000
0
5,000
0
0
0
0
Emergency Services
Mobile Communication
Programme
356
0
356
0
0
0
0
EU Procurement
Projects
105
0
105
0
0
0
0
Training
220
0
220
0
0
0
0
13,612
(1,785)
8,849
6,548
(4,086)
1,400
9,234
Vehicle Fleet reserve
London Resilience
Compensation
Hazardous Material
Protection
Property
National Operational
Guidance
Property PFI
Total
32
8.
Minimum Revenue Provision
The Authority is required by statute to set aside a minimum revenue provision, that it
considers prudent, for the redemption of external debt and notional interest on credit
arrangements, principally leases. The total amount set aside to the Capital Adjustment
Account in 2015/16 was £6.37m (2014/15 £5.89m), being assessed by the Authority
as being prudent given CLG guidance.
9.
Property Plant and Equipment
Accounting Policy
Assets that have a physical substance and are held for use in the production or supply of
goods or services, for rental to others, or for administrative purposes and that are
expected to be used during more than one financial year are classified as Property, Plant
and Equipment.
Recognition
Expenditure on the acquisition, creation or enhancement of Property, Plant or
Equipment is capitalised on an accruals basis, provided that it is probable that future
economic benefits or service potential associated with the item will flow to the Authority
and the cost of the item can be measured reliably. Expenditure that maintains but does
not add to an asset’s potential to deliver future economic benefits or service potential
(i.e. repairs and maintenance) is charged as an expense when it is incurred.
Measurement
Assets are initially measured at cost, comprising:
 the purchase price
 any costs attributable to bringing the asset to the location and condition necessary
for it to be capable of operating in the manner intended by management
 the initial estimate of the costs of dismantling and removing the item and restoring
the site on which it is located
The Authority does not capitalise borrowing costs incurred whilst assets are under
construction. A deminimis of £20,000 is in place for the capitalisation of expenditure.
The cost of assets acquired other than by purchase is deemed to be its fair value, unless
the acquisition does not have commercial substance (i.e. it will not lead to a variation in
the cash flows of the Authority). In the latter case, where an asset is acquired via an
exchange, the cost of the acquisition is the carrying amount of the asset given up by the
Authority.
Donated assets are measured initially at fair value. The difference between fair value and
any consideration paid is credited to the Taxation and Non-Specific Grant Income line of
the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement, unless the donation has been
made conditionally. Until conditions are satisfied, the gain is held in the Donated Assets
Account. Where gains are credited to the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
33
Statement, they are reversed out of the General Fund Balance to the Capital Adjustment
Account in the Movement in Reserves Statement.
Assets are then carried in the Balance Sheet using the following measurement bases:
 Infrastructure and assets under construction - depreciated historical cost
 all other assets - fair value, determined as the amount that would be paid for the
asset in its existing use (existing use value - EUV)
Where there is no market-based evidence of fair value because of the specialist nature of
an asset, depreciated replacement cost (DRC) is used as an estimate of fair value.
With non-property assets that have short useful lives or low values (or both) depreciated
historical cost basis is used as a proxy for fair value.
Assets included in the Balance Sheet at fair value are revalued sufficiently regularly to
ensure that their carrying amount is not materially different from their fair value at the
year-end, but as a minimum every five years. Increases in valuations are matched by
credits to the Revaluation Reserve to recognise unrealised gains. Exceptionally, gains
might be credited to the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Account where they
arise from the reversal of a loss previously charged to a service.
Where decreases in value are identified they are accounted for by:
 Where there is a balance of revaluation gains for the asset in the Revaluation
Reserve, the carrying amount of the asset is written down against that balance (up to
the amount of the accumulated gains)
 Where there is an insufficient balance in the revaluation reserve, the revaluation
reserve is written down to nil and the remaining amount of the decrease in value is
written down against the relevant service line(s) in the Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure Statement.
 Where there is no balance in the Revaluation Reserve, the whole amount of the
decrease in value is written down against the relevant service line(s) in the
Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement.
The Revaluation Reserve contains revaluation gains recognised since 1 April 2007 only,
the date of its formal implementation. Gains arising before that date have been
consolidated into the Capital Adjustment Account.
Impairment
Assets are assessed at each year-end as to whether there is any indication that an asset
may be impaired. Where indications exist and any possible differences are estimated to
be material, the recoverable amount of the asset is estimated and, where this is less than
the carrying amount of the asset, an impairment loss is recognised for the shortfall.
34
Where impairment losses are identified, they are accounted for by:

Where there is a balance of revaluation gains for the asset in the Revaluation
Reserve, the carrying amount of the asset is written down against that balance (up
to the amount of the accumulated gains)

Where there is an insufficient balance in the revaluation reserve, the
revaluation reserve is written down to nil and the remaining amount of the
decrease in value is written down against the relevant service line(s) in the
Where there is no balance in the Revaluation Reserve, the whole amount of

the decrease in value is written down against the relevant service line(s) in the
Where an impairment loss is reversed subsequently, the reversal is credited to the
relevant service line(s) in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement, up to
the amount of the original loss, adjusted for depreciation that would have been charged
if the loss had not been recognised.
Depreciation
Depreciation is provided for on all property, plant and equipment assets by the
systematic allocation of their depreciable amounts over their useful lives. An exception is
made for assets without a determinable finite useful life (i.e. freehold land and Heritage
Assets) and assets that are not yet available for use (i.e. assets under construction).
Land
Not depreciated
Heritage Assets
Not depreciated
Buildings – Structure, roof, plant & services
Estimated life between 10 to 60
years
Vehicles
5 to 25 years
Plant and Equipment
5 to 10 years
Depreciation is calculated on the following bases:
 Dwellings and other buildings - straight-line allocation over the useful life of the
property as estimated by the valuer
 Vehicles, plant, furniture and equipment - straight-line allocation over the
useful life
Revaluation gains are also depreciated, with an amount equal to the difference between
current value depreciation charged on assets and the depreciation that would have been
chargeable based on their historical cost being transferred each year from the
Revaluation Reserve to the Capital Adjustment Account. Depreciation is charged the
year after a new asset becomes operational and a full years deprecation is charged in the
year of disposal.
35
Component Accounting
For assets that are classed as material (£5 million and above) to the Authority,
component accounting is applied. Componentisation is applicable to any significant
enhancement and/or acquisition expenditure incurred and revaluations carried out as
from 1st April 2010. During 2012/13, the non-current tangible assets of the Authority
were re-valued which triggered of the component accounting requirements, which has
effected the depreciation charge levied in subsequent financial years. Componentisation
does not apply to land assets and it applies where an item of property, plant and
equipment asset has major components whose cost is significant (20% or above) in
relation to the total cost of the item. In these instances, the components are recognised
and depreciated separately according to it’s useful life.
Surplus Assets
Surplus assets are those assets that are not being used to deliver services but do not
meet the criteria to be classified as either investment properties or non-current assets
held for sale. The asset is revalued immediately before reclassification from operational
non current assets to surplus assets under the existing use value (DRC). Once the asset
is reclassified to surplus assets, the asset is revalued under the IFRS13 fair value
measurement methodology. Where there is a decrease in the fair value, the loss is
posted to the Other Operating Expenditure line in the Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure Statement (even where there is a balance on the asset’s revaluation
reserve). Gains in fair value are recognised only up to the amount of any previous losses
recognised in the Surplus or Deficit on the Provision of Services. Depreciation is not
charged on Assets Held for Sale.
Disposals and Non-current Assets Held for Sale
When it becomes probable that the carrying amount of an asset will be recovered
principally through a sale transaction rather than through its continuing use, it is
reclassified as an Asset Held for Sale. The asset is revalued immediately before
reclassification and then carried at the lower of this amount or fair value less costs to sell
which is deemed to be the estimated disposal proceeds for the site. Where there is a
subsequent decrease to fair value less costs to sell, the loss is posted to the Other
Operating Expenditure line in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement.
Gains in fair value are recognised only up to the amount of any previous losses
recognised in the Surplus or Deficit on the Provision of Services. Depreciation is not
charged on Assets Held for Sale.
Assets that are to be abandoned or scrapped are not reclassified as Assets Held for Sale.
When an asset is disposed of or decommissioned the carrying amount of the asset in the
Balance Sheet (whether Property, Plant or Equipment or Assets Held for Sale) is written
off to the Other Operating Expenditure line in the Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure Statement as part of the gain or loss on disposal. Receipts from disposals (if
any) are credited to the same line in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
Statement also as part of the gain or loss on disposal (i.e. netted off against the carrying
value of the asset at the time of disposal). Any revaluation gains accumulated for the
asset in the Revaluation Reserve are transferred to the Capital Adjustment Account.
36
Amounts received for a disposal in excess of £10,000 are categorised as capital receipts.
The balance of receipts is required to be credited to the Capital Receipts Reserve and
can then only be used for new capital investment or set aside to reduce the Authority’s
underlying need to borrow (the capital financing requirement). Receipts are
appropriated to the Reserve from the General Fund Balance in Movement in Reserves
Statement.
The written-off value of disposals is not a charge against Authority revenue funding, as
the cost of non-current assets is fully provided for under separate arrangements for
capital financing. Amounts are appropriated to the Capital Adjustment Account from the
General Fund Balance in the Movement in Reserves Statement.
Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and Similar Contracts
PFI and similar contracts are agreements to receive services, where the responsibility for
making available the non current assets needed to provide the service passes to the PFI
contractor. As the Authority is deemed to control the services that are provided under
its vehicle PFI scheme, the Authority carries the assets used under the contract on its
Balance Sheet as part of Property, Plant and Equipment.
The original recognition of these vehicles is balanced by the recognition of a liability for
amounts due to the scheme operator to pay for the assets.
Non-current assets recognised on the Balance Sheet are depreciated in the same way as
property, plant and equipment owned by the Authority.
The amounts payable to the PFI operators each year are analysed into five elements:
 Fair value of the services received during the year – debited to the
relevant service in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
Statement
 Finance cost – an interest charge on the outstanding Balance Sheet
liability, debited to Financing and Investment Income and Expenditure
line in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement
 Contingent rent – increases in the amount to be paid for vehicles arising
during the contract, debited to Financing and Investment Income and
Expenditure line in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
Statement
 Payment towards liability – applied to write down the Balance Sheet
liability towards the PFI operator (the profile of write-downs is
calculated using the same principles as for a finance lease)
 Lifecycle replacement costs – recognised as additions to property, plant
and equipment when vehicles are purchased.
37
The table below shows the movements in the Authority’s Non Current Assets during
2015/16:
Land
Buildings
Vehicles
Equipment
Non
Operational
& Surplus
Assets
£000
£000
£000
£000
£000
78,780
206,811
15,733
8,014
10,440
1,198
36,215
357,191
0
79,039
3,997
28,239
178
0
13,134
124,587
78,780
285,850
19,730
36,253
10,618
1,198
49,349
481,778
2,516
254
0
1,041
(8,679)
0
0
(4,868)
15,069
18,331
0
0
1,386
148
3,665
38,599
Impairments
0
(6,657)
0
0
(342)
0
0
(6,999)
Additions
in year
0
38,538
251
81
2,577
0
0
41,447
Disposals
in year
0
0
(10)
0
(142)
0
(8,191)
(8,343)
Gross value
as at 31/3/16
96,365
336,316
19,971
37,375
5,418
1,346
44,823
541,614
Accumulated
Depreciation
as at 1.4.2015
0
(79,039)
(3,997)
(28,239)
(178)
0
(13,134)
(124,587)
Disposals in
year
0
0
10
0
0
0
1,556
1,566
Depreciation
for year
0
(8,993)
(4,002)
(2,553)
0
0
0
(15,548)
Total
Depreciation
as at 31/3/16
0
(88,032)
(7,989)
(30,792)
(178)
0
(11,578)
(138,569)
96,365
248,284
11,982
6,583
5,240
1,346
33,245
403,045
Non
Current
Assets
Net Book value
as at 1/4/15
Add back
Depreciation
Gross Value
as at 1/4/15
Reclassification
Revaluation
Net Book
Value as at
31/3/2016
Operational
38
Heritage
Assets
Assets
held for
sale
Total
£000
£000
£000
The table below shows the comparative movements in the Authority’s Non Current
Assets during 2014/15:
Non
Current
Assets
Operational
Non
Operational
Assets
Heritage
Assets
Assets
held for
sale
Total
£000
£000
£000
£000
Land
Buildings
Vehicles
Equipment
£000
£000
£000
£000
78,990
201,549
225
7,295
12,814
1,198
32,813
334,884
0
72,781
15
25,353
0
0
14,256
112,405
78,990
274,330
240
32,648
12,814
1,198
47,069
447,289
2,246
6,395
0
262
(8,903)
0
0
0
Revaluation
0
0
0
0
56
0
7,740
7,796
De-recognition
– other
0
(5,838)
0
0
0
0
0
(5,838)
(2,456)
(3,402)
0
0
0
0
(522)
(6,380)
Additions
in year
0
14,365
19,490
3,343
6,706
0
(40)
43,864
Disposals
in year
0
0
0
0
(55)
0
(4,898)
(4,953)
Gross value
as at 31/3/15
78,780
285,850
19,730
36,253
10,618
1,198
49,349
481,778
Accumulated
Depreciation
as at 1.4..2014
0
(72,781)
(15)
(25,353)
0
0
(14,256)
(112,405)
Disposals in
year
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,122
1,122
Reclassification
0
178
0
0
(178)
0
0
0
De-recognition
– other
0
2,047
0
0
0
0
0
2,047
Depreciation
for year
0
(8,483)
(3,982)
(2,886)
0
0
0
(15,351)
Total
Depreciation
as at 31/3/15
0
(79,039)
(3,997)
(28,239)
(178)
0
(13,134)
(124,587)
78,780
206,811
15,733
8,014
10,440
1,198
36,215
357,191
Net Book value
as at 1/4/14
Add back
Depreciation
Gross Value
as at 1/4/14
Reclassification
Impairments
Net Book
Value as at
31/3/2015
39
Basis of Valuations
Non Current asset valuations for Land and Buildings were determined as follows:
The freehold and long leasehold interests in the various properties which are owned by
London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA), were valued by External
Valuers, Dron & Wright, Chartered Surveyors and Property Consultants, at 1st April
2013, in accordance with the Sixth Edition of the Valuation Standards of the Royal
Institution of Chartered Surveyors (the ‘Red Book’). In their report dated 26 June 2013
in that connection, Dron and Wright confirmed the information set out below.
Operational portfolio
For the whole of the LFEPA operational portfolio, Existing Use Value (EUV) has been
adopted. For specialised operational properties, a Depreciated Replacement Cost
(DRC) methodology has been used to determine EUV, as there are no market
transactions for this type of asset. The DRC has been assessed on the basis of the
existing properties, rather than by reference to ‘Modern Equivalent Assets’ (MEAs).
This departure from the Red Book is necessary because it is impractical to ascertain the
‘service potential’ of MEAs, due to the following factors: The very large number of fire stations in LFEPA operational property portfolio.
 The ‘services’ which are provided from individual fire stations are not ‘standard’ and
vary significantly between different properties.
 When fire stations are rebuilt, that opportunity is often taken to rationalise the
services which are provided from the property.
 LFEPA own a significant number of nationally or locally listed buildings in central
London locations, and it would not have been viable to purchase a replacement asset, in
the context of the market conditions prevailing at the valuation date.
The Building Cost Information Service (BCIS) suggests that the increase in the costs of
constructing fire stations in London over the last year have typically increased by 10%.
Further professional advice sought by the Valuer indicated that the general increase in
land value in London, over the one year period to 31 March 2016, is between 10% and
25% depending on the area of London. The increase in the valuation of land is based on
a mid point position for each area of London.
Surplus Assets
Once an asset is classified to surplus assets the asset is revalued under the IFRS13 fair
value methodology. The fair value is based on level 2 valuation techniques by reference
to sales comparisons and market variables and based on advice which has been
provided to the Authority by Dron & Wright, in connection with the estimated disposal
proceeds (EDP). The EDP figures are not market valuations as they were not subject to
the standards and guidance which is contained in the RICS ‘Red Book’, as the
preparation of agency advice, including estimates of disposal proceeds, is specifically
excluded from the provisions of the ‘Red Book’.
40
LFEPA is satisfied that the EDP figures provided meet the requirements of ‘fair value’ as
deemed by the CIPFA Code of Practice for Local Government Accounting 2015/16. On
the basis of that advice, we are of the view that the figures referred to in our accounts
are a reasonable reflection of the present values of our property interests.
Assets held for sale
Assets held for sale are valued at the lower of EUV/DRC and fair value as determined
under IFRS13. The EDP is used as the fair value for this comparison as detailed above.
Freehold and long leasehold interests
The freehold and long leasehold interests in the various properties which are owned by
London Fire And Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA), were valued by External
Valuers, Dron & Wright, Chartered Surveyors and Property Consultants, at 1st April
2016, in accordance with the current edition of the RICS Valuation - Professional
Standards January 2014 (the Red Book).
Valuer’s report
In their report dated 27th May 2016 (the report), Dron & Wright confirmed that, for the
whole of the LFEPA operational portfolio, Existing Use Value (EUV) has been adopted.
For specialised operational properties, a Depreciated Replacement Cost (DRC)
methodology has been used. Non-specialised operational properties have been valued
by reference to sales comparisons and market variables. The EUVs may be different to
the prices which would have been obtainable in the open market for LFEPA's interests in
the properties, if they had been declared surplus to LFEPA's operational requirements, at
the valuation date.
In accordance with section 8.1 of Professional Standard 2 of the Red Book, Dron &
Wright have made the following disclosures:1. This is the sixth time that the Valuer has been the signatory of the report provided to
London Fire And Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) and the previous valuation
dates were 1st April 2003, 1st April 2008, 1st April 2013, 1st April 2014 and 1st April
2015. This is the seventh time that the Valuer's firm has carried out the valuation
instruction, with the first valuation date being 1st April 1999. Although this may be
construed as a departure from the recommendations which are contained in the Red
Book, we do not consider that it has prevented us from providing you with an
independent and objective opinion of the values of your various properties.
2. The firm has acted for LFEPA for a period of over 20 years. During that time, the firm
has provided property management, landlord and tenant, agency, building surveying
and rating services to LFEPA, under a series of contracts for the provision of property
and estate management functions.
3. In the firm's preceding financial year, the fees payable to the firm by LFEPA
represented between 10% and 15% of the total fee income of the firm.
41
4. No material increase is anticipated in the proportion referred to in 3, in the foreseeable
future.
Vehicles
The Authority terminated the contract with the previous provider in November 2012
and appointed Babcock to manage and maintain the fleet on an interim basis. In
2013/14 the fleet vehicles were owned by the Bank of Scotland and the Authority
leased the fleet from the bank under an operating lease. The lease was discharged in
April 2014, at which point the Authority took ownership of the fleet.
In April 2014 the Authority also took ownership from the Department for
Communities and Local Government of New Dimension vehicles and equipment.
These vehicles are available for national deployment and include specialist vehicles
and equipment such as high volume pumps and mass de-contamation equipment.
Intangible Assets
Expenditure on non-monetary assets that do not have physical substance but are
controlled by the Authority due to past events (e.g. software licences) are capitalised
when it is expected that future economic benefits or service potential will flow from the
intangible asset to the Authority.
Internally generated assets are capitalised where it is demonstrable that the project is
technically feasible and is intended to be completed (with adequate resources being
available) and the Authority will be able to generate future economic benefits or service
potential by being able to sell or use the asset. Expenditure is capitalised where it can be
measured reliably as attributable to the asset and is restricted to that incurred during the
development phase (research expenditure cannot be capitalised).
Expenditure on the development of websites is not capitalised if the website is primarily
intended to promote or advertise the Authority’s goods or services.
Intangible assets are measured initially at cost. Amounts are only revalued where the fair
value of the assets held by the Authority can be determined by reference to an active
market. If intangible assets held by the Authority fail to meet this criterion they are
carried at amortised cost. The depreciable amount of an intangible asset is amortised
over its useful life to the relevant service line(s) in the Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure Statement. An asset is tested for impairment whenever there is an
indication that the asset might be impaired – any losses recognised are posted to the
relevant service lines in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement. Any
gain or loss arising on the disposal or abandonment of an intangible asset is posted to
the Other Operating Expenditure line in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
Statement.
Where expenditure on intangible assets qualifies as capital expenditure for statutory
purposes, amortisation, impairment losses and disposal gains and losses are not
permitted to have an impact on the General Fund Balance. The gains and losses are
therefore reversed out of the General Fund Balance in the Movement in Reserves
42
Statement and posted to the Capital Adjustment Account and (for any sale proceeds
greater than £10,000) the Capital Receipts Reserve.
Intangible Assets
Intangible Assets represent expenditure on computer software which has been
capitalised, but which is not an integral part of a particular IT system and accounted
for as part of the hardware item of Property Plant and Equipment. All software is
given a finite useful life, based on assessments of the period that the software is
expected to be of use to the Authority. The useful lives assigned to the major
software suites used by the Authority are:
Software Licences
In-house Software
7 years
Firelink radio software Wide-Area Network
Command Support System
5 years
All other Intangible assets
Mobile Work Systems
The carrying amounts of intangible assets are amortised on a straight line basis and
the amortisation is charged to the relevant service heading in the Comprehensive
Income and Expenditure Statement.
Under Development
(non operational)
Operational
Intangible Assets
Software
licences
In-house
Software
Total
Software
licences
In-house
Software
Total
£000
£000
£000
£000
£000
£000
Net Value as at 1/4/15
1,586
1,385
2,971
1,052
246
1,298
Amortised
(573)
(481)
(1,054)
0
0
0
Additions
123
(14)
109
2,347
3
2,350
1,559
6,957
8,516
(8,267)
(249)
(8,516)
0
0
0
4,868
0
4,868
2,695
7,847
10,542
0
0
0
Reclassification
Reclassification from
Non Operational
Tangibles Assets to
Intangible Assets Under
Development
Net Value as at
31/3/16
Following a review of expenditure for the Control and Mobilising System (CAMS)
project in 2014/15, elements were identified as IT software rather than IT hardware. An
adjustment has been made in year, since the value is not considered material.
43
Heritage Assets
Heritage assets are assets that are held by the Authority principally for their contribution
to knowledge or culture. These assets are accounted for as a separate item on the
balance sheet. The Authority’s Heritage Assets are presently housed in the Authority’s
London Fire Brigade Museum located at Southwark. The Museum closed in 2015/16
pending a move to new site, the collection will be placed in storage until the new site is
ready, meanwhile some museum pieces will be placed on display at various sites. The
collection which can be divided across four main areas: museum exhibits, the art
collection, the museum archive and museum library.
10. Financial Instruments
Accounting Policy
Financial liabilities
Financial liabilities are recognised on the Balance Sheet when the Authority becomes
party to the contractual provisions of a financial instrument and are initially measured at
fair value and are carried at amortised cost. The Authority has taken loans from the
Public Works Loans Board (PWLB) and Local Authorities at fixed rates and the
associated arrangement cost of the loans is not material. In these circumstances there is
no need to carry out a formal effective interest rate calculation as the instruments carry
the same interest rate for the whole term of the instrument.
For most of the borrowings that the Authority has, this means that the amount presented
in the Balance Sheet is the outstanding principal repayable (plus accrued interest); and
interest charged to the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement is the
amount payable for the year according to the loan agreement.
The Authority has not restructured its borrowing during the year therefore there have
been no gains or losses on the repurchase or early settlement of borrowing resulting
from any premiums or discounts.
Financial Assets
Financial Assets are classified into two types:
Loans and receivables are financial assets that have fixed or determinable payments
but are not quoted in an active market.
Available for sale assets – assets that have a quoted market price and/or do not
have fixed or determinable payments. The Authority does not have any such assets.
Loans and receivables are recognised on the Balance Sheet when the Authority
becomes a party to the contractual provisions of a financial instrument and are initially
measured at fair value. They are subsequently measured at their amortised cost. Annual
credits to the Financing and Investment Expenditure and Income line in the
Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement for interest receivable are based on
the carrying amount of the asset multiplied by the effective rate of interest for the
44
instrument. For most of the loans that the Authority has made, this means that the
amount presented in the Balance Sheet is the outstanding principal receivable (plus
accrued interest) and interest credited to the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
Statement is the amount receivable for the year in the loan agreement.
The Authority has made a number of loans to employees at less than market rate (soft
loans). However the difference in the present value of the interest that will be foregone
over the life of the instrument, resulting in a lower amortised cost than the outstanding
principal is not material and therefore does not require adjustment to the
The borrowings and investments disclosed in the Balance Sheet are made up of the
following categories of financial instruments:
Financial liabilities and Assets at
amortised cost
31/3/15
Long Term
Current
Long Term
Current
£000
£000
£000
£000
Borrowings
PWLB & Local Authority Borrowing
PWLB & Local Authority Accrued Interest
IIntIIrestInterestowing
Total borrowingsInterest
PFI and finance lease liabilities
Total Other Long term liabilities
92,725
6,000
78,725
14,000
808
104
722
177
93,533
6,104
79,447
14,177
28,520
528
62,180
1,119
28,520
528
62,180
1,119
0
17,064
0
19,456
122,053
23,696
141,627
34,752
Creditors
TOTAL
Financial liabilities and Assets at
amortised cost
31/3/16
31/3/15
31/3/16
Long Term
Current
Long Term
Current
£000
£000
£000
£000
Loans & Receivables
Investments
Short term investments
0
0
0
0
Accrued Interest
0
0
0
0
Total investments
0
0
0
0
63
21,208
76
38,230
0
27,167
0
58,032
63
48,375
76
96,262
Debtors
Cash Equivalents
TOTAL
45
Financial Instruments Gains/ Losses
The gains and losses recognised in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
Statement in relation to financial instruments are made up as follows:
2014/15
£000
Financial Instruments
(7,162)
2015/16
£000
Interest expense
377
(8,635)
Interest income
(6,785)
568
Net gain/(loss) for the year
2014/15
£000
(8,067)
Financial Instruments
(4,391)
PWLB borrowing
(104)
(4,017)
Local Authority borrowing
(60)
(2,607)
(7,162)
2015/16
£000
(104)
PFI lease interest
& contingent rentals
(1,591)
Merton Lease Payment
(2,923)
Total Interest expense
(8,635)
Fair Value of Assets and Liabilities
Financial liabilities and financial assets represented by loans and receivables are carried
on the balance sheet at amortised cost (in long term assets/liabilities with accrued
interest in current assets/liabilities). The fair values calculated are as follows:
31/3/2015
Liabilities & Assets
31/3/2016
Carrying
amount
Fair Value
Carrying
amount
Fair value
£000
£000
£000
£000
98,725
125,189
PWLB & Local Authority debt
92,725
117,892
29,048
29,048
PFI & Other Finance Leases
63,299
63,299
17,064
17,064
Trade and other creditors
19,456
19,456
144,837
171,301
175,480
200,647
0
0
0
0
21,208
21,208
38,230
38,230
63
63
76
76
27,167
27,167
58,032
58,032
48,438
48,438
96,338
96,338
Total Liabilities
Fixed term deposits
Trade and other debtors
Long term debtors
Cash & Cash Equivalents
Total Assets
46
The 2015/16 Code of Practice has been updated to incorporate the adoption of IFRS13
Fair Value measurement, ewhich defines fair value as the price that would be received
to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market
participants at the measurement date.
The valuations use the Net Present Value (NPV) approach, which provides an estimate
of the value of payments in the future in todays terms. The discount rate used in the
NPV calculation should be equal to the same instrument from a comparable lender. The
discount rates were obtained by the Authority’s treasury advisor (Capita) and PWLB
from the market on 31 March 2016, using bid prices where applicable.
The fair value of fixed term deposits includes accrued interest as at the balance sheet
date. Interest is calculated using the most common market convention, ACT/365.
Interest is not paid/received on the start date of an instrument, but is paid/received on
the maturity date.
The fair value of PWLB debt is based on PWLB valuation and the local authority debt is
based on Capita’s valuation, who are an independent treasury management service
provider to UK public service organisations. Capita’s valuation uses the new borrowing
rates in their valuation assessment.
Nature and extent of risk arising from Financial Instruments
Key risks
The Authority’s activities expose it to a variety of financial risks. The key risks are:
(i)
Credit risk - the possibility that other parties might fail to pay amounts due to the
Authority
(ii)
Liquidity risk - the possibility that the Authority might not have funds available to
meet its commitments to make payments
(iii)
Re-financing risk - the possibility that the Authority might be requiring to renew
a financial instrument on maturity at disadvantageous interest rates or terms
(iv)
Market risk - the possibility that financial loss might arise for the Authority as a
result of changes in such measures as interest rates movements
Overall procedures for managing risk
The Authority’s overall risk management procedures focus on the unpredictability of
financial markets, and are structured to implement suitable controls to minimise these
risks. The procedures for risk management are set out through a legal framework based
on the Local Government Act 2003 and associated regulations. These require the
Authority to comply with the CIPFA Prudential Code, the CIPFA Code of Practice on
Treasury Management in the Public Services and investment guidance issued through
the Act. Overall these procedures require the Authority to manage risk in the following
ways:
47
 by formally adopting the requirements of the CIPFA Treasury Management Code
of Practice
 by the adoption of a Treasury Policy Statement and treasury management clauses
within its financial regulations/standing orders/constitution
 by approving annually in advance prudential and treasury indicators for the
following three years limiting:
o
o
o
o
The Authority’s overall borrowing
Its maximum and minimum exposures to fixed and variable rates
Its maximum and minimum exposures to the maturity structure of its debt
Its maximum annual exposures to investments maturing beyond a year
 by approving an investment strategy for the forthcoming year setting out its
criteria for both investing and selecting investment counterparties in compliance with
Government guidance
These are required to be reported and approved before the start of the year to which
they relate. These items are reported with the annual treasury management strategy
which outlines the detailed approach to managing risk in relation to the Authority’s
financial instrument exposure. Bi annual reports on the treasury management
performance are submitted to the Resources Committee for scrutiny, and then to the
Authority.
The Authority’s daily treasury management function is managed under a shared service
arrangement with the Greater London Authority who carry out borrowing, investment
and reporting requirements. Investments are managed through a Group Investment
Syndicate. The annual treasury management strategy for 2015/16 which incorporates
the prudential indicators and investment strategy was approved by Authority on 26
March 2015 and is available on the Authority website (FEP2412).
The key issues within the strategy were:
(i)
The Authorised Borrowing Limit for 2015/16 was set at £220m with an
Operational Borrowing Limit of £215m. This is the maximum limit of external
borrowings or other long term liabilities.
(ii) The maximum amounts of fixed and variable interest rate exposure were set at
100% and 75% respectively based on the Authority’s net debt position.
48
(iii)
The maximum and minimum exposures to the maturity structure of debt are:
Upper Limit
Lower Limit
Under 12 Months
20 %
0%
12 – 24 Months
20 %
0%
2 – 5 Years
50 %
0%
5 – 10 Years
75 %
0%
10 Years and over
90 %
25 %
Exposure to the maturity of debt
(iv) No principal sums to be invested for periods longer than one year, subject to
review
The Authority sets these policies and officers maintain approved written principles for
overall risk management, as well as written policies (Treasury Management Practices –
TMPs) covering specific areas, such as interest rate risk, credit risk, and the investment
of surplus cash. These TMPs are a requirement of the Code of Practice and are
reviewed periodically. Any changes are put to members for consideration.
Credit risk
Credit risk arises from deposits with banks and financial institutions, as well as credit
exposures to the Authority’s customers.
This risk is minimised through the Annual Investment Strategy, which requires that
deposits are only made with financial institutions on the Approved Counterparty
Lending List. Acceptability as an authorised counterparty will be based upon credit
ratings issued by credit ratings agencies, advice from the Authority’s treasury advisors,
Capita Treasury Services and other financial information sources deemed appropriate by
the Director of Finance and Contractual Services in order to ensure that investments are
made giving sufficient priority to security over yield in accordance with Section 15 (1) of
the Local Government Act 2003.
The Annual Investment Strategy also considers maximum amounts and time limits in
respect of each financial institution. Deposits are not made with banks and financial
institutions unless they meet the minimum requirements of the investment criteria
outlined above. Additional selection criteria are also applied after these initial criteria are
applied. The additional criteria for the Authorities loan portfolio (quantified at the day of
lending) are set out in the Authority’s investment strategy (FEP2412).
The Authority’s Annual Investment Strategy takes a risk averse approach to investment
that gives priority to the security of funds over the potential rates of return. As set out in
the Strategy Statement for the current year LFEPA is using the current creditworthiness
service from Capita as a starting point. This method uses credit ratings from all three
agencies and a scoring system that incorporates credit default swap rates. It does not
give undue prevalence to any one agency’s ratings.
49
The Authority’s maximum exposure to credit risk in relation to its investments in banks
and building societies cannot be assessed generally as the risk of any institution failing to
make interest payments or repay the principal sum will be specific to each individual
institution. Recent experience has shown that it is rare for such entities to be unable to
meet their commitments. A risk of irrecoverability applies to all of the Authority’s
deposits, but there was no evidence at the 31 March 2016 that this was likely to
crystallise.
The major element of the Authority’s investments are held and managed in the GLA
Group Investment Syndicate (GIS), which is jointly controlled by the GLA, syndicate
members and LFEPA through their respective chief financial officers.
The Authority’s cash balances averaged £84.1m for the year 2015/16 and attracted
interest of £568k. The closing investment position on the GIS, as of 31 March 2016, was
£55.8m with a Weighted Average Maturity of 75days. Including a sum held on a Nat
West Call account (£3m) the total investment position as at 31 March 2016 was £59.8m.
Cumulative performance for the year was 0.65% versus the LIBID benchmark of 0.46%
(gross outperformance of 0.19%).
No breaches of the Authority’s counterparty criteria occurred during the reporting
period and the Authority does not expect any losses from non-performance by any of its
counterparties in relation to deposits and bonds.
Liquidity risk
The Authority manages its liquidity position through the risk management procedures
above (the setting and approval of prudential indicators and the approval of the treasury
and investment strategy reports), as well as through a comprehensive cash flow
management system, as required by the CIPFA Code of Practice. This seeks to ensure
that cash is available when needed.
The Authority has ready access to borrowings from the money markets to cover any day
to day cash flow need, and the PWLB, Local Authority and money markets for access to
longer term funds. The Authority is also required to provide a balanced budget through
the Local Government Finance Act 1992, which ensures sufficient monies are raised to
cover annual expenditure. There is therefore no significant risk that it will be unable to
raise finance to meet its commitments under financial instruments.
All sums owing including investments and non-statutory trade debtors, are due to be
paid in less than one year. The maturity analysis of financial liabilities is as follows:
31/3/2015
£000
6,000
Maturity analysis
Within 1 year
31/3/2016
£000
14,000
14,000
Between 1 and 2 years
6,000
18,000
17,000
22,500
17,500
38,225
More than 10 years
38,225
98,725
Total
92,725
50
All trade and other payables are due to be paid in less than one year and are not shown
in the table above.
Refinancing and Maturity risk
The Authority maintains a significant debt and investment portfolio. Whilst the cash flow
procedures above are considered against the refinancing risk procedures, longer-term
risk to the Authority relates to managing the exposure to replacing financial instruments
as they mature. This risk relates to both the maturing of longer term financial liabilities
and longer term financial assets.
The approved treasury indicator provides limits for the maturity structure of debt and on
investments of greater than one year in duration. These are the key parameters used to
address this risk. The Authority approved treasury and investment strategies address
the main risks and the GLA treasury management team address the operational risks
within the approved parameters.
This includes:
 monitoring the maturity profile of financial liabilities and amending the profile
through either new borrowing or the rescheduling of the existing debt
 monitoring the maturity profile of investments to ensure sufficient liquidity is
available for the Authority’s day to day cash flow needs, and the spread of longer
term investments provide stability of maturities and returns in relation to the
longer term cash flow needs.
The maturity analysis of borrowing is as follows, with the upper and lower limits for fixed
interest rates maturing in each period:
Maturity analysis of
fixed rate borrowing
Approved
upper limits
Approved
lower limits
Actual
31 /3/15
Actual
31 /3/16
Less than 1 year
20 %
0%
7%
15%
20 %
0%
7%
6%
50 %
0%
19%
19%
75 %
0%
18%
22%
More than 10 years
90 %
25 %
49%
38%
Market risk
Interest rate risk
The Authority is exposed to interest rate movements on its borrowings and investments.
Movements in interest rates have a complex impact on the Authority, depending on
how variable and fixed interest rates move across differing financial instrument periods.
For instance, a rise in variable and fixed interest rates would have the following effects:
51
i.
Borrowings at variable rates – the interest expense charged to the Comprehensive
Income and Expenditure Statement will rise
ii.
Borrowings at fixed rates – the fair value of the borrowing will fall (no impact on
revenue balances)
iii.
Investments at variable rates – the interest income credited to the Comprehensive
Income and Expenditure Statement will rise
iv.
Investments at fixed rates – the fair value of the assets will fall (no impact on
revenue balances)
Borrowings are not carried at fair value on the balance sheet, so nominal gains and
losses on fixed rate borrowings would not impact on the Surplus or Deficit on the
Provision of Services or Other Comprehensive Income and Expenditure.
11. Long-Term Borrowing
Long-term Borrowing
The sources are:
Public Works Loan Board
31/3/2015
31/3/2016
£000
£000
84,725
78,725
8,000
0
92,725
78,725
14,000
6,000
18,000
17,000
22,500
17,500
10,725
14,725
More than 15 years
27,500
23,500
92,725
78,725
808
722
93,533
79,447
Local Authority
Total
These loans mature as follows:
Add accrued interest
Total
12. Inventories
The Authority held a stock value of £399k at the start of the year. The value increased to
£983k as at 31st March 2016, mainly due to the grant from the Department for
Communities and Local Government (DCLG) of a smoke and CO2 alarm stock valued at
£703k, offset by movement in stock levels following the issue of stock items during the
year.
52
13. Debtors
Long Term Debtors
These are staff to whom loans have been made under the Authority’s essential and
casual car users’ scheme. Changes during the year were:
Car loans
Outstanding
at 31/3/15
Advanced
During year
Repaid
During the year
Outstanding
At 31/3/16
£000
£000
£000
£000
Car Loans
63
52
(39)
76
Short Term Debtors
These include:
31/3/2015
£000
31/3/2016
£000
Debtors
15,194
Government departments - DCLG
2,832
Government departments - other
334
Local authorities
263
Rents
5,059
218
2,579
26,479
(976)
25,503
31,094
0
1,265
118
Sundry debtors
7,721
Employee Loans
190
Payments in advance
2,656
Sub Total
43,044
Less: Provision for doubtful debts (Sundry
Debtors)
(1,104)
Total
41,940
Provision for Doubtful Debts
Following a review of the particular circumstances and profile of the Authority’s debtors,
the general provision of £976 brought forward from 2014/15 to safeguard against future
losses or non-recoveries has been increased, as at 31 March 2016, by £128k to £1,104k.
53
The aged debt analysis below shows that £1,414k (£1,430k 2014/15) of the total
outstanding debt is past its due date for payment. All outstanding debt shown below
has been allowed for in the Authority’s assessment of bad debt provision. The majority
of third party debts are being repaid in instalments. Unpaid Sundry debt relates mainly
to unpaid invoices relating to brigade attendance at Shut in lift and Automated Fire
Alarm incidents.
Aged debt
analysis
Greater
than
2 years
1-2
years
120-365
days
90-120
days
60-90
days
30-60
days
Total
£000
£000
£000
£000
£000
£000
£000
Sundry debt
75
343
311
75
127
238
1,169
MFB Act levy
17
1
3
0
0
0
21
Third party
claims
146
70
6
2
0
0
224
Total
238
414
320
77
127
238
1,414
14. Cash and Cash equivalents
Cash is represented as cash in hand and deposits with financial institutions repayable
without penalty on notice of not more than 24 hours. Cash equivalents are investments
that mature in 90 days or less from the date of acquisition and that are readily
convertible to known amounts of cash with insignificant risk of change in value. In the
Cash Flow Statement, cash and cash equivalents are shown net of bank overdrafts that
are repayable on demand and form an integral part of the authority’s cash management.
The balance of Cash and Cash equivalents is made up of the following elements:
Cash and Cash Equivalents
31/3/ 2015
£000
31/3/2016
£000
97
Cash held by the Authority
100
(2,209)
Bank Current Accounts
(1,922)
29,279
Short term deposits held on demand
59,854
0
27,167
Short term deposits with maturity of 3 months or
less
Total Cash and Cash Equivalents
54
0
58,032
15. Creditors
Creditors
31/3/2015
31/3/2016
£000
£000
7,144
46
Government Departments - HMRC
Government Departments - other
7,253
46
331
Local Authorities
1,332
11,760
Sundry creditors
15,263
484
Deferred income
16
4,888
12,869
37,522
Accumulated Absences
Receipts in advance
4,177
16,867
Total
44,954
16. Provisions
Provisions
Provisions are made where an event has taken place that gives the Authority a legal or
constructive obligation that probably requires settlement by a transfer of economic
benefits or service potential, and where a reliable estimate can be made of the amount of
the obligation. For instance the Authority may be involved in a court case that could
eventually result in the making of a settlement or the payment of compensation.
Provisions are charged as an expense to the appropriate service line in the
Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement in the year that the authority
becomes aware of the obligation, and are measured at the best estimate at the balance
sheet date of the expenditure required.
When payments are eventually made, they are charged to the provision carried in the
Balance Sheet. Estimated settlements are reviewed at the end of each financial year –
where it becomes less than probable that a transfer of economic benefits will now be
required (or a lower settlement than anticipated is made), the provision is reversed and
credited back to the relevant service.
Where some or all of the payment required to settle a provision is expected to be
recovered from another party (e.g. from an insurance claim), this is only recognised as
income for the relevant service if it is virtually certain that reimbursement will be
received if the Authority settles the obligation.
55
31/3/2015
Current
Long term
Total
£000
£000
£000
Summary of
provisions
2,695
0
2,695
334
0
334
540
900
1,440
92
0
92
0
1,576
1,576
0
146
146
3,661
2,622
6,283
31/3/2016
Current
Long term
Total
£000
£000
£000
Legal
1,945
0
1,945
Employees
1,468
0
1,468
666
1,109
1,775
Pensions
0
0
0
Property
1,466
431
1,897
146
0
146
5,691
1,540
7,231
Motor Insurance
Insurance Levy
Total
17. Usable Reserves
Usable reserves consist of the Authority’s general fund and a range of earmarked
reserves for specific purposes. Movements in the Authority’s usable reserves are
detailed in the Movement in Reserves Statement.
18. Unusable reserves
Accounting Policy
The Authority sets aside specific amounts as reserves for future policy purposes or to
cover contingencies. Reserves are created by appropriating amounts out of the General
Fund Balance in the Movement in Reserves Statement. When expenditure to be
financed from a reserve is incurred, it is charged to the appropriate service in that year to
score against the Surplus or Deficit on Provision of Services in the Comprehensive
Income and Expenditure Statement. The reserve is then appropriated back into the
General Fund Balance in the Movement in Reserves Statement so that there is no net
charge against council tax for the expenditure.
31/3/2015
Unusable Reserves
£000
31/3/2016
£000
Revaluation Reserve
(112,718)
(139,855)
Capital Adjustment Account
(127,869)
6,293,941
Pensions Reserve
5,626,354
(76,584)
4,887
6,082,389
Accumulated Absences Account
Total Unusable Reserves
56
4,177
5,389,944
Revaluation Reserve
The Revaluation Reserve contains the gains made by the Authority arising from
increases in the value of its Property, Plant and Equipment and Intangible Assets. The
balance is reduced when assets with accumulated gains are:
 Revalued downwards or impaired and the gains are lost
 Used in the provision of services and the gains are consumed through
depreciation, or
 Disposed of and the gains are realised.
Revaluation Reserve
2014/15
£000
£000
(78,523)
£000
Balance as at 1 April
Upward revaluation of assets
503
Downward revaluation of assets and impairment losses
not charged to the Surplus/Deficit on the Provision of
Services
1,048
444
1,492
(76,584)
£000
(76,584)
(56)
447
2015/16
(39,049)
410
Surplus or deficit on revaluation of non-current assets
not posted to the Surplus or Deficit on the Provision of
Services
(38,639)
Difference between fair value depreciation and
historical cost depreciation
1,023
Accumulated gains on assets sold or scrapped
1,482
Amount written off to the Capital Adjustment Account
Balance as at 31 March
2,505
(112,718)
The Reserve contains only revaluation gains accumulated since 1 April 2007, the date
that the Reserve was created. Accumulated gains arising before that date are
consolidated into the balance on the Capital Adjustment Account.
The Capital Adjustment Account absorbs the timing differences arising from the
different arrangements for accounting for the consumption of non-current assets and for
financing the acquisition, construction or enhancement of those assets under statutory
provisions. The Account is debited with the cost of acquisition, construction or
enhancement as depreciation, impairment losses and amortisations are charged to the
Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement (with reconciling postings from the
Revaluation Reserve to convert fair value figures to a historical cost basis). The Account
is credited with the amounts set aside by the Authority as finance for the costs of
acquisition, construction and enhancement.
57
The Account contains accumulated gains and losses on Investment Properties and gains
recognised on donated assets that have yet to be consumed by the Authority. The
Account also contains revaluation gains accumulated on Property, Plant and equipment
before 1 April 2007, the date that the Revaluation Reserve was created to hold such
gains.
2014/15
2014/15
£000
£000
(121,618)
6,684
2015/16
£000
£000
(139,855)
Balance at 1 April
Charges for depreciation and impairment of non current
and intangible assets
Amounts of non current assets de-recognised or written off
on the disposal or sale as part of the gain/loss on disposal to
the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Account
14,202
2015/16
22,235
5,295
20,886
27,530
Use of Capital Receipts to finance new capital expenditure
(9,719)
Capital grants and contributions credited to the
Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Account that have
been applied to the capital financing
Application of grants to capital financing from the Capital
Grants unapplied Account
Statutory provision for the financing of capital investments
charged against the General Fund
(9,659)
(13,850)
(5,895)
(39,123)
(139,855)
(8,527)
(652)
0
(6,365)
(15,544)
Balance at 31 March
(127,869)
Pensions Reserve
The Pensions Reserve absorbs the timing differences arising from the different
arrangements for accounting for post employment benefits and for funding benefits in
accordance with statutory provisions.
The Authority accounts for post employment benefits in the Comprehensive Income
and Expenditure Statement as the benefits are earned by employees accruing years of
service, updating the liabilities recognised to reflect inflation, changing assumptions and
investment returns on any resources set aside to meet the costs. However, statutory
arrangements require benefits earned to be financed as the Authority makes employer’s
contributions to pension funds or eventually pays any pensions for which it is directly
responsible. The debit balance on the Pensions Reserve therefore shows a substantial
shortfall in the benefits earned by past and current employees and the resources the
Authority has set aside to meet them. The statutory arrangements will ensure that
funding will have been set aside by the time the benefits come to be paid.
58
Pensions Reserve
2014/15
£000
5,338,725
2015/16
£000
Balance at 1 April
6,293,941
778,303
Actuarial gains or losses on pensions assets and liabilities
(780,246)
343,571
Reversal of items relating to retirement benefits debited or
credited to the Surplus or Deficit on the Provision of Services in
the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement
(166,658)
6,293,941
Employer’s pensions contributions and direct payments to
pensioners payable in the Year
Balance at 31 March
309,650
(196,991)
5,626,354
Short-term accumulating compensated absences refers to benefits that employees
receive as part of their contract of employment, entitlement to which is built up as they
provide services to the Authority. The most significant benefit covered by this heading is
holiday pay.
Employees build up entitlement to paid holidays as they work. Under the Code, the cost
of providing holidays and similar benefits is required to be recognised when employees
render service that increases their entitlement to future compensated absences. As a
result, the Authority is required to accrue for any annual leave earned but not taken at 31
March each year.
The Government has issued regulations that mean local authorities are only required to
fund holiday pay and similar benefits when they are used, rather than when employees
earn the benefits. Amounts are transferred to the Accumulated Absences Account,
which is included in Unusable Reserves on the Balance Sheet, until the benefits are
used.
The Accumulated Absences Account absorbs the differences that would otherwise arise
on the General Fund balance from accruing for compensated absences earned but not
taken in the year, e.g. annual leave entitlement carried forward at 31 March. Statutory
arrangements require that the impact on the General Fund Balance is neutralised by
transfers to or from the Account.
59
2014/15
£000
£000
5,306
2015/16
£000
Balance at 1 April
4,887
(5,306)
Settlement or cancellation of accrual made
at the end of the preceding year
(4,887)
4,887
Amounts accrued at the end of the current
year
4,177
Amount by which officer remuneration
charged to the Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure Statement on an accruals basis
(419)
is different from remuneration chargeable
in the year in accordance with statutory
requirements
4,887
£000
Balance at 31 March
(710)
4,177
19. Amounts Reported for Resource Allocation Decisions
The analysis of income and expenditure by service on the face of the Comprehensive
Income and Expenditure Statement is that specified by CIPFA’s Best Value Accounting
Code of Practice. However decisions about resource allocation are taken by the
Authority on the basis of budget reports analysed on a subjective rather than objective
format based on available funding through GLA grant. These reports are prepared on a
different basis from the accounting policies used in the financial statements. In
particular:
o No charges are made in relation to depreciation, revaluation and impairment
losses, or amortisation. These are charged to services in the Comprehensive Income
and Expenditure Statement. The reports do however include external financing costs,
which includes debt charges such as interest costs and Minimum Revenue Provision
to reflect the cost of repaying debt.
o The cost of retirement benefits is based on cash flows (payment of employer’s
pensions contributions) rather than current service cost of benefits accrued in the year
as defined by the Authority’s actuaries.
o expenditure on some support services is budgeted for centrally and not charged
to directorates.
Members of the Authority receive and approve a budget report in March for the
following financial year. During the year they receive quarterly financial and service
performance monitoring reports.
60
The following tables show the financial outturn in a subjective format as presented in
end of year outturn management reports. These figures have been reconciled back to
the Best Value format shown in the Authority’s Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
Statement. The tables also show comparative figures and reconciliation for the previous
year.
Management reports are available to view on the Authority’s website.
2015/16
Service Expenditure
Operational Staff
Annual
Budget
Outturn
Outturn
variance
£000
£000
£000
241,574
234,092
(7,482)
Other Staff
48,571
48,376
(195)
Employee Related
23,337
23,906
569
Pensions
21,601
20,681
(920)
Premises
33,301
31,831
(1,470)
Transport
17,302
16,237
(1,065)
26,422
25,825
(597)
1,969
2,136
167
9,978
10,011
33
Central Contingency
1,439
555
(884)
0
1,153
1,153
425,494
414,803
(10,691)
Income
(31,038)
(32,701)
(1,663)
394,456
382,102
(12,354)
1,238
1,238
0
245
1,199
954
395,939
384,539
(11,400)
(13,539)
(13,547)
(8)
(382,400)
(382,400)
0
0
(11,408)
(11,408)
Business Continuity
Financed by
Specific grants
GL Funding
Reconciliation of Income and Expenditure to Cost of Services in the
Net Service Expenditure in the above analysis
Amounts in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement not
reported to management in the analysis
Amounts included in the analysis not included in the Comprehensive Income
and Expenditure Statement
Net Cost of services in Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
61
Statement
2015/16
£000
382,102
(84,156)
(14,432)
283,514
The table below shows the amounts adjusted between management reporting analysis
and the Deficit on provision of Services shown in the Comprehensive Income and
Reconciliation to
subjective analysis
2015/16
Service
Analysis
£000
Fees, charges & other service
income
Amounts not
included in
analysis but
included in
CIES
Amounts
included in
analysis but
not included
in CIES
Net Cost of
Services
£000
£000
£000
Corporate
Amounts
TOTAL
£000
£000
(32,133)
0
0
(32,133)
0
(32,133)
0
0
0
0
(24,001)
(24,001)
(568)
0
568
0
(568)
(568)
0
(12,012)
0
(12,012)
(387,413)
(399,425)
Sub Total
(32,701)
(12,012)
568
(44,145)
(411,982)
(456,127)
Total Income
(32,701)
(12,012)
568
(44,145)
(411,982)
(456,127)
Staff Costs
283,621
966
0
284,587
0
284,587
Other Staff Related
23,906
(711)
0
23,195
7,994
31,189
Firefighters Pension
Expenditure
20,681
(89,000)
0
(68,319)
192,700
124,381
Premises
31,831
0
(2,923)
28,908
0
28,908
Transport
16,237
0
0
16,237
0
16,237
Supplies & Services
25,825
0
0
25,825
0
25,825
2,136
0
0
2,136
0
2,136
10,011
0
(12,077)
(2,066)
8,635
6,569
555
0
0
555
0
555
0
16,601
0
16,601
6,657
23,258
Total Expenditure
414,803
(72,144)
(15,000)
327,659
215,986
543,645
Surplus/deficit on the
provision of service
382,102
(84,156)
(14,432)
283,514
(195,996)
87,518
Gain on disposal of non current
assets
Interest & Investment Income
Government Grants &
Contributions
External Financing Costs
Contingency
Depreciation, Amortisation &
Impairments
62
Expenditure Statement.
2014/15
Service Expenditure
Operational Staff
Annual
Budget
Outturn
Outturn
variance
£000
£000
£000
247,424
241,680
(5,744)
Other Staff
48,906
48,462
(444)
Employee Related
22,807
23,991
1,184
Pensions
21,701
21,143
(558)
Premises
30,152
28,173
(1,979)
Transport
20,082
18,863
(1,219)
23,334
22,990
(344)
1,912
1,895
(17)
10,633
10,377
(256)
960
237
(723)
0
10,559
10,559
427,912
428,370
459
Income
(29,869)
(30,862)
(993)
398,042
397,508
(534)
Use of General Reserves
3,940
3,940
0
(3,271)
(3,272)
(1)
398,711
398,176
(535)
(9,536)
(8,063)
1,473
Revenue Support Grants
(138,838)
(138,838)
-
Retained Business Rates
(112,162)
(112,162)
-
Council Tax Requirement
(138,175)
(138,175)
0
938
Central Contingency
Business Continuity
Use of Earmarked Reserves
Financed by
Specific grants
Reconciliation of Income and Expenditure to Cost of Services in the
938
2014/15
£000
Net Service Expenditure in the above analysis
Amounts in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement not
reported to management in the analysis
Amounts included in the analysis not included in the Comprehensive Income
63
and Expenditure Statement
Net Cost of services in Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
Statement
397,508
(43,806)
(12,704)
340,998
The table below shows the amounts adjusted between management reporting analysis and
the Deficit on provision of Services shown in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
Accounts.
Reconciliation to
subjective analysis
2014/15
Service
Analysis
£000
Fees, charges & other service
income
Amounts not
included in
analysis but
included in
CIES
Amounts
included in
analysis but
not included
in CIES
Net Cost of
Services
£000
£000
£000
Corporate
Amounts
TOTAL
£000
£000
(30,484)
0
(25)
(30,509)
0
(30,509)
0
0
0
0
(10,409)
(10,409)
(377)
0
377
0
(377)
(377)
0
(8,202)
0
(8,202)
(399,300)
(407,502)
Total Income
(30,861)
(8,202)
352
(38,711)
(410,086)
(448,797)
Staff Costs
300,700
(302)
0
300,398
0
300,398
Other Staff Related
23,991
(418)
0
23,573
7,616
31,189
Firefighters Pension
Expenditure
21,143
(51,500)
0
(30,357)
221,100
190,743
Premises
28,173
0
(2,607)
25,566
0
25,566
Transport
18,863
0
0
18,863
0
18,863
Supplies & Services
22,990
0
0
22,990
0
22,990
1,895
0
0
1,895
0
1,895
10,377
0
(10,449)
(72)
7,162
7,090
237
0
0
237
0
237
0
16,616
0
16,616
1,957
18,573
Total Expenditure
428,369
(35,604)
(13,056)
379,709
237,835
617,544
Surplus/deficit on the
provision of service
397,508
(43,806)
(12,704)
340,998
(172,251)
168,747
Gain on disposal of non current
assets
Interest & Investment Income
Government Grants &
Contributions
External Financing Costs
Contingency
Depreciation, Amortisation &
Impairments
64
20.
Members’ Allowances
Corporate and Democratic Core costs include payments of £140,498 made during the year
under the Authority’s Scheme for Members’ Allowance payments. The payments were in
respect of basic and special responsibility allowances (SRA) to borough Members; basic
allowances to Mayoral appointees; special responsibility allowances to Assembly Members
who hold the position of Chairman and Vice-Chairman; and together with payments in respect
of travel and subsistence allowances, conference fees and Employers National Insurance
payments for all members made under the Local Authorities (Members’ Allowances) (England)
Regulations 2003. These are summarised in the table below.
2014/15
£
127,406
3,089
1,975
5,825
138,295
2015/16
£
Summary of Members’ Payments
Basic & Special Allowances
Travel & Subsistence
Conference Fees
Employers National Insurance
Total
125,750
3,926
5,395
5,427
140,498
The table below shows totals of Basic and SRA paid for LFEPA Members in the
period 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2016.
Member
Ali, Liaquat
Basic
SRA
£
£
Total
£
7,750.00
0.00
7,750.00
Arbour, Tony
0.00
0.00
0.00
Bacon, Gareth
0.00
26,000.00
26,000.00
Boff, Andrew
0.00
0.00
0.00
7,750.00
0.00
7,750.00
Cleverly, James
0.00
0.00
0.00
Copley, Tom
0.00
0.00
0.00
Dismore, Andrew
0.00
0.00
0.00
Fisher, Mike
1,636.10
0.00
1,636.10
Hall, Susan
7,750.00
0.00
7,750.00
Hayward Sarah
7,750.00
7,500.00
15,250.00
Heaster, Maurice
7,750.00
7,500.00
15,250.00
Hopkins Jack
7,750.00
0.00
7,750.00
Johnson, Darren
0.00
0.00
0.00
Knight, Stephen
0.00
0.00
0.00
Morrison, Pauline
7,750.00
0.00
7,750.00
Moulton, Oonagh
6,113.90
0.00
6,113.90
Shawcross Valerie
0.00
0.00
0.00
Twycross, Fiona
0.00
15,000.00
15,000.00
Whelton, Martin
7,750.00
0.00
7,750.00
69,750.00
56,000.00
125,750.00
Cartwright, David
Total
65
Councillor Tony Arbour, Councillor Stephen Knight, Mr Andrew Boff, Mr Tom Copley,
Mr Andrew Dismore and Mr Darren Johnson as Assembly members are prohibited the
payment of basic and special responsibility allowances under schedule 28 to the Greater
London Authority Act although the Greater London Authority Act 2007 enables the
Authority to pay the Chairman of the Authority (Mr Gareth Bacon) and Vice Chair of the
Authority (Dr Fiona Twycross) an allowance in respect of that office even though they
are Assembly members.
The changes to postholders receiving Basic and Special Responsibility Allowances
during 2015/2016 were as follows:
Councillor Mike Fisher, Mr James Cleverley and Ms Valerie Shawcross left the Authority
in June 2015. Councillor Oonagh Moulton, Mr Andrew Boff and Mr Tom Copley became
Authority Members in June 2015.
Mr Andrew Dismore resigned as Chair of Resources Committee in March 2016.
Independent Persons
In accordance with the Localism Act 2011 (the Act), arrangements must be put in place
for the appointment by the Authority of at least one Independent Person. The
Independent Person(s) views must be sought and taken into account by the Authority
before it makes any decision on a formal complaint against an elected Member that it has
decided to investigate. The Independent Person’s views may be sought by a member or
co-opted member of the Authority if that person’s behaviour is the subject of an
allegation, and may also be sought by the Authority in relation to an allegation it has not
yet decided to investigate.
The Authority agreed in June 2012 (FEP 1918A) to appoint Suzanne McCarthy and
Anthony Moss as Independent Persons for a two year period from 1 July 2012. The
Authority then agreed in June 2014 (FEP 2249) to extend the appointment of Suzanne
McCarthy and Anthony Moss as the Authority’s Independent Persons to 30 June 2016.
66
The table below shows totals of subsistence and travel paid for LFEPA Members and
independent members in the period 1 April 2015 to 31 March 2016.
Member
Subsistence
Claimed
Borough Members
£
Travel
Paid
Direct
£
Claimed
£
Total
Paid Direct
£
£
Ali, Liaquat
0.00
411.86
0.00
429.12
840.98
Fisher, Mike
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hopkins, Jack
0.00
198.70
0.00
234.58
433.28
Hall, Susan
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Hayward, Sarah
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Morrison, Pauline
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Moulton, Oonagh
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Whelton, Martin
0.00
361.95
0.00
234.94
596.89
Arbour, Tony
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Bacon, Gareth
0.00
229.70
0.00
128.88
358.58
Cleverly, James
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Copley, Tom
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Dismore, Andrew
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Johnson, Darren
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Knight, Stephen
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Shawcross, Valerie
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Twycross, Fiona
0.00
369.40
0.00
387.66
757.06
Cartwright, David
0.00
229.70
0.00
128.88
358.58
Heaster, Maurice
0.00
369.40
0.00
211.56
580.96
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Assembly Members
Mayoral Appointee
Independent Persons
McCarthy, Suzanne
Moss, Anthony
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
Total
0.00
2,170.71
0.00
1,755.62
3,926.33
67
21. Officer Remuneration
Senior Officers
Senior officers are defined by the CIPFA Code as those officers whose salary is £150k or
more, and those whose salary is £50k or more and who meet the criteria of statutory
chief officers as defined by Section 2(6) of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989,
as amended, and their direct reports.
The Authority approved a top management review at their meeting on 26 March 2015
that saw the deletion of the Deputy Commissioner and Strategic Advisor to the
Commissioner posts with effect from 31 March 2015. The new structure took effect
from 1 April 2015.
The remuneration paid to the Authority’s senior officers is as follows:
2015/16
Post title and
Name
Commissioner
R Dobson
2014/15
Post title and
Name
Salary
(including
fees and
allowances)
Expense
Allowance
s
Compensation
for Loss of
Office
Other
Compensation
payments
Total
Remuneration
(excluding
pensions)
Pension
Contributions
Total
Remuneration
(including
pensions)
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
101,058
0
0
0
101,058
0
101,058
Salary
(including
fees and
allowances)
Expense
Allowances
Compensation
for Loss of
Office
Other
Compensation
payments
Total
Remuneration
(excluding
pensions)
Pension
Contributions
Total
Remuneration
(including
pensions)
£
£
£
£
£
£
£
Commissioner
R Dobson
102,274
0
0
0
102,274
0
102,274
Deputy
Commissioner
R Dexter
Last day of
service
31/3/2015
166,370
314
342,509
15,000
524,193
25,274
549,467
68
Senior Officers Salary £50k per year or higher
2015/16
Post title
Directors
Acting Director of
Operational Resilience
and Training
(last day of service
th
13 January 2016)
Director of Safety &
Assurance
(w.e.f. 1st Dec 2015)
- Dave Brown
st
(w.e.f. 1 April 2015)
Director of Finance and
Contractual Services
and S127 Officer –
Sue Budden
Strategic Advisor to the
Commissioner
th
30 April 2015)
Head of Legal and
Demogratic Services &
Monitoring Officer
st
31 October 2015)
Head of Legal and
Demogratic Services &
Monitoring Officer
st
(w.e.f. 1 Nov 2016)
2014/15
Post title
Directors
Salary
(including fees
and
allowances)
Expense
Allowances
Compensation
for Loss of
Office
Total
Remuneration
(excluding
pensions)
Pension
Contributions
Total
Remuneration
(including
pensions)
£
£
£
£
£
£
122,422
25
93,077
215,524
16,842
232,366
48,000
296
0
48,296
10,416
58,712
155,691
623
0
156,314
33,785
190,099
158,093
392
0
158,485
23,556
182,041
7,269
0
7,492
14,761
1,083
15,844
56,685
0
0
56,685
0
56,685
69,853
0
0
69,853
0
69,853
Salary
(including
fees and
allowances)
Expense
Allowances
Compensation
for Loss of
Office
Total
Remuneration
(excluding
pensions)
Pension
Contributions
Total
Remuneration
(including
pensions)
£
£
£
£
£
£
Director of Operational
Resilience and Training
Last day of service
2 January 2015
123,005
2,193
0
125,198
24,461
149,659
Acting Director of
Operational Resilience
and Training
W.e.f. 3 January 2015
36,000
0
0
36,000
5,364
41,364
Director of Finance and
Contractual Services and
S127 Officer –
Sue Budden
153,489
324
0
153,813
22,870
176,683
Strategic Advisor to the
Commissioner
Last day of service
30 April 2015
87,229
0
62,338
149,567
12,997
162,564
69
Head of Legal and
Democratic Services
Monitoring Officer
85,630
0
0
85,630
0
85,630
The annual salary of senior officers is reviewed each year and the annual basic salary for
each of these senior officers as at 31 March 2015 and 31 March 2016 are shown below:
As at
31/3/15
As at
31/3/16
Salary
£
£
100,000 Commissioner
100,000
169,623 Deputy Commissioner *
-
152,028 Director of Operational Resilience and Training*
-
87,229 Strategic Advisor to the Commissioner*
153,488 Director of Finance and Contractual Services
158,093
-
Director of Safety and Assurance #
144,000
-
Director of Operations #
155,691
85,630 Head of Legal and Democratic Services
*Post deleted
-
#Post created
The Commissioner took a pension in October 2011 and is retained under a contractual
arrangement whereby no pension contributions are payable.
The Head of Legal and Democratic Services is retained by the Authority on an interim
basis via an agency arrangement and as such is not salaried. The agency costs are shown
for 2015/16 in the above table.
70
Employees whose remuneration (excluding employer’s pension contributions)
was £50k or higher
2014/15
Salary range
No
2015/16
No
62
£50,000 - £54,999
72
102
£55,000 - £59,999
71
77
£60,000 - £64,999
88
42
£65,000 - £69,999
43
28
£70,000 - £74,999
32
10
£75,000 - £79,999
6
8
£80,000 - £84,999
6
5
£85,000 - £89,999
10
4
£90,000 - £94,999
3
2
£95,000 - £99,999
1
1
£100,000 - £104,999
0
2
£105,000 - £109,999
1
3
£110,000 - £114,999
3
1
£115,000 - £119,999
0
0
£120,000 - £124,999
2
1
£125,000 - £129,999
0
1
£130,000 - £134,999
0
0
£135,000 - £139,999
0
0
£140,000 - £144,999
0
0
£145,999 - £149,999
0
0
£150,000 - £154,999
0
1
£155,000 - £159,999
0
The number of employees shown in each band in this table does not include those
senior employees whose remuneration is shown individually in the tables above.
71
22. Audit Fees
Audit Fees
2014/15
2015/16
£000
£000
101
Fees payable to appointed Auditor for External
Audit services
70
1
Audit Commission National Fraud initative fee
0
102
Total
70
23. Grant Income
Government Grants and Contributions Accounting Policy
Whether paid on account, by instalments or in arrears, government grants and third
party contributions and donations are recognised as due to the Authority when there is
reasonable assurance that:
 The Authority will comply with the conditions attached to the payments, and
 The grants/contributions will be received.
Amounts recognised as due to the Authority are not credited to the Comprehensive
Income and Expenditure Statement until conditions attached to the grant or contribution
have been satisfied. Conditions are stipulations that specify the future economic benefits
or service potential embodied in the asset acquired using the grant or contribution are
required to be consumed by the recipient as specified, or future economic benefits or
service potential must be returned to the transferor.
Monies advanced as grants and contributions for which conditions have not been
satisfied are carried in the Balance Sheet as creditors. When conditions are satisfied, the
grant or contribution is credited to the relevant service line (attributable revenue grants
and contributions) or Taxation and Non-Specific Grant Income (non-ringfenced revenue
grants and all capital grants) in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement.
Where capital grants are credited to the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
Statement, they are reversed out of the General Fund Balance in the Movement in
Reserves Statement. Where the grant has yet to be used to finance capital expenditure,
it is posted to the Capital Grants Unapplied reserve. Where it has been applied, it is
posted to the Capital Adjustment Account. Amounts in the Capital Grants Unapplied
reserve are transferred to the Capital Adjustment Account once they have been applied
to fund capital expenditure.
72
The Authority credited the following grants, contributions and donations to the
Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement in 2015/16:
Credited to Taxation and
Non-Specific Grant
Income
2014/15
Source of funding
£000
2015/16
£000
389,175
466
4,921
0
4,550
188
399,300
GLA Grant
Greater London Authority
PFI Grant
CLG
3,732
Fire Capital Grant
CLG
0
Other Capital Grants
CLG
1,237
Donated Assets
CLG
0
Chargemaster
5
Contribution to capital
Total
382,400
387,374
Credited to services
2,564
Fire Control Grant
CLG
2,664
4,525
New Dimensions & USAR
Grant
CLG
4,114
New Risks grant
CLG
209
0
National Operational
Guidance
CLG
0
Other Revenue Grants
CLG
883
232
3,195
327
Fired Up Grant
EU
196
468
European Unified Rescue
EU
0
35
Vehicle development
CLG
0
23
Access to work
DWP
14
8,174
Revenue Grant income
274
Revenue Contributions
received
8,448
11,275
Various
Total
374
11,649
CLG - Department for Communities and Local Government PFI - Private Finance Initiative
USAR - Urban Search And Rescue, DWP Department for Works and Pension.
The grants received by the Authority are non-ring fenced and therefore these are
unconditional. The 2015/16 £382.4m GLA grant ( £382.4m 2014/15) shown in the table
above is now comprised of three elements, CLG grant funding in the form of Retained
Business rates £114.8m (£112.2m 2014/15) and Revenue Support Grant £129.4m
(£138.8m 2014/15), with precepts collected by the GLA totalling £138.2m (£138.2m
2014/15).
73
24. Related Party Transactions
Mayor of London and the Greater London Authority (GLA)
The London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) is part of a unique
government arrangement of a number of organisations operating under the umbrella of
the Greater London Authority (GLA), which includes this Authority, the core GLA, the
Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime, the Metropolitan Police Authority and Transport
for London.
The Mayor appoints all LFEPA’s 17 Members and chooses one of them to be the
Chairman of the Authority. Eight are nominated from the London Assembly, seven from
the London Boroughs and two Mayoral appointees.
The Mayor sets the budget for LFEPA and provides grant funding to support it. The
London Assembly can amend the Mayor’s budget when two thirds of the twenty-five
members agree. The Assembly is also able to summon members of LFEPA to answer
questions at Assembly meetings.
Central Government
The Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) has significant
influence over the general operations of the Authority – it is responsible for providing
the statutory framework within which the Authority operates and provides the majority
of its funding via the GLA in the form of various grants. As at 31st March 2016, sums due
to and from central government departments are shown in notes 13 and 15. Grants
received from government departments are set out in note 23.
Members/Officers
Members of the Authority have direct control over the Authority’s financial and
operating policies. The total of members allowances paid in 2015/16 is shown in Note
20.
A number of Authority officers are members of the London Fire Brigade Welfare Fund
Executive Council. During the year the authority paid an annual donation of £3.7k
(£3.9k 2014/15) to the London Fire Brigade Welfare Fund. One senior officer is a coopted Director to the board of the Chief Fire Officers Association. Three senior officers
are unpaid Directors of the LFB Enterprises Ltd, the wholly owned Authority trading
company.
No Authority Member and no other member of senior management has declared that
during the year they, or their close relations or members of the same household have
undertaken any declarable transactions neither with related parties nor with the
Authority. This disclosure note has been prepared on the basis of specific declarations
obtained in April 2016, in respect of related party transactions. The Authority has
prepared this disclosure in accordance with its current interpretation and understanding
of CIPFA’s Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the UK. The Code’s
provisions are based on International Accounting Standard 24 (IAS24).
74
25. Capital Expenditure and Capital Financing
In 2015/16, total spending on the capital programme for tangible and intangible
assets was £43.9m, of which £9.2m was capital expenditure incurred by the
Authority and £34.7m under the PFI arrangement. The spend included the rebuilding
and modernising of fire stations and other buildings (£41.1m), upgrading equipment
(£2.6m) and the purchase of fleet vehicles (£0.2m). Capital expenditure on Authority
assets (£43.9m) is to be financed in accordance with the Prudential Code,
Government capital grant (£0.7m), Capital receipts (£8.5m) and finance lease
borrowing (£34.7m).
2014/15
£000
140,280
26,562
10,635
6,667
(1)
Capital expenditure and financing:
10,635
3,000
(8,894)
0
Opening Capital Financing Requirement
Tangible Operational Assets
Tangible Operational Assets under PFI Property Lease
Tangible Non Operational Assets
Intangible Assets
Sources of finance
Government grants and other contributions
Minimum Revenue Provision
Other movements
Closing Capital Financing Requirement
Explanation of movements in year
Other long term liability PFI and finance lease
Borrowing from PWLB & Local Authorities in year
Increase/(decrease) in underlying need to borrow
Other movements
4,741
Increase/(decrease) in Capital Financing Requirement
(33,228)
(5,894)
0
145,021
2015/16
£000
145,021
4,265
34,727
2,576
1,996
(9,179)
(6,365)
(39)
173,002
34,727
0
(6,707)
(39)
27,981
The table above shows the movement in the Authority’s Capital Financing
Requirement (CFR) showing expenditure in year and sources of funding applied.
As at 31st March 2016 the Authority is committed a total of £12.3m . £10.4m is
replacement of fire appliances, with £1.9m various property projects
The capital programme approved by Members on 17 March 2016 (FEP2574)
included a total forecast spend of £39.5m in 2016/17, £56m in 2017/18 and £31m in
2018/19.
75
26.
Other Long term Liabilities
Other long term liabilities shown in the balance sheet comprise the long term
elements of the vehicle PFI and Merton Control Finance lease, with deferred credits
and the pensions liability, details of which are shown in the notes that follow.
Other Long Term Liabilities
31/3/15
31/3/16
£000
£000
Note
Long Term PFI Properties
10,095
43,755
27
Long term Finance Leases
18,425
18,425
27
3,980
3,647
6,293,941
5,626,354
6,326,441
5,692,181
Deferred Credit
Pensions Liability
Total
30
27. Service Concession Arrangements, Finance and Operating Leases
Leases
Leases are classified as finance leases where the terms of the lease transfer substantially
all the risks and rewards incidental to ownership of the property, plant and equipment
from the lessor to the lessee. All other leases are classified as operating leases.
Where a lease covers both land and buildings, the land and buildings elements are
considered separately for classification.
Arrangements that do not have the legal status of a lease but convey a right to use an
asset in return for payment are accounted for under this policy where fulfilment of the
arrangement is dependent on the use of specific assets.
The Authority as a Lessee
Finance leases
Property, plant and equipment held under finance leases is recognised on the Balance
Sheet at the commencement of the lease at its fair value measured at the lease’s
inception (or the present value of the minimum lease payments, if lower). The asset
recognised is matched by a liability for the obligation to pay the lessor. Initial direct costs
of the Authority are added to the carrying amount of the asset. Premiums paid on entry
into a lease are applied to writing down the lease liability. Contingent rents are charged
as expenses in the periods in which they are incurred.
76
Lease payments are apportioned between:
 A charge for the acquisition of the interest in the property, plant or equipment applied to write down the lease liability, and
 A finance charge (debited to the Financing and Investment Income and
Expenditure in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement).
Property, plant and equipment recognised under finance leases is accounted for using
the policies applied generally to such assets, subject to depreciation being charged over
the lease term if this is shorter than the asset’s estimated useful life (where ownership of
the asset does not transfer to the authority at the end of the lease period).
The Authority is not required to raise funding to cover depreciation or revaluation and
impairment losses arising on leased assets. Instead, a prudent annual contribution is
made from revenue funds towards the deemed capital investment in accordance with
statutory requirements. Depreciation and revaluation and impairment losses are
therefore substituted by a revenue contribution in the General Fund Balance, by way of
an adjusting transaction with the Capital Adjustment Account in the Movement in
Reserves Statement for the difference between the two.
Private Finance Initiative (PFI) and Similar Contracts
Property PFI Scheme
The Authority has entered into a PFI agreement with Blue3 (London) Ltd to design,
build, finance and maintain nine new fire stations. The PFI project will see the Brigade
receive £51.5m at today’s prices to replace and make major improvements to
Dagenham, Dockhead, Leytonstone, Mitcham, Old Kent Road, Orpington, Plaistow,
Purley and Shadwell fire stations. Eight of the stations are being completely re-built on
their existing sites and one station, Mitcham, will be built on a new site. PFI provides a
way of funding major capital investments, without the public purse having to find all the
cost up front. This £51.5m is extra money for the Brigade which is indexed linked to
cover for inflation and is payable over a twenty-five year period
The Authority will carry the assets used under the contract on its Balance Sheet as part
of Property, Plant and Equipment. As Non-current assets recognised on the Balance
Sheet they will be depreciated in the same way as property, plant and equipment owned
by the Authority.
The contract runs for a period of 25 years and in return the Brigade will pay a regular
charge on the property, known as the Unitary Charge. Once the agreed repayment
period ends, the fire station buildings will be returned to the Brigade in a pre-agreed
and acceptable condition, although the buildings always remain the Brigade’s
property.
During 2015/16, six new fire stations opened under the arrangement, Dagenham,
Leytonstone, Orpington, Plaistow, Purley and Shadwell. A finance lease liability was
raised for these six properties (£34.7m) during the year. The carrying value of these
assets on the balance sheet amount to £31.1m.
77
The amounts paid under the PFI finance lease in 2015/16 is shown below.
Finance Lease
Property PFI
2015/16
Unitary
Charge
Deferred
liability
£000
£000
Income &
Expenditure
Account
£000
Opening balance as at 1 Apr 2015
10,623
New finance lease liability in year
34,727
Principal sum paid in year
476
Interest
(476)
1,591
1,591
2
2
Contingent rentals
Operational expenses
505
Balance as at 31 March 2016
505
2,574
44,874
2,098
The amounts paid under the PFI finance lease in 2014/15 is shown below.
Finance Lease
Property PFI
2014/15
Unitary
Charge
Deferred
liability
£000
£000
Opening balance as at 1 Apr 2014
Income &
Expenditure
Account
£000
0
New finance lease liability in year
10,635
Principal sum paid in year
12
Interest
60
60
0
0
Operational expenses
23
23
Balance as at 31 March 2015
95
Contingent rentals
(12)
10,623
83
The table below shows the forecast future payments due under the property PFI
arrangement.
PFI Property
Future Liabilities
Within 1
Year
£000
Lease rental
liabilities
Operating Costs
Interest Costs
Contingent Rentals
Total
Within 2 to
5 Years
£000
Within 6 to
10 Years
Within 11
to 15 Years
Within 16
to 20 Years
Within 21
to 25 Years
£000
£000
£000
£000
1,119
4,996
7,551
8,364
11,803
16,570
991
4,596
7,347
10,842
11,884
11,920
3,320
12,609
13,703
11,056
7,841
3,112
12
145
273
(215)
(152)
264
5,442
22,346
28,874
30,047
31,376
31,866
78
Finance Leases
The Authority holds two finance lease as at 31 March 2016, one is for its control
centre at Merton and the other is for the fire stations being provided under the PFI
contract.
The Authority entered into a 25 year finance lease arrangement (valued on the balance
sheet at £12.6m) for the provision of its control function at Merton in March 2011. The
building became operational in February 2012, when control functions transferred
from the Authority’s site at 2 Greenwich View to Merton. Lease payments of £2,923k
were paid during 2015/16 (£2,607k 2014/15). The table below shows the future
payments under the lease agreement.
Merton Control
Centre Finance Lease
Total value of
minimum lease
payments
as at 31/3/15
Present value of
minimum lease
payments
as at 31/3/15
Total value of
minimum lease
payments
as at 31/3/16
Present value of
minimum lease
payments
as at 31/3/16
£000
£000
£000
£000
Not later than one year
2,599
1,341
2,919
1,276
Later than one year and
not later than five years
11,676
4,052
11,697
3,439
Later than five years
54,781
4,634
51,841
3,971
69,056
10,027
66,457
8,686
Total
Total value of
minimum lease
payments
as at 31/3/15
PFI Property
Finance Lease
Present value of
minimum lease
payments
as at 31/3/15
Total value of
minimum lease
payments
as at 31/3/16
Present value of
minimum lease
payments
as at 31/3/16
£000
£000
£000
£000
2,316
2,316
4,439
4,439
Later than one year and
not later than five years
17,680
14,995
17,605
14,953
84,362
33,876
79,999
33,116
104,358
51,187
102,043
52,508
Total
79
Operating Leases
The Authority as a Lessee
Rentals paid under operating leases are charged to the Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure Statement as an expense of the services benefiting from use of the leased
property, plant or equipment. Charges are made on a straight-line basis over the life of
the lease, even if this does not match the pattern of payments (e.g. there is a rent free
period at the commencement of the lease).
The Authority as a Lessor
Where the Authority grants an operating lease over a property or an item of plant or
equipment, the asset is retained in the Balance Sheet. Rental income is credited to the
Other Operating Expenditure line in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
Statement. Credits are made on a straight-line basis over the life of the lease, even if this
does not match the pattern of payments (e.g. there is a premium paid at the
commencement of the lease). Initial direct costs incurred in negotiating and arranging
the lease are added to the carrying amount of the relevant asset and are charged as an
expense over the lease term on the same basis as rental income.
The following table shows a breakdown of the Authority’s current operating leases as
at 31 March 2016 with future sums committed.
The future minimum lease payments payable under non-cancellable leases in future
years are:
As at
31/3/2015
£000
Vehicles,
Plant and
equipment
As at
31/3/2015
£000
As at
31/3/2016
£000
Vehicles,
Plant and
equipment
As at
31/3/2016
£000
3,353
2,172
3,421
2,188
Later than one year and not
later than five years
12,319
4,460
12,731
2,274
21,124
0
18,102
0
36,796
6,632
34,254
4,462
Operating lease payments
Total
Land and
Buildings
Land and
Buildings
The Authority had no subleases or contingent rents during the reporting period.
80
28. Termination Benefits
Accounting Policy
Termination benefits are amounts payable as a result of a decision by the Authority to
terminate an employee’s employment before the normal retirement date or an
employee’s decision to accept voluntary redundancy. They are charged on an accruals
basis to the appropriate service in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure
Statement when the Authority is demonstrably committed either to the termination of
the employment of an employee or group of employees, or to making an offer to
encourage voluntary redundancy.
Where termination benefits involve the enhancement of pensions, statutory provisions
require the General Fund balance to be charged with the amount payable by the
Authority to the pension fund or pensioner in the year, not the amount calculated
according to the relevant accounting standards. In the Movement in Reserves
Statement, appropriations are required to and from the Pensions Reserve to remove the
notional debits and credits for pension enhancement termination benefits and replace
them with debits for the cash paid to the pension fund and pensioners and any such
amounts payable but unpaid at the year-end.
The Authority terminated the contracts of 10 employees in 2015/16, incurring liabilities
of £0.9m. 10 support service staff were made redundant in 2015/16, comprising of 4
officers from the Deputy Commissioner’s Directorate, 2 officers from the Directorate of
Operational Resilience and Training and 4 from the Directorate of Finance and
Contractual Services.
Exit package
cost band
£000
Number of
compulsory
redundancies
Number of other
agreed departures
Total number of exit
packages
Total cost of exit
packages
in each band - £000
2014/15
2015/16
2014/15
2015/16
2014/15
2015/16
2014/15
2015/16
0 – 20
0
0
3
0
3
0
46
0
20 – 40
0
0
4
3
4
3
101
94
40 – 60
0
0
2
2
2
2
96
92
60 – 80
0
0
1
0
1
0
62
0
80 – 100
0
0
4
1
4
1
353
85
100 – 150
0
0
0
2
0
2
0
266
Over 150
0
0
1
2
1
2
343
353
0
0
15
10
15
10
1,001
890
TOTAL
81
29. Defined Benefit Pension Schemes
Post-employment Benefits – Accounting Policy
Post-employment benefits can include pensions, life insurance or medical care. Postemployment benefit plans are classified as either defined contribution plans or defined
benefit plans. The Authority has no post-employment benefit plans other than pensions.
Pensions are provided for all full-time employees under the requirements of statutory
regulations. In certain circumstances these regulations extend to cover part-time
employees. The schemes in operation are:
 The 1992 Firefighters’ Pension Scheme, The 2006 Firefighters Pension
Scheme, and the 2015 Firefighters Pension Scheme
These are unfunded schemes, which are administered by the Authority in accordance
with regulations laid down by the Department for Communities and Local
Government (CLG). These schemes are administered under contract by the London
Pensions Fund Authority (LPFA) on behalf of the Authority. For such schemes as
there are no investment assets, IAS19 requires recognition of the liability and pension
reserve in the Balance Sheet and transactions in the Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure Statement for movements in the liability and reserve. The last actuarial
review for IAS19 purposes was dated April 2016.
 Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS)
This scheme is funded by employer and employee contributions to the London
Pension Fund Authority’s Pension Fund, which provides members with defined
benefits related to pay and service. The contribution rate is determined by the Fund’s
Actuary based on triennial actuarial valuations, the last review, impacting on 2012/13,
being at 31 March 2010. Under Pension Fund Regulations, contribution rates are set
to meet all of the overall liabilities of the Fund. The last actuarial review for IAS19
purposes was dated April 2016.
Post employment benefits have been included in the Authority’s accounts to comply
with accounting standard IAS 19 - Employee Benefits. The International Accounting
Standards Board (IASB) issued a new version of IAS19 in June 2011. This revised
standard applies to financial years starting on or after 1 January 2013.
Consequently, the following tables and disclosures have been presented in the revised
formats as required by the CIPFA Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting
2015/16.
82
Actuarial figures are included in the Authority’s accounts on the following
basis;
Liabilities are discounted to their value at current prices, using a discount rate based on
the indicative rate of return on a high quality corporate bond.
The assets of the Fund (LGPS only) attributable to the Authority are included in the
Balance Sheet at their fair value:
 Quoted securities – current bid price
 Unquoted securities – professional estimate
 Unitised securities – current bid price
 Property – market value
The change in the net pensions liability is analysed into seven components:
 current service cost – the increase in liabilities as a result of years of service earned
this year allocated in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement to the
services for which the employees worked
 past service cost – the increase in liabilities arising from current year decisions
whose effect relates to years of service earned in earlier years – debited to the
Surplus or Deficit on Provision of Services in the Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure Statement as part of Non Distributed Costs
 interest cost – the expected increase in the present value of liabilities during the
year as they move one year closer to being paid –debited to the Financing and
Investment Income and Expenditure line in the Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure Statement
 expected return on assets (LGPS only) – the annual investment return on the fund
assets attributable to the Authority, based on an average of the expected long term
return – charged to the Pension Reserve as Other Comprehensive Income and
Expenditure.
 gains/losses on settlements and curtailments – the result of actions to relieve the
Authority of liabilities or events that reduce the expected future service or accrual of
benefits of employees – debited to the Surplus or Deficit on the Provision of Services
in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement as part of Non Distributed
Costs
 actuarial gains and losses – changes in the net pensions liability that arise because
events have not coincided with assumptions made at the last actuarial valuation or
because the actuaries have updated their assumptions – debited to Pensions Reserve
 contributions paid to the Fund - cash paid as employer’s contributions to the
pension fund in settlement of liabilities; not accounted for as an expense.
83
In relation to retirement benefits, statutory provisions require the General Fund balance
to be charged with the amount payable by the Authority to the pension fund in the year
or directly to pensioners in the year, not the amount calculated according to the relevant
accounting standards. In the Movement in Reserves Statement, this means that there
are appropriations to and from the Pensions Reserve to remove the notional debits and
credits for retirement benefits and replace them with debits for the cash paid to the
pension fund and pensioners and any amounts payable to the fund but unpaid at the
year-end. The negative balance that arises on the Pension Reserve thereby measures the
beneficial impact to the General Fund of being required to account for retirement
benefits on the basis of cash flows rather than as benefits are earned by employees.
Transactions Relating to Post-employment Benefits
The Authority recognises the cost of retirement benefits in the reported cost of services
when they are earned by employees, rather than when the benefits are eventually paid
as pensions. However the charge the Authority is required to make against council tax
funding is based on the cash payable in the year, so the real cost of post
employment/retirement benefits is reversed out of the General Fund via the Movement
in Reserves Statement. The following transactions have been made in the
Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement and the General Fund via the
Movement in Reserves Statement during the year:
84
The firefighter pension actuary figures shown in the following tables are the combined
figures for the 1992, 2006 and 2015 schemes.
Comprehensive Income and
Cost of Services
Local Government
Pension Scheme
Firefighter’s
Pension Schemes
2015/16
2014/15
2015/16
2014/15
£000
£000
£000
£000
10,423
8,758
97,500
105,000
933
520
100
200
7,594
400
7,616
377
192,700
0
221,100
0
19,350
17,271
290,300
326,300
10,847
(5,833)
0
0
 Actuarial (gains) and losses arising on
changes in demographic assumptions
0
0
(14,400)
0
 Actuarial (gains) and losses arising on
changes in financial assumptions
(34,325)
55,911
(552,300)
725,000
(568)
(175)
(189,500)
3,400
0
0
0
0
(4,696)
67,174
(465,900)
1,054,700
 Reversal of net charges made to the
Surplus or Deficit for the Provision of
Services for post-employment benefits in
accordance with the Code
(19,350)
(17,271)
(290,300)
(326,300)
Employers’ contributions payable to scheme
9,426
9,075
186,500
156,500
Benefits paid directly to beneficiaries
1,065
1,083
0
0
(8,859)
(7,113)
(103,800)
(169,800)
Current service cost
Past service costs/(gain)
Financing and Investment Income and
Expenditure
Net Interest expense
Administrating expenses
Total post-employment Benefit charged to
the Surplus or Deficit on the Provision of
Services
Other post-employment benefits charged to
the Surplus or Deficit on the Provision of
Services
Re-measurement of the net defined benefit
liability comprising:
 Return on plan assets (excluding the
amount included in the net interest
expense)
Experience (gains) and losses on defined
benefit obligation
Other
Total Post-employment Benefit Charged to
the Comprehensive Income and
Actual amount charged against the General
Fund Balance for pensions in the year:
85
Membership
of Schemes
LGPS
1992/2015 FPS
2006 FPS
Number
Number
Number
2015/16
2014/15
Actives
928
928
3,569
3,635
1,115
1,103
Deferred
Pensioners
687
687
684
669
278
257
Pensioners
1,265
1,265
8,249
8,342
9
9
Unfunded
pensioners
309
313
Injury Pensioners
-
Membership
of Schemes
2015/16
2014/15
-
-
2,240
2015/16
2014/15
-
-
2,513
1
1
LGPS
1992/2015 FPS
2006 FPS
Average Age
Average Age
Average Age
2015/16
2014/15
2015/16
2014/15
2015/16
2014/15
Actives
48
48
50
46
50
32
Deferred
Pensioners
48
48
47
48
56
36
Pensioners
71
71
62
61
49
61
Unfunded
pensioners
73
72
-
-
-
-
-
-
65
64
34
33
Injury Pensioners
The data for the firefighter pension scheme and the new firefighter pension schemne
(2006) included the protection status of each active member. If the member was
unprotected or had tapered protection due to end prior to 31 March 2016, then they
were assumed to be a member of the 2015 scheme from April 2015 to 31 March 2016
for the purposes of the calculations.
The service cost for firefighters and support staff has been allocated to the
Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement based on individual levels of staff
pensionable pay for the year. Details of the Authority’s accrued liability in respect of
both the firefighters’ and the Local Government Pension Schemes are given below.
Further information in respect of the Local Government Pension Scheme can be found in
the Pension Fund’s Annual Report, which is available upon request from:
London Pension Fund Authority
169 Union Street
London SE1 0LL
86
30. Pensions – Retirement benefits
In accordance with the requirements of IAS19 the Authority has to disclose its share
of assets and liabilities related to pension schemes for its employees. As explained
above the Authority participates in two firefighter schemes, which are unfunded,
and the Local Government Pension Scheme for other employees, which is
administered by the London Pension Fund Authority (LPFA). In addition the
Authority has made arrangements for the payment of added years to certain retired
employees outside the provisions of the schemes.
The amount included in the Balance Sheet arising from the Authority’s obligation in
respect of its defined benefit plans is as follows:
LFEPA Pension obligations
Local Government Pension
Scheme
Firefighter’s
Pension Schemes
2015/16
2014/15
2015/16
2014/15
£000
£000
£000
£000
Present value of the defined
benefit obligation
Fair Value of plan assets
Net
Present Value of unfunded
obligation
Net liability arising from
defined benefit obligation
463,730
480,104
0
0
(263,343)
(266,418)
0
0
200,387
213,686
0
0
19,367
21,255
5,406,600
6,509,000
219,754
234,941
5,406,600
6,059,000
Reconciliation of the Movements in the Fair Value of Scheme (Plan) Assets
Scheme
LFEPA
Opening fair value of scheme assets
Interest Income
2015/16
2014/15
£000
£000
266,418
251,635
8,782
11,029
(10,847)
5,833
0
0
10,491
10,158
2,649
2,613
(13,750)
(15,465)
0
992
(400)
(377)
263,343
266,418
Re-measurement gain /(loss):
 The return on plan assets, excluding the amount included in
the net interest expense
 Other
Contributions from employer
Contributions from employees into the scheme
Benefits paid
Settlement prices received/(paid)
Other
Closing fair value of scheme assets
The Firefighters Pension schemes are unfunded schemes and as such have no assets.
87
Reconciliation of present Value of the Scheme Liabilities
(Defined Benefit Obligation)
Funded Liabilities
Scheme
Unfunded Liabilities
Firefighter’s
Pension Schemes
2015/16
2014/15
2015/16
2014/15
£000
£000
£000
£000
501,359
429,560
6,059,000
5,160,800
Current service cost
10,423
8,758
97,500
105,000
Interest costs
16,376
18,645
192,700
221,100
2,649
2,613
22,400
24,600
0
0
(14,400)
0
(34,325)
55,911
(552,300)
725,000
(568)
(175)
(189,500)
3,400
0
0
0
0
(1,065)
(1,083)
0
0
933
111
100
200
(12,685)
(14,382)
(208,900)
(181,100)
0
1,401
0
0
483,097
501,359
5,406,600
6,059,000
Opening Balance at 1 April
Contributions from scheme
participants
Re-measurement (gains) and
Losses:
 Actuarial gains/losses
arising from changes in
demographic assumptions
 Actuarial gains/losses
arising from changes in
financial assumptions
 Experience loss/(gain) on
defined benefit obligation
 Other
Unfunded pension payments
Past service cost
Benefits paid
Liabilities extinguished on
settlements
Closing balance at
31 March
88
Local Government Pension Scheme assets comprised:
Fair Value of Fund Assets
2015/16
Equities - Seggregated
£000
Basic Materials
Restated
2014/15
£000
3,160
2,931
Communications
10,270
5,595
Consumer
47,138
22,379
1,053
1,332
Financial
15,011
7,460
Industrial
15,537
9,857
7,110
4,263
Equities
3,160
6,660
Bonds
6,584
53,550
Pooled funds
6,320
0
Cash
1,843
2,131
527
0
Fixed Income / Investment funds & units trusts
14,747
41,561
Private Equity
22,911
20,248
LDI*
26,598
19,981
0
2,398
8,954
0
Hedge funds
13,957
12,522
Infrastructure
14,221
13,054
Property Fund
9,744
7,460
Commodity Funds
1,053
2,398
Cash at bank
35,552
31,171
Derivatives - forwards
(2,107)
(533)
263,343
266,418
Energy
Technology
Diversified Fund
Alternative assets
Government
Alternative debt
Total
*As part of the investment strategy the Fund has a liability driven investment (LDI) portfolio
managed by Insight investment. The portfolio uses RPI Swaps to hedge 25% of the Fund's
cashflow liabilty against inflation.
89
Rate of return on fund assets
Based on the above the Authority’s share of Fund assets is approximately 6%.
Based on a bid value to bid value basis the actuary has estimated that the return on
the LGPS fund assets for the year to 31 March 2016 to be -1%. The expected return
on assets has been replaced with a single net interest cost, which will effectively set
the expected return equal to the discount rate.
Basis for Estimating Assets and Liabilities
The Firefighter pension schemes have been valued by Hymans Robertson LLP and the
LGPS fund liabilities have been valued by Barnett Waddingham
Valuation Method
For both the LGPS and Firefighters’ schemes liabilities have been assessed on an
actuarial basis using the projected unit credit method, i.e. an estimate of the pensions
that will be payable in future years dependent on assumptions about mortality rates,
salary levels, etc.
The main assumptions used in the calculations are:
Financial Assumptions
The financial assumptions used for the purposes of the IAS19 calculations are as
follows:
Local Government
Pension Scheme
Assumption as at
Firefighter Pension
Scheme
31/3/16
31/3/15
31/3/16
31/3/15
RPI increases
3.2%
3.2%
3.2%
3.3%
CPI increases
2.3%
2.4%
2.2%
2.6%
Salary increases
4.1%
4.2%
3.2%
3.8%
Pensions increase
2.3%
2.4%
2.2%
2.8%
Discount rate
3.6%
3.3%
3.5%
4.3%
These assumptions are set with reference to market conditions as at 31 March 2016.
90
Actual and future projected employers contribution rates
Employers Contribution
2015/16
2016/17
£000
£000
LGPS
10,491
9,361
Firefighters Schemes
28,937
28,324
TOTAL
39,428
37,685
Local Government Pension Scheme
The Administering Authority for the Fund is the London Pensions Fund Authority.
The LPFA Board oversees the management of the Fund whilst the day to day fund
administration is undertaken by a number of teams within the administering
authority. Where appropriate some functions are delegated to the Fund’s
professional advisers.
As Administering Authority to the Fund, the London Pensions Fund Authority, after
consultation with the Fund Actuary and other relevant parties, is responsible for the
preparation and maintenance of the Funding Strategy Statement and the Statement
of Investment Principles. These should be amended when appropriate based on the
Fund’s performance and funding.
Contributions are set every 3 years as a result of the actuarial valuation of the Fund
required by the Regulations. An actuarial valuation of the Fund was carried out as at
31 March 2016 and set contributions for the period from 1 April 2017 to 31 March
2020. There are no minimum funding requirements in the LGPS but the
contributions are generally set to target a funding level of 100% using the actuarial
valuation assumptions.
Should the Authority as an employer decide to withdraw from the scheme , on
withdrawal from the plan, a cessation valuation would be carried out in accordance
with Regulation 64 of the LGPS Regulations 2013 which would determine the
termination contribution due by the Authority, on a set of assumptions deemed
appropriate by the Fund Actuary.
In general, participating in a defined benefit pension scheme means that the
Authority as an employer is exposed to a number of risks:
 Investment risk. The Fund holds investment in asset classes, such as equities,
which have volatile market values and while these assets are expected to provide
real returns over the long-term, the short-term volatility can cause additional
funding to be required if a deficit emerges.
 Interest rate risk. The Fund’s liabilities are assessed using market yields on
high quality corporate bonds to discount the liabilities. As the Fund holds assets
91
such as equities the value of the assets and liabilities may not move in the same
way.
 Inflation risk. All of the benefits under the Fund are linked to inflation and so
deficits may emerge to the extent that the assets are not linked to inflation.
 Longevity risk. In the event that the members live longer than assumed a
deficit will emerge in the Fund. There are also other demographic risks.
In addition, as many unrelated employers participate in the London Pension Fund
Authority Pension Fund, there is an orphan liability risk where employers leave the
Fund but with insufficient assets to cover their pension obligations so that the
difference may fall on the remaining employers.
All of the risks above may also benefit the Employer e.g. higher than expected
investment returns or employers leaving the Fund with excess assets which
eventually get inherited by the remaining employers.
LGPS - Actuarial assumptions
The actuary’s estimate of the duration of the employer’s liabilities is 18 years.
The discount rate is the annualised yield at the 18 year point on the Merrill Lynch AA
rated corporate bond curve which has been chosen to meet the requirements of
IAS19 and with consideration of the duration of the Employer’s liabilities.
The Retail Price Index (RPI) increase assumption is set based on the difference
between conventional gilt yields and index-linked gilt yields at the accounting date
using data published by the Bank of England, specifically the 18 year point on the
BoE spot inflation curve. The RPI assumption is therefore 3.2% p.a.
As future pension increases are expected to be based on Consumer Price Index
(CPI) rather than RPI, the actuary has made a further assumption about CPI which is
that it will be 0.9% below RPI i.e. 2.3%. This is a slightly higher differential than last
year. The actuary believes this is a reasonable estimate for the future differences in
the indices, based on the different calculation methods and recent independent
forecasts..
Salary increases are then assumed to increase at 1.8% per annum above CPI in
addition to a promotional scale.
92
Firefighter Pension schemes - Assumptions
Discount rate
IAS19 implies that liabilities should be discounted at a rate equivalent to the `current
rate of return available on a high quality corporate bond of equivalent currency and
term to the scheme liabilities’. It further defines a high quality corporate bond as one
that ` has been rated at the level of AA or equivalent status’.
The principle behind the actuary’s approach to setting the recommended discount
rate as at 31 March 2016 has remained unchanged since 31 March 2015 i.e. the
discount rate is derived from a corporate bond yield curve whilst recognising the
weighted average duration (of term) of the benefit obligation for the Authority.
Corporate Bond yield curve
Government bond yield curves are updated and available on a daily basis from the
Bank of England. It is therefore relatively easy to identify a spot yield on
Government bonds at any duration and at any date. Unfortunately, a similarly
accessible Corporate bond yield curve is not so readily available.
The actuary has adopted an approach whereby a corporate bond yield curve is
constructed based on the constituents of the iBoxx AA corporate bond index.
The actuary has calculated a weighted average duration of liabilities across all
firefighter schemes and use this duration to determine a single set of assumptions.
This is a change in approach from previous years. The duration categories are
defined below:
Weighted average duration
Less than 17 years
More than 23 years
Discount rate category
Short
Medium
Long
The weighted average duration used to identify the appropriate category is based
on the membership data provide as at 31 March 2016.
Retail Price Inflation (RPI) assumption
This assumption is typically derived from yields available on fixed interest and index
linked government bonds, and should be consistent with the derivation of the
discount rate.
RPI assumption is derived from the Bank of England implied inflation curve and is set
equal to the average rate appropriate for the cash flows of a typical Authority.
93
Pension increase assumption
The pension increase assumption, as with the accounting exercise in the previous
year, will be in line with the Consumer Prices Index (CPI). As a market in CPI linked
bonds does not exist the calculation is based on an estimate of the long term gap
between RPI and CPI in order to derive a CPI assumption for IAS19 purposes.
Based on accumulated evidence over the last four years from the Office of national
Statistics (ONS) about RPIvs CPI the assumed RPI- CPI gap is 1% p.a. at 31 March
2016.
CARE Revaluation
The CARE revaluation rates for the 2015 firefighters scheme are as laid out in the
schems’s regulations. These are for the Fire scheme where national average
earnings will be equal to the salary growth assumption below.
Salary increase assumption
The salary increase assumption is CPI plus 1% .
Allowance for contingent injury pensions
As requested an allowance has been made for future injury pensions. Historic data is
not available to allow the required analysis to set assumptions relating to the injury
retirement incidence rate and amount of injury benefit awarded. Therefore the
assumption is set following a high level analysis of injury liabilities and pension
amounts relative to normal pension liability and pension amounts.
The above approach in effect assumes that the historic relationship between injury
and pension benefits liabilities has been broadly consistent and will continue to be
so. It is acknowledged that this may not be realised in practice, although the actuary
will continue to monitor the position.
Demographic/Statistical Assumptions
Mortality Assumptions 2015/16
LGPS
Fire Service
Pension Schemes
Average Future Life expectancy as at
Age 65
Age 60
Retiring today
Current pensioners
Male
22.3 years
29.7 years
Female
24.8 years
31.6 years
Retiring in
20 years
Future pensioners
Male
24.7 years
31.2 years
Female
27.1 years
33.2 years
94
Mortality assumptions
The post retirement mortality for the LGPS scheme is based on Club Vita analysis
These base tables are then projected using the CMI 2012 model, allowing for a long
term rate of improvement of 1.5% per annum.
The mortality assumption for the firefighter schemes is based on the
S1NFA/S1NMA tables, published by the Continuous Mortality Investigation Board
(CMIB) of the actuarial profession, with future improvement in line with the CMI
2013 model with long term rate of improvement of 1.25% per annum.
The estimation of the defined benefit obligations is sensitive to the actuarial assumptions
set out in the tables above. The sensitivity analyses below have been determined based
on reasonably possible changes of the assumptions occurring at the end of the reporting
period and assumes for each change that the assumption analysed changes while all the
other assumptions remain constant. The assumptions in longevity, for example, assume
that life expectancy increases or decreases for men and women. In practice, this is
unlikely to occur, and changes in some of the assumptions may be interrelated. The
estimations in the sensitivity analysis have followed the accounting policies for the
scheme, i.e. on an actuarial basis using the projected unit credit method. The methods
and types of assumptions used in preparing the sensitivity analysis below did not change
from those used in the previous period.
Sensitivity Analysis
The following table sets out the impact of a small change in the discount rates on the
defined benefit obligation and projected service cost along with a +/- 1 year age rating
adjustment to the mortality assumption.
Local Government Pension Scheme
£000
£000
£000
Adjustment to discount rate
+0.1%
0.0%
-0.1%
474,786
483,097
491,561
Projected service cost
9,079
9,278
9,481
Adjustment to long term salary increase
+0.1%
0.0%
-0.1%
484,099
483,097
482,100
9,282
9,278
9,274
Adjustment to pension increases and deferred
revaluation
+0.1%
0.0%
-0.1%
490,659
483,097
475,670
9,479
9,278
9,081
Adjustment to mortality age rating assumption
+1 year
none
-1 year
Present value of total obligation
498,019
483,097
468,636
9,515
9,278
9,047
95
Firefighters Pension Schemes
The sensitivities regarding the principal assumptions used to measure the scheme
liabilities are set out in the table below;
Change in financial
assumption at year ended
31/3/2016
Approximate % increase
to Employer liability
Approximate monetary
amount
(£000)
0.5% decrease in real
discount rate
9%
476,200
1 year increase in member
life expectancy
3%
160,900
0.5% increase in the salary
Increase Rate
1%
56,000
0.5% increase in the
pensions Increase rate (CPI)
8%
414,800
The sensitivities regarding the principal assumptions used to measure the projected
current service cost are set out in the table below;
Change in financial
assumption at year ended
31/3/2016
Approximate % increase
to Projected Current
Service Cost
Approximate monetary
amount
(£000)
0.5% decrease in real
discount rate
8%
6,690
1 year increase in member
life expectancy
2%
1,580
0.5% increase in the salary
Increase Rate
1%
450
0.5% increase in the
pensions Increase rate (CPI)
7%
6,200
96
31. Contingent Liabilities and Assets
Contingent Liabilities
A contingent liability arises where an event has taken place that gives the Authority a
possible obligation whose existence will only be confirmed by the occurrence or other of
uncertain future events not wholly within the control of the Authority. Contingent
liabilities also arise in circumstances where a provision would otherwise be made but
either it is not probable that an outflow of resources will be required or the amount of
the obligation cannot be measured reliably.
Contingent liabilities are not recognised in the Balance Sheet but disclosed in a note to
the accounts. As at 31 March 2016 the Authority had no such liability.
Contingent Assets
A contingent asset arises where an event has taken place that gives the Authority a
possible asset whose existence will only be confirmed by the occurrence or otherwise of
uncertain future events not wholly within the control of the Authority.
Contingent assets are not recognised within the Balance Sheet but disclosed in a note to
the accounts where it is probable that there will be an inflow of economic benefits or
service potential.
As at 31 March 2016 the Authority had no contingent assets.
32. Self Insurance
With the exception of property theft and damage to operational vehicles (where
insurance cover is on a third party basis), the Authority generally insures against all
material risks with policies to meet the cost of losses over and above predetermined
limits, i.e. by policies subject to an excess or to a deductible. Significant excesses to
be met from within the Authority’s own resources for any one claim are:
Category insured
£
Property (All risks of physical loss or damage)
10,000
Property – Museum & Residential Properties
100
Engineering Lifting plant
250
Combined Liabilities
500,000
Fidelity Guarantee
250,000
Airside Cover
50,000
Motor Operational fleet
35,000
Motor Leased vehicles
100
Marine Protection and Indemnity
1,000
Marine Hull and Machinery Lambeth River Station
6,750
Marine Hull and Machinery Vessels
1,750
97
33. Going Concern
The Authority’s accounts have been prepared on the basis that it is a going concern. The
Authority’s Balance Sheet shows a negative Total Equity of £5.6bn (£6.1bn 2014/15), as
result of the full adoption of International Financial Reporting Standard IAS19. The
accounting standard requires the recognition of the Authority’s pension liabilities in the
accounts. However this is purely an accounting entry and does not impact on the
Council Taxpayer. It does not affect the Authority’s future status or ability to fulfil its
function.
Policing and Crime Bill
The Policing and Crime Bill currently progressing through Parliament will abolish the
Authority. Once the Bill is approved the functions of the Authority will transfer to the
London Fire Commissioner. The Secretary of State may then make one or more schemes
for the transfer of property, rights and liabilities of the Authority to the London Fire
Commissioner.
34. Cash flow statement Adjustments to Net Surplus or Deficit on the
provision of services for Non Cash Movements
Adjustments to Net Surplus or Deficit on the provision of
services for Non Cash Movements
31/3/2016
31/3/2015
£000
£000
(15,547)
(15,351)
(6,999)
1,360
Revaluation on foregin exchange
(40)
0
Assets de-recognised during year
(6,777)
(7,126)
Amortisation of Intangible assets
(1,054)
(1,264)
0
4,550
(128)
(239)
584
(97)
Increase/(Decrease) in debtors
16,578
6,004
(Increase)/Decrease in creditors
(5,096)
2,676
(948)
99
(112,659)
(176,913)
(39)
2
(132,125)
(186,299)
Depreciation of Non Current assets
Impairment and Revaluation of Non Current Assets
Donated Assets adjustment
(Increase)/Decrease in impairment for provision of bad debts
Increase/(Decrease) in inventories
(Increase)/Decrease in Provisions
Pension Fund Costs adjustment
Other Non cash items
Net cash (inflow)/outflow from operating activities
98
35. Cash Flow Statement – Operating activities
Operating Activities
31/3/2016
31/3/2015
£000
£000
Interest Received
(587)
(362)
Interest Paid
4,058
4,320
Interest element of Finance leases
3,823
2,667
7,294
6,625
Total
36. Adjustments for items in the net surplus or deficit on the provision of
services that are investing or financing activities
Investing Activities
Purchase of property, plant and equipment, investment
property and intangible assets
Proceeds from the sale of property, plant and equipment,
investment property and intangible assets
Capital grants received
Net cash flows from investing activities
Financing Activities
Cash Receipts of Short and Long term Borrowing
Cash payments for the reduction of the outstanding
liabilities relating to finance leases On-Balance sheet PFI
contracts (Principal)
Repayments of Short and Long term borrowing
Net cash flows from financing activities
99
31/3/2016
31/3/2015
£000
£000
7,266
29,471
(30,818)
(14,235)
(1,242)
(4,921)
(24,794)
10,315
31/3/2016
31/3/2015
£000
£000
0
(13,000)
476
12
6,000
16,000
6,476
3,012
As at
31/03/15
£000
As at 31/03/16
£000
£000
Contributions receivable
- from employer
- normal
(33,385)
(28,944)
- early retirements
(1,143)
(946)
(34,528)
(29,890)
- from members
(24,542)
(22,275)
(59,070)
(52,165)
Transfers in
- individual transfers in from other schemes
(17)
(208)
Benefits payable
- pensions
124,476
- commutations and lump sum retirement benefits
34,416
130,116
- Back Dated Commutations
12,397
0
- Lump sum death benefits
230
37,128
281
159,122
179,922
Payments to and on account of leavers
- refunds of contributions
0
- individual transfers out to other schemes
1,662
- other – interest due on back dated lump sums
255
- interest due on back dated commutations lump sums
0
1,917
1,509
245
3,005
4,759
101,952
Deficit/Surplus for the year before top up grant receivable/
amount payable to central government
132,308
(101,952)
Top up grant receivable from/amount payable from central
government
(116,892)
0
Grant received from central government for back dated
commutations
0
Net amount payable/receivable for the year
2014/15
Net Assets Statement
15,195
(15,228)
0
0
2015/16
£000
33
(15,416)
£000
- Recoverable overpayments of pensions
- Top up receivable from/(payable to) Government
- other current liabilities
60
31,094
(31,154)
Total
0
100
Firefighters’ Pension Fund Account Notes
1. The Firefighters’ Pension Scheme in England
There are three firefighter pension schemes the 1992, 2006 and 2015 schemes.
The Firefighters Pension Scheme is a defined benefit occupational pension scheme
which is guaranteed and backed by law. The Scheme changed on the 1st April 2015
from a Final Salary Scheme to a Career Average Revalued Earnings Scheme (CARE).
Members starting after the 1st April 2015, and members of the 1992 and 2006 Final
Salary Schemes moved into the new 2015 Scheme, unless protections applied.
The funding arrangements for the Firefighters’ Pension Scheme in England were
introduced on 1 April 2006 by regulation under the Firefighters’ Pension Scheme
(Amendment) (England) Order 2006. Prior to 1 April 2006 the firefighter scheme did
not have a percentage of pensionable pay type of employer’s contribution, the Authority
was responsible for paying pensions of its former employees on a pay-as-you-go basis.
Under new funding arrangements the schemes remain unfunded but will not be on a
pay-as-you-go basis as far as the Authority is concerned. Apart from the costs of injury
awards the Authority no longer meets pension outgoings directly: instead it will pay an
employer’s pension contribution based on a percentage of pay into the Pension Fund.
The Authority is required by legislation to operate a Pension Fund and the amounts that
must be paid into and paid out of the fund are specified by regulation. The Pension Fund
is managed by the Authority and the day to day administration of the scheme is
provided under contract by the London Pensions Fund Authority. The supplementary
fund statement does not take account of any liabilities to pay pensions or any other
benefits after the year end; it purely details pension transactions for the year. Notes 29
and 30 to the accounts provide details of the assessed pension liabilities and the
corresponding entries in the main statements.
Milne v Government Acturary Department (GAD)
Following a Pension Ombudsman determination on a complaint brought by Mr W
Milne, a retired firefighter, the Government decided that additional payments were to
be made to members of the Firefighters' Pension Scheme 1992 who became entitled to
payment of their pension between 1 December 2001 and 21 August 2006 inclusive and
who chose to commute part of that pension for a lump sum. This was to address the
Ombudsman’s conclusion that the Scheme’s commutation factors should have been
reviewed before 2006. During 2015/16 £15.4m was paid to retired firefighters in
backdated commutation (£12.4m) and interest (£3.0m).
Contributions
Employees and employers contribution levels are set nationally by CLG and are subject
to triennial revaluation by the Government Actuary’s Department. Under the firefighters
pension regulations the employers contribution rates as a percentage of pensionable pay
for the 1992 scheme were 21.7%, 11.9% for the 2006 scheme and 14.3% for the 2015
scheme. Employee contributions, as a percentage of pensionable pay, depends on the
level of earnings for the different schemes as shown in the tables below.
101
2006
Scheme
%
1992
Scheme
%
Up to and including £15.15k
8.5
11.0
More than £15.15k and up to and including £21.21k
9.4
12.2
10.4
14.2
10.9
14.7
11.2
15.2
11.3
15.5
More than £60.6k and up to and including £101k
11.7
16.0
More than £101k and up to and including £121.2k
12.1
16.5
More than £121.2k
12.5
17.0
Firefighters’ Pension Scheme employee contributions
Firefighters’ Pension Scheme employee contributions
2015 Scheme
%
Up to and including £27.27k
10.0
12.5
13.5
More than £142.5k
14.5
Ill health contributions, for fighters who retired due to ill health, were also paid into the
pension fund.
Accounting policies
The Authority’s accounting policies apply to the fund and are prepared on an accruals
basis, apart from transfer values which are accounted for on a cash basis. Transfer
payments between English Fire Authorities were repealed by Regulation 36 of Statutory
Instrument 1810/2006. Therefore any transfer payments which arise relate to
firefighters transferring to/from Welsh and Scottish authorities or transferring out of the
Firefighters Pension Scheme entirely.
The Pension Fund has no investment assets and is balanced to nil at the end of the
financial year. This is achieved by either paying over to CLG (sponsoring Government
department ) the amount by which the amounts receivable by the fund for the year
exceeded the amounts payable, or by receiving cash in the form of pension top-up grant
from CLG equal to the amount by which the amounts payable from the fund exceeded
the amounts receivable.
Details of the Authority’s long term pension obligations can be found under notes to the
core Accounting Statements Notes 29 and 30.
102
Events after the Balance sheet date
Firefighter pensions back dated refund of contributions
DCLG have settled on the case brought by the Fire Brigade Union regarding pension
contributions paid by firefghters employed before age 20 who have served for over 30
years before reaching the minimum retirement age of 50 and it has been confirmed that
affected pension scheme members will receive a refund of contributions after the FFPS
1992 regs have been amended.
103
ANNUAL GOVERNANCE STATEMENT 2015/16
Scope of responsibility
1. The London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (the Authority) is responsible for
ensuring that its business is conducted in accordance with the law and appropriate
standards, and that public money is safeguarded and properly accounted for, and used
economically, efficiently and effectively. The Authority also has a duty to make
arrangements to secure continuous improvement in the way in which its functions are
exercised, having regard to a combination of economy, efficiency and effectiveness.
In discharging this overall responsibility, the Authority is also responsible for putting into place
suitable arrangements for the governance of its affairs (ensuring that there is a sound system of
internal control) which facilitates the effective exercise of its functions and which includes
arrangements for the management of risk.
This statement explains how the Authority meets the requirements of regulations 3 and 6 (1) of
the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015 in relation to the publication of an Annual
Governance Statement.
The purpose of the governance framework
2. The Authority’s governance framework comprises the systems and processes, and culture
and values, by which the Authority is directed and controlled and the activities through
which it accounts to, engages with and leads the community. It enables the Authority to
monitor the achievement of its strategic objectives and to consider whether those objectives
have led to the delivery of appropriate, cost-effective services.
3. The governance framework is underpinned by our Corporate Code of Governance which
sets out how the Authority discharges its governance responsibilities based on the six core
principles defined in the CIPFA/SOLACE Delivering Good Governance in Local
Government guidance which was updated with an addendum during 2012/13. This
includes defining our scrutiny arrangements; maintaining effective policies and procedures
on whistleblowing and complaint handling (on the London Fire website); and engaging with
all sections of the local community through our community safety strategies and
partnerships to ensure accountability. The Corporate Code of Governance was last updated
and approved by the Authority on 27 September 2012.
4. The system of internal control is also a significant part of the Authority’s governance
framework and is designed to manage risk to a reasonable level. It cannot eliminate all risk of
failure to achieve policies, aims and objectives; it can therefore only provide reasonable and
not absolute assurance of effectiveness.
104
5. The system of internal control is based on an ongoing process designed to identify and
prioritise the risks to the achievement of the Authority’s policies, aims and objectives, to
evaluate the likelihood of those risks being realised and the impact should they be realised,
and to manage them efficiently, effectively and economically.
6. The governance framework has been in place at the Authority for the year ended 31 March
2016 and supports the annual budget report and statement of accounts.
The governance framework
The key elements of the governance framework are set out in the following paragraphs.
Effective exercise of our functions and the monitoring and achievement of the
Authority’s objectives
Members have met regularly to consider strategic direction, plans and progress of the Authority
in various Committees and the Authority itself. Decision making arrangements were confirmed
for 2015/16 following reconstitution of the Authority at the meetings in June and December
2015 (FEP2448 and 2541). The reconstitution confirmed the roles and duties of the following
Committees:
 Resources Committee - with responsibilities for budgets, staffing and assets, and
performance related to those responsibilities;
 Strategy Committee - with responsibilities for policy and strategy for the service delivery
functions of emergency response, prevention and protection, including responsibility
for community engagement;
 Governance, Performance and Audit Committee - with responsibilities for service
delivery performance (excluding performance related specifically to the functions of the
Resources Committee) and for all audit and governance matters, including the Annual
Governance Statement; and
 Appointments and Urgency Committee - to meet on an ad hoc basis as and when urgent
matters or appointments dictate.
The Authority also established a Local Pensions Board during 2015/16 for the firefighter
pension schemes to support it on scheme governance and administration in its role as a Scheme
Manager.
The Mayor of London has powers to direct the Authority to take (or not to take) action.
Mayoral directions were received on the following matters during 2015/16:







Disposal of 8 Albert Embankment;
Disposal of Southwark Fire Station Site
Recruitment of Commissioner
Budget options and the permanent removal of thirteen appliances
Provision of Fire Consultancy Services
Disposal of Kingsland Fire Station Site
105
The Authority’s Fifth London Safety Plan (LSP5) – which is the Authority’s corporate plan and its
Integrated Risk Management Plan as required by the government’s fire and rescue service
national framework - sets out the Authority’s plans for improvement in services to address the
risks facing Londoners, together with the management arrangements required to implement
them. LSP5 was approved by the Authority on 12 September 2013 (FEP2143). Details of the
public consultation undertaken can be found in the covering report to the Fifth London Safety
Plan (FEP2091). The Plan was extended during 2015/16 to run for another year and effectively
will be in place until the end of March 2017 (at which time it is anticipated that a new London
Safety Plan (LSP6) will be approved).
Key performance indicators and targets are included in the London Safety Plan and the relevant
committees review indicators and targets on an annual basis.
All key LSP targets and commitments as well as key projects, are subject to close scrutiny and
monitoring by the Resources, Strategy, and Governance, Performance and Audit Committees.
The Authority has performed well against its targets for 2015/16. This information is available
online in the annual end of year performance report on the London Fire website via the
following link: Our Performance 2015-16. Detailed commentaries against performance can also
be found in the end of year performance reports to the Governance, Performance and Audit
Committee and the Resources Committee.
The Governance, Performance and Audit Committee reviews the effectiveness of the internal
control framework by monitoring the work of internal audit, considering both internal and
external audit reports and reviewing the corporate risk management framework, including the
arrangements for business continuity.
Effective arrangements for the management of risk
The risk management strategy 2014-17 contains a number of actions to develop the use of risk
management information within the Authority. The strategy was updated and approved by the
Strategy Committee on 18 November 2014 (FEP2356). The strategy has been refreshed to
incorporate the Authority’s risk appetite statement (which was formerly included as part of this
statement).
The Authority’s corporate risk register is subject to regular reviews by the Governance,
Performance and Audit Committee. The corporate risks are summarised in each London Safety
Plan and were last approved by full Authority in September 2013 as part of appendix one to
LSP5. The register is reviewed regularly in full consultation with the Commissioner and
Directors and identifies key risks that could prevent the Authority achieving its aims and
objectives. Controls are in place to mitigate these risks and both risks and controls are subject to
regular review and scrutiny, which is evidenced in the form of external inspections and internal
audits, reports to Authority Committees, the Commissioner’s Corporate Management Board,
including at its regular dedicated performance meetings, and by heads of service assurances
through the risk management process.
106
In December 2015, an updated approach to the assessment of risk (AOR) in London (FEP2544)
was presented to the Authority. The Authority has a requirement to understand the risks in its
area as part of the Integrated Risk Management Plan (IRMP) – the Authority’s IRMP is the
London Safety Plan. As part of the development of the current London Safety Plan (LSP5), it
became clear that some external stakeholders did not understand how their concerns locally
(sometimes articulated as ‘risks’) had been taken into account. To make this consideration of
risk more explicit and transparent, it was agreed that officers should annually prepare an
assessment of risk in London.
This latest iteration of the assessment of risk, which builds on previous approaches, has been
developed to cover the wide range of ‘concerns’ that the public and stakeholders might have
about their local area (often articulated as ‘risks’), how those ‘concerns’ translate into actual risks
that the Brigade has to deal with, and the response, prevention and protection activity (i.e.
‘controls’) the Authority has in place to manage or mitigate those risks. It was agreed by
Members that the methodology should be further developed, and that key external
stakeholders, like the London borough councils, should have an opportunity to feed into this
process as part of developing an AOR 2016. The AOR will also inform the development of the
Sixth London Safety Plan (LSP6).
Ensuring compliance with established policies, procedures, laws and regulations
The system of internal control comprises a network of policies, procedures, systems, reports,
processes and meetings. These arrangements are in place to verify the Authority’s objectives,
risk management arrangements, performance management processes and financial controls.
These controls are in place to:







establish and monitor the achievement of the Authority’s objectives through regular
monitoring reports to members;
facilitate policy and decision making via , for example Standing Orders, and the
service planning process;
ensure compliance with established policies, procedures, processes, laws and
regulations, as underpinned by regular reviews carried out by internal and external
auditors;
ensure the delivery of high quality services in an efficient and effective manner
through established policies and procedures and the monitoring of performance
through Directorate Management Boards, the Commissioner’s Corporate
Management Board, the Corporate Management Team, the Top Management
Group performance meetings, the Heads of Service Group, the Contracts Oversight
Board, the Governance, Performance and Audit Committee, the Resources
Committee and the Strategy Committee;
identify, assess and manage the risks to the Authority’s objectives including risk
management;
ensure the economical, effective and efficient use of resources, and for securing
continuous improvement in the way in which the Authority’s functions are
exercised, through the Authority’s medium term financial forecasting and budget
processes, strategic and annual internal audit plans, and the budget review process;
provide appropriate financial management of the Authority and the reporting of
financial management to the Resources Committee;
107


provide adherence to the Authority’s values and ethical standards through the
application of the leadership model and equality framework; and
ensure proper performance management of the Authority and the reporting of
performance management through the Governance, Performance and Audit
Committee, the Resources Committee and the Strategy Committee.
The internal audit function is conducted by the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC)
for the Authority via a shared service agreement and provides independent assurance on risk
management internal controls and governance arrangements within the Authority. MOPAC
completed 37 audits during 2015/16. From the work undertaken during the year, internal audit
has concluded that the internal control framework was adequate, with controls to mitigate key
risks, generally operating effectively. For 2015/16, external auditors have concluded that they
can continue to place reliance on the work carried out by the Authority’s internal audit function.
During 2015/16, the Head of Legal and Democratic Services was the Authority’s Monitoring
Officer and the duties of this role were discharged in line with the Monitoring Officer Protocol
agreed by the Authority on 26 March 2009 (FEP1339).
Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act and confidential reporting (‘whistleblowing’)
As required by the RIPA Codes of Practice, the Authority undertakes an annual review of the
Brigade’s use of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA). A policy governing
LFEPA’s use of RIPA was approved by the Authority on 22 November 2012 (FEP 2011). LFEPA
was inspected by the Office of Surveillance Commissioners in December 2012. The RIPA policy
was reviewed and revised by the Authority on 27 October 2015 (FEP2326). There were no
applications for any RIPA authorisations in 2015/16, nor were there any previous authorisations
that continued into 2015/16. LFEPA therefore continues to make no use of RIPA powers.
There were two complaints identified as confidential reporting (whistleblowing) cases in
2015/16. One concerned an allegation of surveillance and the other concerned an allegation
over the appropriateness of fire safety measures in a premises. Both were dealt with by the
Director of Operations.
The Bribery Act 2010
The Authority continues to take action to address the requirements of the Bribery Act 2010.
The Authority’s intranet includes information for staff and managers on bribery, and policies
reflect the requirements of the Bribery Act. Key staff, including those in the Legal and
Procurement departments, have previously attended a briefing on the Act, and bribery is now
included in fraud awareness sessions.
108
Review of effectiveness
Regulation 6(1) of the Accounts and Audit Regulations 2015 requires the Authority to conduct a
review of the effectiveness of the system of internal control. This review is informed by the
work of the internal auditors and Authority officers who have responsibility for the
development and maintenance of the internal control environment, and also by comments
made by the external auditors and any other review agencies and inspectorates.
Throughout 2015/16, the Authority has maintained and reviewed its systems of internal control
in a number of ways. In particular:








the Authority received regular performance reports on its LSP commitments,
performance against performance indicators, and key projects through its
Governance, Performance and Audit Committee, Resources Committee and
Strategy Committee;
comprehensive performance reports covering corporate performance indicators,
corporate risks, key projects, as well as departmental performance were considered
regularly by the Commissioner’s Corporate Management Board;
progress reports submitted to the Commissioner’s corporate management board on
the implementation of health and safety policy and the submission of a full annual
report to the Resources Committee;
the regular review of the outcomes from the Authority’s dynamic and intelligent
operational training (DIOT) process coordinated through the officer-level
Operational Directorates Coordination Board chaired by the Director of Operations.
The DIOT process supports the Authority in its commitment to protecting the
health, safety and welfare at work of all its employees by learning from the
performance of staff and crews at operational incidents, via the incident monitoring
process, accident investigations, thematic audits, etc.;
monitoring the development, implementation and delivery of services provided by
third parties and key contractual arrangements through the Contracts Oversight
Board;
the Authority’s internal audit shared service provider working to defined
professional standards and the preparation of the internal audit plan on the basis of a
formal risk assessment. The plan, annual performance and main outcomes and
recommendations arising from audit work were reported to the Governance,
Performance and Audit Committee. The external auditor has relied on the work of
internal audit in supporting its risk assessment and understanding of the entity's
level of controls;
the external auditor’s plan and audit memorandum on the year’s audit reported to
the Governance, Performance and Audit Committee and the Independent auditor’s
opinion and certificate to the full Authority;
a review of the effectiveness of the system of internal control informed by the work
of senior management, who continually reviewed the identification and
management of risks at all levels across the Authority, providing assurance that
controls are in place and the extent to which they were effective. Our review is also
informed through the work of internal auditors as described above, and the external
auditors in their annual audit letter and other reports;
109



the Authority agreed to participate in the Local Government Association (LGA) Fire
Peer Challenge (FEP2305) concentrating on four focus areas: value for money;
information collection and use; industrial relations; and operational competence.
The site visit and information gathering by the peer team was conducted during
March and April 2015. The LGA report was finalised in August 2015 and confirmed
that the Brigade is a well run and well resourced organisation, providing a first class
service, with some outstanding staff members. The report also concluded that the
Brigade leads in several areas of good practice, notably its leadership role in the UK
for fire and rescue services, especially in terms of national resilience. Innovative
approaches to procurement and shared services are delivering long term savings,
and value for money is recognised as a necessity in organisational culture, with
analysis of benefits realisation from projects. The peer challenge was a useful space
to consider how the Brigade provides its services, and much of the discussion held
with the peer team representatives will feed into other strategic developments such
as the Sixth London Safety Plan;
the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014 has led to requirements for local
authorities to prepare and publish their accounts earlier from 2017/18. The
Authority continues to work to prepare its accounts to an earlier timetable, and now
provides its draft accounts to its auditors at the beginning of June.
responsibility for the fire and service transferred from the Department for
Communities and Local Government(DCLG) to the Home Office during 2015/16.
The Government published the Policing and Crime Bill on 10 February 2016. The
Bill changes the governance arrangements for fire and rescue services in London by
abolishing the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA) and creating
the London Fire Commissioner as a corporation sole – having the functions of the
fire and rescue authority for Greater London under the Fire and Rescue Services Act
2004. The London Fire Commissioner will be appointed by the Mayor of London
who will also have the power to give directions and guidance to the Commissioner
relating to the exercise of his/her functions. The Bill also provides the option for the
Mayor to create a Deputy Mayor for Fire and sets out that the Mayor may arrange
for a Deputy Mayor for Fire to exercise any function of the Mayor relating to fire and
rescue. It also places a duty on police, fire and rescue and ambulance services to
collaborate, and enables Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) outside of London
to take on responsibility for fire and rescue services in England and Wales. The Bill
was carried over to the 2016-17 Parliamentary session and is subject to change as it
passes through the Parliamentary process.
110
Statement of accounts
As required by the Authority’s financial regulations, the Director of Finance and Contractual
services approves all systems used to record Authority financial transactions. Assurance that the
financial data used to produce the Authority’s statement of accounts is accurate and complete is
obtained through regular central finance reconciliation routines of all financial systems and
monthly officer monitoring of all expenditure and income recorded on the Authority’s approved
general ledger system. Periodic member level review of financial records and forecast outturn
add to the scrutiny carried out by both the Authority’s internal and external audit. The
statement of accounts is authorised by the Director of Finance and Contractual Services as
being true and fair within the current statutory deadline of 30 June each year. The accounts are
then fully audited by the Authority’s external auditor who issues an audit opinion by the end of
the following September.
The statutory deadline for producing the accounts will be brought forward for the financial year
2017/18 from 30 June to 31 May, with the publishing deadline brought forward from 30
September to 31 July. The Director of Finance and Contractual Services has signed off the
Authority accounts by 31 May for the last three years and officers are working with external
audit to target an audited and published set of accounts by 31 July this year.
The role of the Chief Finance Officer
CIPFA’s Statement on the Role of the Chief Financial Officer (CFO) in public service
organisations sets out the key principles that define the core activities and behaviours that
belong to the CFO in public service organisations. The CIPFA statement sets out that the CFO in
a public service organisation:



is a key member of the leadership team, helping it to develop and implement
strategy and to resource and deliver the organisation's strategic objectives
sustainably and in the public interest;
must be actively involved in, and able to bring influence to bear on, all material
business decisions to ensure immediate and longer term implications, opportunities
and risks are fully considered, and alignment with the organisation's financial
strategy; and
must lead the promotion and delivery by the whole organisation of good financial
management so that public money is safeguarded at all times and used
appropriately, economically, efficiently and effectively.
To deliver these responsibilities the CFO:


must lead and direct a finance function that is resourced to be fit for purpose; and
must be professionally qualified and suitably experienced.
The principles are supported by a range of governance requirements that are used to
demonstrate compliance. The role of the CFO is undertaken by the Director of Finance and
Contractual Services who is the Authority’s section 127 (Greater London Authority Act 1999)
officer and is a member of the Authority’s Corporate Management Board reporting directly to
the Commissioner.
111
Other governance arrangements
This section highlights other noteworthy governance arrangements that the Brigade has either
put in place or maintained during the 2015/16 financial year.
National resilience
The National Resilience Programme is one part of the Department for Communities and Local
Government’s contribution to the Government’s Civil Contingencies Capabilities Programme.
The strategic aim is to continue to enhance preparedness and resilience of the fire and rescue
services in England and Wales by maintaining and improving the capability of the National
Assets. The programme consists of a number of distinct capabilities. These are:

 Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear and Explosive CBRN(E);
 Urban Search and Rescue (USAR);
 Water and High Volume Pumping (HVP); and
 Command and Control.
Twenty per cent of the National Resilience assets are located within the Brigade area reflecting
the importance of the capital city to national resilience in providing these capabilities to both the
London region and the rest of the country. London also hosts the Fire and Rescue Service’s
National Co-ordination Centre (FRSNCC) at the London Operational Command (LOC), where
all requests for national assistance at large scale incidents are dealt with.
The Brigade has a full USAR capability, as part of the resilience programme, for providing fire
and rescue services with a national capability to respond and effectively manage large-scale
structural collapses and heavy transportation type incidents. This national capability is designed
to augment existing local and specialised planning arrangements within Brigades or regions. As
part of this national capability, the LFB provides USAR trained personnel to respond to incidents
outside of the Brigade area.
Following the assessment and assurance of the Brigade’s multi-capability in the previous year,
the National Resilience Assurance Team (NRAT) undertook an assessment of the Brigade’s high
volume pump (HVP) capability in February 2016. The assurance process has been developed as
a long term procedure to ensure that the fire and rescue services which have received National
Resilience assets, achieve and maintain an efficient, robust and effective operational capability
to respond to national and major emergencies.
NRAT concluded that the Brigade satisfactory discharges its statutory duties relating to national
resilience under the Fire and Rescue Services Act 2004 and the Statutory Instrument 3193 Fire
and Rescue Services (Emergencies) Order 2007. However, there were five instances of nonconformity and seven instances of unsatisfactory outcomes resulting from the practical
assessment of key HVP skills. The assessors were however pleased to note the willingness of
Brigade personnel to take immediate corrective action for the non-conformities and since the
assessment, NRAT has now received evidence and also confirmed (in May 2016) that the
Brigade has adequately addressed all outstanding actions.
112
Brigade staff also lead the fire and rescue service nationally in terms of the sector’s role in the
government CONTEST strategy. This involves working collaboratively with colleagues from the
other blue light agencies as well as government departments to develop multi-agency
operational capabilities for responding to a wide range of terrorist related threats. London has
successfully introduced the concept of inter-agency liaison officers (ILOs) to UK fire and rescue
services and the National ILO coordinator is a London officer. The London Fire Commissioner is
the Chief Fire Officers Association (CFOA) National Resilience Lead Officer for Chemical,
Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (Enhanced Explosives) (CBRN(E)).
Equality, diversity and inclusion
A review of equality, diversity and inclusion was initiated by the Commissioner during 2015/16
and is being directed by the Head of Strategy and Inclusion. An advisory group has been
established, to guide the development of a new, 10 year Inclusion Strategy. Officers have
interviewed inclusion leads from organisations cited for best practice in the public, private and
not-for-profit sectors, and engaged with senior managers, trades unions and support groups to
inform the new strategic inclusion objectives and consequent action plan. Members received a
draft strategy (FEP2590) at the Authority meeting in March 2016, with information about the
Authority’s Public Sector Equality Duty, and the Members’ Equalities Working Group has
subsequently received an update about the continuing development of the strategy. The final
strategy will be represented to the Authority in June 2016 with an accompanying action plan to
facilitate the change in approach.
The Brigade’s equality, diversity and inclusion performance is regularly reported to Members
through the HR Digest.
Information security
The Authority maintains an information security strategy which complies with the ISO/IEC
27001 standard for information security. This standard represents ‘best practice; within the
security industry. The strategy exists to protect Authority information against any type of
accidental loss, damage or abuse, including that relating to its staff as well as third party clients
and partners. In addition it maintains a safeguard to ICT systems that process, store, display and
transmit information.
The strategy is facilitated through the information security policy which has been approved and
maintained by the Information Governance Group (the IGG) and has been applied consistently
across all parts of the Authority.
The Head of Strategy and Inclusion is the Authority’s Senior Information Risk Owner (SIRO),
and, as Chair of the IGG, is responsible for the effective implementation of a consistent
framework for the management of information security across the Authority. This includes the
ownership, development, maintenance and communication of the information security policy.
The SIRO is also required to review and challenge any non-compliance with the information
security policy as highlighted by compliance reports, dispensations, audit findings or the
incident management processes. In conjunction with the Head of ICT, the SIRO ensures that
Business Contingency Plans (BCP) and IT Disaster Recovery (IT DR) plans respectively are
developed implemented and tested to protect all critical information, information systems and
functions of LFEPA. There were no issues of non-conformity during 2015/16.
113
Health and safety
Good health and safety management remains a critical (business) issue for the Authority.
During 2015/16, preventive initiatives and improved working practices have contributed to the
continued reduction in injuries to staff.
Throughout 2015/16 the Authority has maintained and reviewed its systems of internal control
in a number of ways, including:
 Regular reports on health and safety performance to the Commissioner’s Corporate
Management Board and to Resources Committee;
 Continuing the cycle of health, safety and environmental audit and focussed slips
and trips risk assessments of our stations;
 Introducing a system for the early assessment of impact on the health, safety and
welfare of staff from new policy or corporate projects;
 MOPAC completed an audit of health and safety management in 2015/16,
identifying that the control framework was adequate and that controls to mitigate
key risks are generally operating effectively;
 The established Dynamic Intelligent Operational Training (DIOT) process continues
to identify trends in both operational effectiveness and safety management, which
allows targeted intervention to make safety improvements through briefings (e.g.
Operational News), operational training, procedures and equipment, and
 Monitoring progress against actions identified through serious accident
investigations (SAI), Coroner’s Prevention of Future Death reports and other
internal reviews.
Additionally health and safety performance was the subject of external review in 2015/16 as
part of the Local Government Association (LGA) Fire Peer Challenge (FEP2305). Health and
safety is a key assessment area of the peer review process and the review team reported that
they had observed continuous improvement in health and safety and a positive health and
safety culture.
Significant internal control issues
The action plan below comprises actions required to address any significant failings in the
Authority’s governance framework and supporting systems and any other significant actions
being undertaken to improve the governance arrangements which the Authority wishes to
declare. The plan will typically focus on issues of non-compliance or any other significant action
planned or being undertaken to improve governance. It does not seek to replicate any of the
Authority’s other reporting arrangements. The criteria used to determine items for inclusion
are:
 actions arising from the annual assessment of performance against our Code of
Governance;
 significant causes for concern identified in the auditor’s annual letter;
 performance failings or significant concerns relating to governance identified by
external assessment;
 significant failings identified by any internal audit and review processes including:
internal audits, health and safety audits and accident investigations, risk audits;
114






significant failings identified by the Incident Management Policy team;
significant failings identified by internal management assurance processes, with
particular reference to the annual assurance statement provided by each Head of
Service assessing the effectiveness of the controls for which they are responsible;
significant failings identified by any peer review;
any significant improvements or additions to the Authority’s control framework
needed in order to bring the Authority’s risk profile in line with its risk appetite;
any other significant actions being undertaken to improve the governance
arrangements which the Authority wishes to declare in the statement, and
any actions outstanding from the previous year’s action plan.
In the action plan for the coming year, the actions are considered to arise from the criterion:
“any other significant actions being undertaken to improve the governance arrangements which
the Authority wishes to declare in the statement”.
Four actions have been carried forward from the previous year’s action plan. They are largely
substantial challenges to be managed over the long term, relating to the National Fire Role,
realising the full potential of the new mobilising system, promoting inclusion (building on from
delivery of the new strategy), and working towards the new statutory financial reporting
deadlines.
Four new actions have also been added to the plan this year regarding focussing on our people,
driving local and national resilience, safety leadership and the governance changes being
proposed under the Policing and Crime Bill. The complete list of actions is therefore as follows:
(i)
National Fire Role
LFEPA to take a proactive role on policy direction nationally by working with others on a
range of matters to secure improvement of the fire service to the public. This will include:


taking a leading role in supporting the National Joint Council’s position on
conditions of service;
determining the future arrangements for the National Operational Guidance
programme following phase two of the programme.
How progress will be reported - Matters requiring the attention of Members will be
reported to GPAC through the risk, business continuity and governance report.
(ii)
New mobilising system
Further efficiencies in service provision through full utilisation of the new mobilising system.
How progress will be reported – Progress on delivering the new mobilising system will be
reported to Strategy Committee through the quarterly commitments and key projects report
and to GPAC through the risk, business continuity and governance report.
115
(iii) Promoting inclusion
Deliver the inclusion strategy action plan for the Authority and implement a step change
process, working with all departments and the support groups to drive the equalities agenda
forward within the Brigade.
How progress will be reported – Action plan proposals and progress will be reported to the
Resources Committee.
(iv) Statutory financial reporting deadlines
To work to prepare the statement of accounts to earlier timescales, and to work with the
Authority’s external auditors to be ready for the new deadlines from 2017/18.
How progress will be reported – Progress on meeting the new statutory financial reporting
deadlines will be reported to GPAC.
(v)
Focus on our people
To refresh our principles and join up our work on people, behavioural framework,
succession planning, inclusion strategy, staff engagement programme, retention rates and
the stress survey outcomes to ensure a supportive and progressive workplace
How progress will be reported – Progress will be reported to the Resources Committee
through regular update reports. A summary of activity will also be reported to GPAC
through the risk, continuity and governance report.
(vi) Driving national and local resilience
To drive improvements at a national, London, and Brigade level in terms of resilience to
reassure the public and key stakeholders at a time when the national threat level remains
severe.
How progress will be reported – Progress will be reported to GPAC through the risk,
continuity and governance report.
(vii) Safety leadership
Improve health and safety for our staff by focussing on promoting effective safety
leadership with senior managers, and making improvements to our systems and training for
accident investigation.
How progress will be reported: Progress will be reported to the Resources Committee
through regular update reports. A summary of activity will also be reported to GPAC
through the risk, continuity and governance report.
(viii) Policing and Crime Bill – New governance arrangements
To manage the transition and develop appropriate governance arrangements to implement
the new regime which will come into place when the Policing and Crime Bill comes into
force.
116
How progress will be reported – Progress will be reported to Authority. A summary of
activity will also be reported to GPAC through the risk, continuity and governance report.
Conclusion
We are satisfied that the appropriate internal systems of control are in place with regards to
the Authority’s governance arrangements, and that adequate processes are in place to
ensure compliance with the Corporate Code of Governance.
Ron Dobson CBE FIFireE QFSM
Commissioner
Planning
for
Fire
and
To be confirmed
Emergency Chair, Governance Performance and Audit
Committee
Dated: June 2016
117
Glossary of Terms
ACCRUALS - Amounts included in the accounts to cover income and expenditure attributable to the
financial year, but for which payment had not been received or made as at 31 March.
BUDGET - A statement defining the Authority’s policies over a specified time in terms of finance.
CAPITAL EXPENDITURE - Spending on the acquisition or construction of assets. This would
normally be assets of land, buildings or equipment that have a long term value to the Authority.
CAPITAL RECEIPTS - Proceeds from the disposal of land or other capital assets. Capital receipts can
be used to finance new capital expenditure, but cannot be used to finance revenue expenditure.
CLG – Communities & Local Government, the Government Department responsible for national
policy on Local Government in England.
CONTINGENCY - Sums set aside to meet the cost of unforeseen items of expenditure, or shortfalls in
income.
CONTINGENT ASSET/LIABILITY - A possible source of future income (ASSET) or liability to future
expenditure (LIABILITY) at the balance sheet date dependant upon the outcome of uncertain events.
CORPORATE AND DEMOCRATIC CORE (CDC) – The costs attributable to CDC are those costs
associated with corporate policy making and member based activities.
CREDITORS - Sums owed by the Authority for goods and/or services received, but for which
payment has not been made by the end of the accounting period.
DEBTORS - Sums due to the Authority but not received by the end of the accounting period.
DEPRECIATION – An accounting adjustment to reflect the loss in value of an asset due to age, wear
and tear, deterioration or obsolescence. This forms a charge to service departments, for use of assets,
in the Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement.
IMPAIRMENT – An accounting adjustment to reflect loss in value of a fixed asset caused either by a
consumption of economic benefits or by a general fall in price. The loss is a charge to the
Comprehensive Income and Expenditure Statement when a consumption of economic benefits or, if
due to revaluation, where there is insufficient balance held in the Revaluation Reserve against the
particular asset.
EARMARKED RESERVES - Amounts set aside for a specific purpose to meet future potential
liabilities, for which it is not appropriate to establish a provision.
MINIMUM REVENUE PROVISION – The minimum amount that must be set aside from the
Authority’s Revenue account each year for principal repayments of loans and credit liabilities.
PROVISIONS - Sums set aside to meet future expenditure. Provisions are for liabilities or losses which
are likely or certain to be incurred, but for which the sum is not known.
PUBLIC WORKS LOANS BOARD – A Government controlled agency that provides a source of
borrowing for public authorities.
REVENUE EXPENDITURE - The day to day costs incurred by the Authority in providing services.
INVENTORIES – The amount of unused or unconsumed goods held for future use within one year.
Stocks of goods held by the Authority are valued at the end of each financial year and carried forward
to be matched to use when required.
118
2015/2016 STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTS
Here at the London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority we are continually trying to improve the
ways in which we provide information. Your views are important to us in assisting us to improve the
content, language and format used in of our accounts, and we would be extremely grateful if you
could complete the attached questionnaire and let us know any ways in which we can make our
Statement of Accounts more useful to you.
Please tick the Yes or No boxes below. It would also be very helpful if you would add a comment
explaining the reason for any No choices
1
Did you find the information contained within the Statement of Accounts easy to understand?
Yes
No
Comments
2
Was there a sufficient level of information to allow you the user to assess the financial
performance of the Fire and Rescue Authority.
Yes
No
Comments
3
Did you find that the financial information contained was presented in a clear and easy to
understand format?
Yes
No
Comments
4
Did you find the notes to the accounts added value to the financial statements?
Yes
No
Comments
5
Did you find the Glossary helpful?
Yes
No
Comments
119
6
Overall, has the statement of accounts been of value in helping you to assess the Fire and
Rescue Authority’s financial position and performance?
Yes
No
Comments
7
Do you think there is anything that should be added to the Statement of Accounts to provide
you the user with a more complete view of the financial position and performance of the Fire
and Rescue Authority?
Yes
No
Comments
8
Please state below any further comments or suggested improvements you may have regarding
the Statement of Accounts.
9
Which of the following best describes you?
An employee or elected member of the authority
A member of the public
A member of another organisation/interested party
Thank you for taking the time to complete this questionnaire
Please return the completed feedback questionnaire to:
LFEPA, Finance Accountancy, 1st Floor, 169, Union Street, London, SE1 0LL
Alternatively you can comment by e-mail by addressing your response or comments to the
following e-mail address – [email protected]
120
London Fire Brigade Headquarters
169 Union Street London SE1 0LL
T 020 8555 1200 F 020 7960 3602
Minicom 020 7960 3629
www.london-fire.gov.uk
APPENDIX C
Mr Neil Harris,
Ernst & Young LLP
One Cambridge Business Park
Cambridge
CB4 0WZ
London Fire Brigade is run by the London
Fire and Emergency Planning Authority
Date 18 July 2016
Dear Mr Harris,
Audit for the year ended 31 March 2016
This representation letter is provided in connection with your audit of the financial statements
of London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (“the Authority") for the year ended 31
March 2016. We recognise that obtaining representations from us concerning the information
contained in this letter is a significant procedure in enabling you to form an opinion as to
whether the financial statements give a true and fair view of the financial position of London
Fire and Emergency Planning Authority as of 31 March 2016 and of its expenditure and income
for the year then ended in accordance with the CIPFA LASAAC Code of Practice on Local
Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom 2015/16.
We understand that the purpose of your audit of our financial statements is to express an
opinion thereon and that your audit was conducted in accordance with International Standards
on Auditing (UK and Ireland), which involves an examination of the accounting system, internal
control and related data to the extent you considered necessary in the circumstances, and is
not designed to identify – nor necessarily be expected to disclose - all fraud, shortages, errors
and other irregularities, should any exist. Accordingly, we make the following representations,
which are true to the best of our knowledge and belief, having made such inquiries as we
considered necessary for the purpose of appropriately informing ourselves:
A. Financial Statements and Financial Records
1. We have fulfilled our responsibilities, under the relevant statutory authorities, for the
preparation of the financial statements in accordance with the Accounts and Audit Regulations
2015 and CIPFA LASAAC Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United
Kingdom 2015/16.
2. We acknowledge our responsibility for the fair presentation of the financial statements. We
believe the financial statements referred to above give a true and fair view of the financial
position and of its expenditure and income of the Authority in accordance with the CIPFA
LASAAC Code of Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom 2015/16 and
are free of material misstatements, including omissions. We have approved the financial
statements.
3. The significant accounting policies adopted in the preparation of the financial statements are
appropriately described in the financial statements.
4. We believe that the Authority has a system of internal controls adequate to enable the
preparation of accurate financial statements in accordance with the CIPFA LASAAC Code of
Practice on Local Authority Accounting in the United Kingdom 2015/16 that are, free from
material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
5. There are no unadjusted audit differences identified during the current audit and pertaining
to the latest period presented.
B. Fraud
1. We acknowledge that we are responsible for the design, implementation and maintenance
of internal controls to prevent and detect fraud.
2. We have disclosed to you the results of our assessment of the risk that the financial
statements may be materially misstated as a result of fraud.
3. We have no knowledge of any fraud or suspected fraud involving management or other
employees who have a significant role in the Authority's internal controls over financial
reporting. In addition, we have no knowledge of any fraud or suspected fraud involving other
employees in which the fraud could have a material effect on the financial statements. We have
no knowledge of any allegations of financial improprieties, including fraud or suspected fraud,
which could result in a misstatement of the financial statements or otherwise affect the financial
reporting of the Authority.
C. Compliance with Laws and Regulations
1. We have disclosed to you all known actual or suspected noncompliance with laws and
regulations whose effects should be considered when preparing the financial statements.
D. Information Provided and Completeness of Information and Transactions
1. We have provided you with:
 Access to all information of which we are aware that is relevant to the preparation of the
financial statements such as records, documentation and other matters as agreed in terms
of the audit engagement.
 Additional information that you have requested from us for the purpose of the audit and
 Unrestricted access to persons within the entity from whom you determined it necessary
to obtain audit evidence.
2. All material transactions have been recorded in the accounting records and are reflected in
the financial statements.
3. We have made available to you all minutes and papers of the meetings of the Authority, its
Resources Committee; Governance, Performance and Audit Committee; Strategy Committee
and Appointments and Urgency Committee held through the year to the most recent meeting
held on 11 July 2016.
4. We confirm the completeness of information provided regarding the identification of related
parties. We have disclosed to you the identity of the Authority's related parties and all related
party relationships and transactions of which we are aware, including sales, purchases, loans,
transfers of assets, liabilities and services, leasing arrangements, guarantees, non-monetary
transactions and transactions for no consideration for the period ended, as well as related
balances due to or from such parties at the year end. These transactions have been
appropriately accounted for and disclosed in the financial statements.
5. We have disclosed to you, and the Authority has complied with, all aspects of contractual
agreements that could have a material effect on the financial statements in the event of noncompliance, including all covenants, conditions or other requirements of all outstanding debt.
E. Liabilties and Contingencies
1. All liabilities and contingencies, including those associated with guarantees, whether written
or oral, have been disclosed to you and are appropriately reflected in the financial statements.
2. We have informed you of all outstanding and possible litigation and claims, whether or not
they have been discussed with legal counsel.
3. We have recorded and disclosed all liabilities, related litigation and claims, both actual and
contingent. The Authority has not provided any guarantees to any third parties.
4. No other claims in connection with litigation have been or are expected to be received.
F. Subsequent Events
1. Other than.the events described in Note 5 to the financial statements, there have been no
events subsequent to period end which require adjustment of or disclosure in the financial
statements or notes thereto.
G. Accounting Estimates
1. We believe that the significant assumptions we used in making accounting estimates,
including those measured at fair value, are reasonable.
2. Accounting estimates recognised or disclosed in the financial statements:
 We believe the measurement processes, including related assumptions and
models, we used in determining accounting estimates is appropriate and the
application of these processes is consistent.
 The disclosures relating to accounting estimates are complete and appropriate in
accordance with the applicable financial reporting framework.
 The assumptions we used in making accounting estimates appropriately reflects
our intent and ability to carry out specific courses of action on behalf of the entity,
where relevant to the accounting estimates and disclosures.
 No subsequent event requires an adjustment to the accounting estimates and
disclosures included in the financial statements.
H Retirement benefits
On the basis of the process established by us and having made appropriate enquiries, we are
satisfied that the actuarial assumptions underlying the scheme liabilities are consistent with our
knowledge of the business. All significant retirement benefits and all settlements and
curtailments have been identified and properly accounted for.
I Use of an expert
We agree with the findings of the experts engaged to evaluate the valuation of assets included
in the financial statements and have adequately considered the qualifications of the experts in
determining the amounts and disclosures included in the financial statements and the
underlying accounting records. We did not give or cause any instructions to be given to the
experts with respect to the values or amounts derived' in an attempt to bias their work, and we
are not otherwise aware of any matters that have had an effect on the independence or
objectivity of the experts.
Yours Faithfully,
…………………………….............
Sue Budden
I confirm that this letter has been discussed and agreed at the Governance,
Performance and Audit Committee on 11 July 2016
………………………………………..
Chair of Governance, Performance and Audit Committee
Report title
Internal Audit – Progress Report Quarter 4 2015/16
Meeting
Date
11 July 2016
Report by
Document Number
FEP 2613
Public
Summary
This report summarises the work carried out under the Internal Audit Shared Service Agreement by
the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC)’s Directorate of Audit, Risk and Assurance
(DARA) in the 4th quarter of 2015/16. It provides an assessment of the adequacy and effectiveness
of the internal control framework within the Authority. The report also provides an update on the
status of accepted agreed actions as requested by the Governance, Performance and Audit
Committee (GPAC) Members at the meeting on 10 September 2012 (FEP 1947).
Recommendations
That the Committee:
1. Notes the work undertaken by Internal Audit in the fourth quarter of the year; and
2. Notes the current assessment of the adequacy of the internal control framework for each
review shown in Annex B.
Introduction and Background
1. The attached report summarises the work carried out under the Internal Audit Shared Service
Agreement by MOPAC’s Directorate of Audit, Risk and Assurance (DARA) in the fourth quarter
of 2015/16. The report provides an assessment on the adequacy and effectiveness of the
internal control framework for each of the Internal Audit final reports issued since the last report
to GPAC on 7 March 2016 (FEP2562). It highlights variations to the audit plan, in particular,
where the focus of a review has changed from assurance to consultancy, at the request of
management, to reflect changes in the operating environment. We have completed four riskbased assurance, two advisory and two follow up reviews since the last report. Three risk-based
reviews received an adequate assurance rating; Cyber Security, Material Systems and Internal
Communication Tools. The remaining assurance review was a Thematic Review of Operational
Equipment on Appliances which received a limited assurance rating. It should be noted that the
control environment has since improved with six of the nine agreed actions already having been
fully implemented. The two advisory reviews were based on Service Charge Provisions and Risk
Management. The two follow up reviews were Disclosure and Barring Service and Risk
Management 2013/14.
2. The report also provides an update on the status of agreed actions as requested by the GPAC
Members at the meeting on 10 September 2012. This update covers all agreed actions reported
to the committee in March 2016 (including any previous agreed actions still outstanding at this
date). The responses demonstrate an improvement in the control environment through the
implementation of all of the agreed actions that were due to be implemented at the date of this
report. This excludes six actions where the implementation date has been deferred. The reasons
for deferral and the new date that has been proposed are set out in Annex A to Appendix 1. We
will continue to track the status of accepted agreed actions, in liaison with the departments
concerned, and will report progress to the GPAC.
3. The Internal Audit progress report is attached as Appendix 1.
Head of Legal and Democratic Services Comments.
4. The Head of Legal and Democratic Services has reviewed this report and has no comments.
Director of Finance and Contractual Services Comments
further comments.
Sustainable Development Implications
6. There are no sustainable development implications in relation to this report.
Consultations Undertaken
7. No staff side consultation was undertaken in relation to this report.
8. There are no equalities implications associated with this report.
Appendix 1 – Internal Audit progress report for the fourth quarter 2015/16
1. The Greater London Authority Act 1999 (Section 127)
2. LFEPA Financial regulations
3. Accounts and Audit (England) Regulations 2015
Proper officer
Director Finance and Contractual Services
Contact officer
Telephone
Email
Lindsey Heaphy/Karen Mason/Cassie Proctor
07917 557084 Ext 31359
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
Appendix 1
GOVERNANCE, PERFORMANCE AND AUDIT
COMMITTEE (GPAC)
11 July 2016
___________________________________________________________________
Directorate of Audit, Risk and Assurance
Progress Report
Report by: The Director of Audit, Risk and Assurance
___________________________________________________________________
1.
Report Summary
This report summarises the work carried out under the Internal Audit Shared
Service Agreement by the Directorate of Audit, Risk and Assurance (DARA) in
the fourth quarter of 2015/16. It also provides an assessment of the adequacy
and effectiveness of the internal control framework for each of the Internal
Audit final reports issued since the last report to GPAC on 7 March 2016 (FEP
2562).
2.
Recommendations to the GPAC
That the GPAC:
a) Notes the work undertaken by Internal Audit in the fourth quarter of the
year.
b) Notes the current assessment of the adequacy of the internal control
framework for each review shown in Annex B.
3.
Supporting Information
Fourth Quarter DARA Review Activity
3.1
Since the last GPAC, eight reports have been finalised which include four riskbased assurance reports, two advisory reports and two follow up reports. The
risk-based assurance reports covered Cyber Security, Material Systems,
Internal Communication Tools and a Thematic Review of Operational
1 of 24
Appendix 1
Equipment on Appliances. The two advisory reviews were for Service Charge
Provisions and Risk Management. We also completed two follow up reviews of
Disclosure and Barring Service and Risk Management 2013/14. A further
review is at draft report stage and one follow up is in progress. The time taken
to finalise audit reports and to complete assignments continues to improve
with Audit Managers working with Senior Management to manage this process
effectively. The Disclosure and Barring Service follow up review identified that
one medium and one high rated agreed actions remain outstanding, the high
risk action is regarding the timeliness of returns for enhanced checks. This risk
continues to be addressed by the Recruitment team as a priority by
implementing a new processes for sending and receiving checks. This is
improving the performance and reducing the risk of late returns.
3.2
Annex B highlights the overall opinion for each review completed, areas of
effective control and risks, together with agreed actions. The status of any
outstanding agreed actions will be reported at the next GPAC to allow for
effective management action to address the issues identified.
3.3
We have continued to provide advice in relation to existing Business
Processes and advisory work on developing systems within the Authority has
also continued during the quarter. This includes work on Risk Management
and Service Charge Provisions where the focus of these reviews changed
from assurance to consultancy, at the request of management, to reflect
changes in the operating environment. The Risk Management review
provided advice and guidance on how the risk management process could be
refreshed and further embed risk management across the Authority. The
Service Charge Provisions review provided advice to the business on matters
relating to existing and billed charges available to the Authority
3.4
We continue to liaise with other assurance providers within the Authority to
ensure a joined-up assurance approach towards the Authority’s key risks.
3.5
Two cases of potential irregularity and/ or fraud have been reported to us
during this period, one regarding fuel cards and one regarding suspect
purchase orders. Enquiries are continuing in relation to these cases, the
results will be reported to committee when the work is completed. In the
interim, any underlying control issues that have been identified are being
addressed.
3.6
Liaison with Operational Senior Management with regards to our audit
programme of station audits and thematic reviews across Boroughs has
continued. This will continue to ensure the 2016/17 plan covers all appropriate
areas.
2 of 24
Appendix 1
Internal Control Framework
3.7
Our control environment opinion has remained ‘adequate’ as a result of the
reviews undertaken in the quarter. Three of the risk and assurance reports
finalised since the last GPAC meeting on 7 March 2016 (FEP 2562) achieved
an assurance rating of adequate. The fourth, Thematic Review of Operational
Equipment on Appliances, received a limited assurance rating. However, the
control environment has improved with six of the nine agreed actions already
having been fully implemented. Further detailed information on each review is
shown at Annex B, and a number of the agreed actions have already been
implemented indicating continued improvement in this area. We will track the
progress of the remaining agreed management actions arising from these
reviews and, to allow sufficient time for appropriate action to be taken, we will
report on the progress of outstanding actions at the next GPAC meeting.
3.8
Two Q4 reports are being finalised and will not be reported to GPAC until the
next quarter. One, Physical Security, is currently at draft report stage a follow
up report for Protective Security is currently being drafted.
3.9
GPAC are provided with the number of implemented agreed actions, and
detailed information on the status of outstanding agreed actions is attached at
Annex A. To ensure that management have a suitable timeframe in which to
respond, the updates provided at Annex A are for reports that have already
been presented to the Committee. The responses received to date
demonstrate the extent to which the control framework continues to improve
following the implementation of agreed actions.
3.10 From the agreed actions reported to the March 2016 GPAC, six have been
deferred at the request of management. Of the remaining actions, all 32 due
for implementation have been implemented. Further information can be found
at Annex A, where the revised implementation dates for the actions which
have been deferred are shown in italics.
DARA Performance in the Fourth Quarter 2015/16
3.11
We have met our target to deliver the 2015/16 plan with all planned audits
being completed to at least draft report stage by year end. Two 2015/16
audits were deferred during the year at the request of the business and have
been included in the 2016/17 internal audit plan. These related to the reviews
of Operational Resilience and Safeguarding Referrals. All deferred work has
been replaced by other work during the year to reflect changing business
priorities. All Q4 audit reviews have been completed under budget.
3 of 24
Appendix 1
3.12
Our follow up programme is embedded and we have undertaken two follow up
reviews in Q4 and a total of eight follow up reviews in 2015/16. We also
continue to track and report on the status of agreed recommendations
previously reported to the Committee.
First Quarter 2016/17 Planned DARA Activity
3.13 Reviews of Statutory Compliance Framework, Fire Safety Youth Engagement
Programmes, Counter Fraud Governance Arrangements and Environment
Management Programmes have commenced. Follow up reviews of Major
Contracts – PFI Contract and Major Contracts – Fleet and Operational
Equipment Items Management and Maintenance are in progress and due to
be finalised by the end of the quarter. Follow up reviews of Fire Safety
Department, Fire Fighter’s Pension Schemes, and Project Management Office
have been completed.
4
Equality and Diversity Impact
The MOPAC’s commitments to equality and diversity are considered in all
activities carried out by the Directorate of Audit, Risk and Assurance. All field
auditors and investigators have received appropriate training in equality and
diversity issues and their performance is monitored. The Internal Audit work
plan is designed to provide as wide a range of coverage of staff and systems
as is possible and practicable.
5
Risk Implications
Completion of the audit plan enables the Director of Audit, Risk and Assurance
to provide assurance on the adequacy and effectiveness of the LFEPA internal
risk and control framework.
6
Contact Details
Report authors: Lindsey Heaphy, Karen Mason and Cassie Proctor on behalf
of the Director of Audit, Risk and Assurance.
Email: [email protected] Tel: 07917 557084
[email protected]
Ext: 31362
[email protected]
Ext: 31358
7
Appendices and Background Papers


Annex A – Status of outstanding agreed actions reported to GPAC since
10 September 2012.
Annex B – Summary of Internal Audit work carried out in Q4 2015/16
4 of 24
SUMMARY OF OUTSTANDING ACTIONS REPORTED TO GPAC
No.
Risk/ Recommendation
Priority
BRIGADE CONTROL – Report issued February 2015
Failure to monitor the cause of lost Medium
1.
rings when the number of rings is high
could prevent service improvements
being identified at the earliest
opportunity and could result in
complaints being received potentially
resulting in adverse publicity.
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Date
Management Action
Update and Status as at
May 2016
Principal
Operations
Manager
A process for reviewing and monitoring lost
calls will be considered once the new
mobilising system has gone live in July
2015.
30 October
2015
STATUS
Due to continuing stability
issues we have been unable to
update the system with the two
patch upgrades and therefore
the product is still at a build
from February 2016. Updates
and patches are taking place,
and are expected to be
completed over the next two
months.
I would refer to the PECs agreement which
states that it is BT’s responsibility for these
calls until they have handed it over to us. We
provide BT will alterative numbers and other
FRS’s to contact so I think we have sufficient
resilience to mitigate long rings. We have
never received an indication that we have
lost a call.
FOLLOW UP OF PETTY CASH REVIEW – Report issued February 2015
Head of Finance
A further review of the nature and Low
2.
volume of payments made from petty
cash floats against the cost of
administering the system with a view
to moving towards alternative payment
methods.
Annex A
in conjunction with
Director
of
Operations
As part of the petty cash review, negotiations
are currently being conducted with the Staff
Side on proposals for changing the current
petty cash system leading to a more effective
and efficient system.
Revised
Date:
31 January
2016
Revised
Date:
July 2016
Revised
Date:
September
2016
30
2015
June
Revised
date:
31 Dec 2015
Revised
Date:
30
June
2016
Revised
Date:
31
December
2016
STATUS
Negotiations continue on new
arrangements.
Progress is
being made and a revised draft
proposal is with staff side, and
management are awaiting a
response.
The timing of this, and whether
further negotiation will be
required,
is
not
clear.
Therefore the due date has
been revised to reflect this.
5 of 24
No.
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Annex A
Date
HEALTH AND SAFETY – Report issued October 2015
The lack of training available to Medium Responsibility – A training programme will be developed to
3.
managers could
ability to ensure
various policies
likelihood of a
incident.
4.
impact upon their
compliance to the
and increase the
health and safety
Basing the policy on responsibilities
rather than activities or actions that
should lead to the completion of risk
assessment could result in the failure
of managers to comply with the policy
requirements and increase the risk of
an avoidable health and safety
incident.
Head
Operational
Assurance
of
cover the various requirements of managers
in relation to health and safety.
Revised
Date:
st
31 August
2016
To be actioned
by:
Head of Health
and Safety
Medium
Responsibility –
Head
of
Operational
Assurance
To be actioned
by:
Head of Health
31 March
2016
The policy will be re-written so that it is based
on the events or actions that may lead to a
risk assessment needing to be completed,
and the roles and responsibilities will be
applied to these.
31 March
2016
Revised
Date:
31 July 2016
Management Action
May 2016
STATUS:
Following a review of the
training
requirement
for
managers with respect to
health and safety management
the
NEBOSH
General
Certificate in Occupational
Health and Safety has been
introduced. The NEBOSH
certificate is a two week
course, which is formally
assessed by both written
examination and a practical
assessment. As of April 2016
47 station/group managers
and 6 FRS managers have
completed the course and
passed the examinations. A
further
12
station/group
managers started the course
on 9 May 2016.
Development of local accident
investigation
training
with
Babcock Training
Ltd is
ongoing.
STATUS:
Health and Safety Policy has
been
reviewed
by
the
responsible team and Heads
of Service consultation closed
on Friday 27th May.
The policy will be amended
6 of 24
No.
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Annex A
Date
and Safety
5.
The Health and Safety team do not
currently
maintain
oversight
or
scrutinise the appropriate completion
of risk assessments. This lack of
oversight could result in assessments
not being adequately completed, or the
duplication of risk assessments where
separate managers are completing
assessments in relation to the same
activity.
Medium
Responsibility –
Head
of
Operational
Assurance
To be actioned
by:
Head of Health
and Safety
Station based risk assessments:
The Health and Safety team will provide
guidance and generic risk assessments for
station based risks and will amend the
station-based audit to include review of
station based risk assessments.
FRS risk assessments:
The Health and Safety team will request each
Head of Service to provide a list of the risk
assessments that they have. The lists will be
reviewed to ensure that there is consistency
across the organisation and to identify areas
where there ma
y be duplication of effort. The findings will be
disseminated and where appropriate actions
taken, and thereafter the exercise will be
completed on a periodic basis.
31 March
2016
Revised
Date:
31 August
2016
Management Action
May 2016
and formally entered into the
staff side health and safety
consultative
committee
(BJCHSW) for consultation on
16th June 2016, which is
currently ongoing.
STATUS:
Station-based
risk
assessments – complete
The health and safety team
have analysed station health
and safety audits and prepared
a report for senior operational
managers. Additionally brief
guidance has been prepared
for persons in control of
premises with regard to
station-based risks. Health and
Safety Auditors review stationbased risk in their audits and
provide
a
report
with
recommendations for action to
person in control of premises.
FRS risk assessments –
ongoing (off target)
A brief review of headquarters
departments has shown that
there are few departmental risk
assessments in place. Heads
of Service were asked to
nominate a person to work
with the health and safety
team to develop departmental
risk assessments. All FRS
7 of 24
No.
Priority
Responsibility
6.
a) Failure to effectively promote the
reporting of all accidents and near
misses across both operational
and non-operational teams could
result in the under-reporting of
incidents
and
increase
the
likelihood of future health and
safety events re-occurring.
Medium
Responsibility –
Head
of
Operational
Assurance
b) Failure to ensure that events are
reported promptly could impact
upon the effectiveness of the
subsequent investigation.
c) This lack of capability prevents the
Health and Safety team providing
effective oversight of this area, and
potentially prevents improvements
to the process being identified.
d) Failure to ensure that the expected
timescales for concluding an
investigation (and the criteria that
should be applied in determining
To be actioned
by:
Head of Health
and Safety
Annex A
Agreed Action
1. A health and safety communications
programme will be developed for both
operational and non-operational staff,
which will include the need to report all
accidents and near misses at appropriate
intervals.
2.
Procurement of a new software solution
has been approved, and this will be
purchased by the end of March 2016. A
process for monitoring the effectiveness
of the reporting process will be included
in the development of this software.
3. Following the implementation of the new
software solution Policy 368 will be
updated so that includes all relevant
timescales and up-to-date information.
Date
31 August
2016
Management Action
May 2016
Heads
of
Service
(and
Operational Heads of Service
with
staff
based
at
headquarters) have nominated
staff to work with health and
safety. The health and safety
team are currently arranging
meetings with nominated leads
in order to develop those
departmental
risk
assessments.
STATUS:
Action 1 – complete.
The importance of reporting
near misses and accidents
was emphasised to staff
through
the
publication
Operational News.
Reporting of accidents/near
misses is promoted through
the
Health,
Safety
and
Environmental
Awareness
course available to all staff
through BIG-Learning on LFB
intranet.
Action 2 – ongoing
Systems
have
been
established to monitor timely
completion
of
accident
investigations (Data reported
corporately quarterly and to
Area DACs every month).
8 of 24
No.
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Annex A
Date
Management Action
May 2016
A suitable procurement route
has been identified. The health
and safety team are currently
completing
the
relevant
paperwork to submit to the
Crown Commercial Services G
Cloud procurement framework.
which timescale is appropriate), is
included in the policy could impact
upon
the
timeliness
of
investigatory actions taking place
Specifications for reporting on
notifications,
actions
and
investigation completions and
for quality assurance of
investigation records will be
included in the overall system
specification.
Action 3 – not started
Review of policy dependent on
implementation
of
new
software solution.
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL REVIEW – Report issued January 2016
Current guidance on the calculation of Medium Responsibility – Risk accepted pending the outcome of 30
7.
fares for indirect stand-bys is not
adequately detailed.
As well as
representing a financial risk to the
Authority,
it
leaves
staff
with
responsibilities for the payment and/ or
certification and authorisation of petty
cash in a vulnerable position should
their actions be queried.
Director
Operations
of
To be actioned
by:
Group Manager
Central
Operations
discussions with representative bodies.
RBs are in negotiation with LFB management
about the possibility of changing the payment
system for indirect stand/bys from a payment
of fare plus overtime to a single flat rate
payment.
If discussions break down we will consider
generating station to station fares sheets.
Though the potential costs of creating these
may outweigh any savings.
June
2016
Revised
Date:
31
December
2016
STATUS:
Negotiations continue on new
arrangements.
Progress is
being made and a revised draft
proposal is with staff side, and
management are awaiting a
response.
The timing of this, and whether
further negotiation will be
required,
is
not
clear.
Therefore the due date has
been revised to reflect this.
CREDITORS – Report issued December 2015
9 of 24
Annex A
No.
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Date
8.
There is a risk that orders made
outside POMS could potentially bypass
authorisation controls.
Medium
To be actioned
by:
Head of
Procurement
The issue has been addressed in a report
(Third Party Spend Review – 2014/15) to the
Contracts Oversight Board on 11 November
2015 who approved the recommendation that
the removal of ‘buyer’ system access rights
for all staff outside of the Procurement
department. This is an aspirational longer
term objective as it needs to be managed
carefully to ensure that the ability for
departments to raise purchase orders is not
compromised and that the new Procurement
departments Data Analytics team will be
responsible for managing this process.
December
2016
9.
There is a risk that the use of generic
user profiles and the ability to both
raise and approve purchase orders
may result in the lack of segregation of
duties and insufficient audit trails which
could lead to inappropriate or
unnecessary purchase/ payment.
Medium
To be actioned
by:
Head
of
Procurement
The use of agency staff on the Property
Helpdesk is a temporary arrangement prior to
the contract commencement and full go live
of the Property Integrator contract with KBR.
Once fully live orders will no longer be raised
by the Property Helpdesk and as referred to
in the action plan 2 above the ‘buyer’ system
access rights will be removed from Property
Helpdesk personnel.
December
2016
STATUS:
Discussions are in hand to
ensure buyer system access
rights are removed from
Property helpdesk personnel
following full go live date of the
Property Integrator contract
with KBR in August. A new
Data Analytics manager has
been appointed and is due to
commence mid-July. The new
manager will be responsible
for ensuring that the process of
removing buyer access rights
for staff is managed. and is
working well.
31
August
2016
STATUS:
Top Managers Group Meeting
on 27 January 2016 agreed
that that the opportunity be
THEMATIC REVIEW OF FIRE STATIONS (POMS) – Report issued January 2016
Failure to ensure that staff are aware Medium Responsibility – Procurement have highlighted modifications
10.
orders have been cancelled could
prevent them from taking appropriate
actions to rectify the reasons for
Head
Procurement
of
that are required for further investment in the
POMS system, which were presented to the
Top Management Group on 27 January
Management Action
May 2016
STATUS:
The removal of ‘buyer system’
access rights for staff outside
the Procurement Department
has commenced. A new Data
Analytics manager has been
appointed and is due to
commence mid-July. The new
Manager will be responsible
for ensuring that the process of
removing buyer access rights
for staff is managed and is
working well.
10 of 24
No.
cancellation promptly, which will delay
the delivery of the items.
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
To be actioned
by:
Head
of
Procurement
Business
Systems
and
Analytics
2016. The outcomes from this will determine
what modifications can be made.
Annex A
Date
FOLLOW UP OF PROCUREMENT ACTIVITY REVIEW – Report issued October 2015
The Code of Practice has yet to be Medium Responsibility – Legal and policy working party (Procurement, 1 April 2016
11.
changed, however, Legal are currently
producing a stand alone conflict of
interest policy. This will encompass the
whole of the LFB. The current deadline
for this policy is 1st April 2016.
Head of Legal
and Democratic
Services
HR and Internal Audit) to continue with the
Declarations of Interest Policy. Approval
should be sought and distributed to all LFB
staff.
Management Action
May 2016
taken to look at the potential
for developing POMs and
making a business case which
will utilise capital money.
An initial paper on progress
made to date will be submitted
to Corporate Management
Team in June following which
a more detailed paper with
proposed costings will be
presented.
Notifications to
users
in
respect
of
cancellations are being built
into
the
proposed
improvements
Subject to the outcome of the
report to CMT, a further
detailed
report
will
be
submitted in the Autumn 2016
STATUS:
A policy has been drafted and
is now the subject of
consultation with employee
representatives. Subject to the
outcome of that consultation, it
will be presented to the
Authority on 30th June 2016. –
an update will be obtained
prior to the GPAC meeting on
11/07/16
11 of 24
SUMMARY OF REPORTS ISSUED IN QUARTER 4 2015/16
Annex B
Audit Title, Date of Issue and
Risk / Recommendation
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Date
Areas of Effective Control
Adequate Assurance – The control framework is adequate and controls to mitigate key risks are generally operating effectively, although a number of controls need
to improve to ensure business objectives are met.
Material Systems
Unauthorised
system.
access
to
the
High
Report issued – April 2016
Testing of 25 starters, 25 leavers and 25
amendments confirmed all processes were
completed in line with procedures and
expectations. On a daily basis all payroll
entries are reviewed by the payroll manager
using the daily variation report. This includes
authorisation via Hotwire, email and bank
change form from GLA staff members.
Testing a sample of 5 StARS overtime claims
confirmed all claims were authorised on the
system to ensure that the automated
processing was operating. However, we did
not confirm that the correct delegation of
authority had been set up within the system.
Journals are processed via an automated
system called share point. Testing revealed
the journals selected were authorised by
Medium
Action Responsibility
Deputy Head of Finance
Responsible
Head
Service
Head of Finance
There is a policy and procedure
in the financial statements under
property plant and equipment.
However the policy does not
highlight
the
arrangements
throughout the year for the
maintenance of the fixed asset
register including the disposal
register and capital monitoring.
Lack of up to date internal
procedures/guidelines for noncurrent assets may mean that
roles and responsibilities are not
clearly defined.
These users will be reviewed as
part of the normal review processThey are deemed to require
occasional use
Complete
Officers have been reminded they
need to evidence their actions.
There were no errors in the input.
Complete
The fixed asset register is updated
on an annual basis and capital
expenditure
monitoring
is
undertaken on a monthly basis.
Disposal of balance sheet assets
are reported to Committee and the
asset register will be updated as
part of the closing of accounts
procedures.
Complete
Responsible
Head
of
Service
Head of Information and
Communication
Technology
Three key areas were looked at as part of the
review; including Payroll, Main Accounting
Systems, and Non-Current Assets.
Clear monthly timetables of payroll payments
for 2015/16 have been agreed which include
the Payroll Run Schedule, Payroll Input
Deadline, payroll payments runs. Timetables There is a risk that an accurate
have communicated to the relevant members audit trail may not be held for
of staff,
records with missing initials.
Head
of
Enterprise
Application
Medium
of
Responsible
Head
Service
Head of Finance
of
12 of 24
appropriate delegated officers.
Reconciliations between control accounts and
the general ledger are undertaken on a
monthly basis for Accounts Receivable and
Payroll.
Annex B
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Date
Job descriptions do not reflect
current
roles
and
responsibilities, resulting in key
tasks and activities not being
undertaken.
Medium
Although some processes have
changed
the
role
and
responsibilities
of
the
job
description have not. The roles of
payroll officers are to be reviewed
in 2016/17 and the review
evidenced.
31
August
2016
Where LFB are unable to obtain
a monthly copy of the rulebase
there is an increased risk non
compliance with agreed LFB
recorded rule settings.
Medium
LFB can request a copy of the
rulebase by raising an incident. It is
also being discussed to include a
latest copy of the rulebase in the
monthly BT reports.
30
June
2016 - an
update
will
be obtained
prior to the
GPAC
meeting on
11/07/16
Failure to update the Patch
Management Policy following
changes to mobilisation systems
and internet service provider
could lead to inappropriate
actions being taken in event of
failure.
Medium
Patch Management Policy to be
brought up-to-date.
Q2 2016/17
Responsible
Head
Service
Head of Finance
of
Each department is given budget codes,
which they use to highlight any new assets
acquired by the department. Codes are
monitored on a monthly basis through the
Capital monitoring process and is also
reported to the Resource Committee.
Disposed assets are identified by the
department manager and any amendments
are made to the asset register. The asset
register is held on a password protected
spreadsheet.
Cyber Security
Report issued – April 2016
A comprehensive framework of security
policies and procedures is in place
supporting the cyber control framework.
Collectively providing a suitable framework of
LFB’s intent to manage and control system
security.
LFB network and system access control
policies and procedures reduces the risk that
access to information and systems is not
protected and controlled, helping to ensure
information and its processing facilities are
available and secure.
Head of ICT
Responsible
Service
Head of ICT
Head
of
Head of ICT
Responsible
Service
Head of ICT
Head
of
13 of 24
Annex B
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
To reflect the integration of ICT with IM, an
integrated organisation chart has been
produced. The responsibility for information
risk management is spread across a number
of roles and documented in relevant job
descriptions.
Failure to obtain a monthly
report of uninstalled/unapproved
patches
could
lead
to
inappropriate
patch
updates/removals
being
undertaken resulting in breach
of ICT security and the Patch
Management Policy.
Medium
Head of ICT
Patch exception reports to
developed and issued monthly.
There is a risk that the absence
of a policy/procedure note may
influence
staff
to
disregard/downgrade
the
importance
of
using
the
communication tools available.
Medium
Failure to effectively convey to
staff the importance of taking
part in the survey and/or lack of
incentives could result on a low
response
rate from some
members of the workforce.
Medium
A Security Incident Response Procedure
Forensic Readiness Plan has been
documented by LFB. The aim of the
Procedure is to ensure LFB plan and are
prepared for information security incidents to
respond effectively and minimise adverse
impacts on business operations.
Internal Communication Tools
Report issued – May 2016
An Internal Communications Survey was
made available throughout the month of
September 2014. The survey was published
in Shout, on the homepage of Hotwire as well
as updates and emails sent directly from the
Internal Communications Manager to Watch
Managers and Control Managers.
The survey was well designed and covered
relevant areas asking five questions; three
closed text questions about use and
preferences
of
current
internal
communication tools and two open text
questions asking for staff to share
suggestions. Responses were mostly echoed
by staff in the discussion groups which
identified
online Shout, Hotwire, email
messages and line managers being the most
Responsible
Service
Head of ICT
Head
Date
be
30 December
2016
Policy
about
internal
communication tools to be drafted
and
published
through
the
Brigade’s policy procedure. This will
cover what tools we have, who they
are aimed at, how staff can access
them and contribute to them and
useful
contacts
in
the
Communications Team.
1 September
2016
As part of the survey for 2016/17,
we will consider:
30 November
2016
of
Internal
Communications
Manager
Responsible
Head
of
Service
Head of Communications
Internal
Communications
Manager
Responsible
Head
of
Service
 A new approach to the survey –
develop
alternatives
and
additions
to
the
online
questionnaire to gauge staff
opinion. For example, running adhoc training sessions lead by
watch / crew managers enabling
watches to respond as a watch.
14 of 24
used and most useful communication tools.
Annex B
Priority
Responsibility
A report was provided to CMB with the
results and recommendations from the
survey
in
December
2014.
Six
recommendations were raised including:
1. Setting up a communication forum
2. Increase the number of face-to-face
briefings
3. Improve Shout newsletter
4. Better targeting of emails from the
communications mailbox
5. Open up access to online information
6. Encourage the use of blogs and other
social media
At a meeting with the Commissioner, it was
agreed that the paper did not need to go to
Resources Committee but would go to CMB
at some point in 2016 to report on progress.
It was also agreed that surveys would be
carried out every two years.
Date
 Consider use of incentives for
completing an online survey for
individuals.
Access to the survey was available to all staff
and appropriate restrictions were in place to
only allow respondents to edit their own
responses.
The Internal Communications Manager’s
PDRS objectives include target dates for the
implementation of the most appropriate
/popular choice of Brigade communication
tool.
Agreed Action
 More engagement with watch
and other line managers ahead of
the survey so they are fully
informed of why and when the
survey is taking place.
If some groups of staff are not
included or encouraged to take
part in the discussion group
sessions a complete overall
view
of
preferences
and
suggestions
may
not
be
obtained.
Medium
Internal
Communications
Manager
Responsible
Head
of
Service
This action is dependent on
whether discussion sessions are
used for the next survey. As set out
in action 2, there may be
alternatives.
30 November
2016
Should discussion sessions take
place we would continue to ask for
volunteers rather than make them
compulsory but with better and
more engagement before the
survey is rolled out, the hope is that
more staff would take part.
The risk of not obtaining a complete
overall view of preferences and
suggestions
remains
although
minimised.
There is a risk that if plans to
fulfil the above are not actively
pursued then these objectives
will not be achieved or may be
further delayed.
Medium
Internal
Communications
Manager
Responsible
Head
of
Service
Outline of how survey will be
carried out to be developed and
presented to CMB in August
alongside progress on previous
survey.
15 of 24
31
August
2016
Annex B
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Date
Limited Assurance – The control framework is not operating effectively to mitigate key risks. A number of key controls are absent or are not being applied to meet
business objectives.
Thematic Review of Fire Stations
Operational Equipment on Appliances
–
Issued June 2016
There is a documented framework in place
governing the monitoring and management of
appliance equipment.
The framework is
supported by a number of policies, all of
which are available on the intranet and which
have been reviewed within the last three
years.
There is an online inventory system in place,
which adequately records the date and time
that each inventory is submitted, the
variances reported and the officer completing
the submission. The online system provides
an effective basis for monitoring the location
of tracked items as well as any equipment
variances being reported.
We found that for the tracked items variances
are generally short in duration, as there is a
requirement to confirm the unique reference
numbers of the equipment at the fire station,
as well as the quantity held against the
number required. This allows for greater
scrutiny in this area which is appropriate
given the importance of these items.
Failure to ensure that the
inventories are fully completed,
at the earliest opportunity, could
delay the identification of
missing equipment and leave
appliances on the run without
critical pieces of equipment.
Medium
Failure to verify that all
equipment is available for could
impact on the crews’ ability to
effectively deal with an incident.
Medium
Failure to ensure that the
outcomes of the daily routines
are being acted upon as
necessary could result in the
checks being performed being
ineffective.
Medium
Group Manager
Operational Tactics
Responsible
Head
Service
AC Operational Policy
Policy 724 has been updated to be
more specific about timings of when
an inventory should be completed.
Complete
Complete
of
Service Standard 6 has been
updated to include further quality
assurance checks in this area, and
the SSSO’s and station based
Station Managers have been
provided with additional guidance in
completing Service Standard 6.
Complete
of
Service Standard 6 has been
updated to include further quality
assurance checks in this area, and
the SSSO’s and station based
Station Managers have been
provided with additional guidance in
completing Service Standard 6.
of
GM Central Operations
Responsible
Head
Service
AC Fire Stations
GM Central Operations
Responsible
Head
Service
AC Fire Stations
The quality of the inventory
monitoring process is not
effective as it focusses solely on
the submission rather than the
outcomes of the inventories.
This has resulted in equipment
shortages, and the reasons for
them, not being appropriately
identified,
considered
and
16 of 24
Annex B
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Date
Failure to define clearly when an
inventory is required could result
in crews will not completing an
appropriate inventory if they do
not believe that equipment has
been left behind, which could
leave the appliance short of
equipment, and impact upon
location and/ or repatriation.
Medium
Group Manager
Operational Tactics
more specific about the completion
of post incident inventories.
Complete
Policy 724 states that whenever
possible every appliance should
leave with a full compliment of
its own equipment. The policy
does not specify whether this
includes replenishment from a
relief appliance, and fire station
understanding appeared to vary
in this area. If the policy is
unclear then it could be subject
to interpretation, which could
differ
across
the
brigade
resulting in an inconsistent
approach.
Medium
more specific about actions to be
taken.
Complete
Items considered as critical or of
high value are classified as
tracked items, and Technical
and Services Support (TSS)
determine which items from the
inventory should be tracked.
However, these decisions are
not based on any pre-
Medium
The criteria for tracked items has
been set as items requiring a
standard test to be performed. A
project between Babcock and the
LFB will determine the equipment
subject to standard testing going
forward.
Complete
addressed.
Responsible
Head
Service
of
Group Manager
Operational Tactics
Responsible
Head
Service
of
Head of FLEET
Responsible
Service
Head of TSS
Head
of
17 of 24
Annex B
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Date
Medium
AC Operational Response
The role of Logistics Manager as
defined in PN646 has significantly
changed, therefore the policy will
be reviewed and updated to reflect
changes. This will not take place
until after the ‘Review of Brigade
Control’ as changes to the existing
staff structures and procedures is
likely to be recommended.
31 December
2016
determined,
documented
criteria.
This could lead to
inconsistencies in the outcomes
and an imbalance with the
Authority’s views on risk and risk
appetite.
At the present time the online
inventory system is not used to
assist in the repatriation of nontracked items of equipment,
which could impact upon the
speed and effectiveness of the
repatriation process.
Responsible
Head
Service
of
In the meantime, existing RML
procedures
will
be
carefully
considered with a view to making
them
more
streamlined
and
efficient.
Standard tests are to be
performed in accordance with a
set schedule, and the results
recorded onto manual record
sheets. The testing records for
the tracked items are not
transferred with the equipment,
instead the sheet remains at the
fire station and the unique
reference number is amended at
the top of the page. Manual
records are open to loss, and
could be unclear if the unique
Medium
Head of FLEET
Responsible
Service
Head of TSS
Head
of
We are currently piloting the
electronic tests cards at Willesden
FS. If successful, (the feedback
from the end user is very
promising), this will mean that the
tracked items will always have the
same test card results wherever the
item is in the Brigade. We intend to
roll this system out across the
Brigade covering the main items of
equipment before the end of this
year.
There will need to be some LFB
18 of 24
31 October
2016
Annex B
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
reference numbers are not
appropriately amended.
This
could
impact
upon
the
effectiveness into equipment
maintenance should the need
arise.
Date
changes such as removing the
standard test cards for small gear
as this currently does not serve any
benefits, this can be done now but
would need senior management
approval, the benefits would be that
there would be far less hard copies
of standard tests cards and would
free up valuable end user time and
more importantly will give us a
service/inspection history of the
item in question.
We were unable to review the
inventory and standard test
results
for
the
National
Resilience fleet located at our
sample stations, as these had
not been appropriately recorded
and maintained.
Failure to
ensure that there is capacity to
effectively
complete
the
inventory and standard tests,
and that these are appropriately
recorded could result in the fleet
being ill-equipped for use when
required.
Medium
Original Risk
Failure to ensure enhanced
renewals are completed in a
timely manner could lead to
barred individuals continuing
employment at LFB and/ or
High
Head of FLEET
Responsible
Service
Head of TSS
Head
of
Electronic inventories for National
Resilience vehicles are currently
being trialled with the view to full
roll out later this year.
30 November
2016
Follow Up Finding
30
September
2016
Risk-Based Audit Follow Ups
Follow Up of Disclosure and Barring
Service
Issued March 2016
There has been improvement in the control
Responsible Owner:
Head of HR Operations and
Employment
Services
Manager
Renewal check processes have
been reviewed and updated to
ensure
more
checks
are
undertaken in a timely manner. In
19 of 24
environment since our original review.
These improvements include:
The renewal check process has been
reviewed and updated to ensure more
checks are being undertaken in a timely
manner. Seven reports have been
created which can be run on Cyborg to
quickly identify renewals required, and
status/ stage of the applications.
- A revised timetable has been produced
and distributed to all staff to ensure a
standardised
chasing
process
is
implemented.
- Fortnightly one-to-one meetings have
been established to review all
outstanding checks to identify any
issues which may have arisen as well
as communicating actions to be taken
for delays.
- All information pertaining to completed
checks are updated onto the Cyborg to
ensure missing information is quickly
identified and recorded.
- A trial system has been introduced by
the Human Resources Management
department which allows evidence/
documents for checks to be verified by
Station Managers. The new process will
reduce the amount of time it takes to
process individual checks and enhance
the current practices. Along with the
new system, a new management
structure has been put in place to
support the process.
having access and working with
children or adults in a vulnerable
situation resulting in reputational
damage and legal liabilities.
Failure to obtain basic DBS
check renewals in a timely
manner increases the risk of
unspent
convictions
going
undetected
resulting
in
inappropriate
employees
continuing employment with the
LFB.
Original Agreed Action
1. Where renewal checks are
required these will be processed
in a timely manner. If an
individual requiring an enhanced
check is identified, the FRS Line
Manager/Station Manager will
be notified to ensure they are
put onto restrictive duties if a
delay in DBS coverage is
expected.
2. Both of the enhanced DBS
checks which have not been
completed are being chased by
staff. In accordance with the
procedure the appropriate Line
Managers will be notified to
remove the individuals from their
duties if the forms are not
received with the permitted
timescales.
3. Staff have been reminded of
their responsibilities and are
Annex B
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Date
addition
reports
have
been
produced to be run on Cyborg. The
reports help to ensure documents
are being sent and received in line
with LFB requirements. Line
Managers/Station Managers will be
notified if an enhanced check has
elapsed without a renewal in place
to take the officers off of post until a
check has been received.
Both of the enhanced checks which
had been identified as lapsed
during the audit have been
updated.
Testing a new sample of enhanced
check renewals from September
2015 to January 2016 identified two
had been completed, one no longer
required the check, one is pending
an ID check and one has not yet
returned the forms.
All renewal requests above were
initiated in a timely manner;
however,
the
new
chasing
processes are still being embedded
within the team. Line Managers
have been notified of the renewal
status and the two without valid
enhanced checks are not currently
fulfilling the duties required by an
enhanced check.
All staff have been reminded of
their roles and responsibilities
within the DBS check function. The
Employment Services Manager
liaises with the team on a fortnightly
20 of 24
Annex B
Priority
Responsibility
currently in the process of
completing
the
renewals
identified from testing
Agreed Action
Date
basis through one-to-one catch ups
to ensure there is a constant review
of processes and any issues are
identified early and actions taken.
Further Action
To continue to chase any
outstanding DBS request for both
Basic and Enhanced checks.
Ensure all chasing is adequately
documented and in line with the
revised chasing timetable.
Original Risk
Where DBS renewal checks and
the appropriate chasing does
not take place, there is an
increased risk of LFB liability
resulting from missed or delayed
DBS checks for employees.
1. The chasing timetable and
pro-forma and its use will be
reinforced within the team.
2. Dates on which chasing has
occurred and evidence of this
will be retained and entered onto
the
central
DBS
renewal
spreadsheet where columns
have already been set up for this
information.
3.
Outstanding
renewals
Medium
Responsible Owner:
Head of HR Operations and
Employment
Services
Manager
Follow Up Finding
The timetable has been updated
and distributed to all staff. A staff
meeting was also held where the
need for this to be followed was
reiterated by the Head of HR
Operations.
There has been an improvement in
documenting
the
chasing
of
outstanding checks onto the
renewal spreadsheet however, the
spreadsheet will be phased out and
reviewing
of
the
chaser
emails/documentation
will
be
discussed
at
the
bi-weekly
meetings with the Recruitment
officers and the Employment
Services Manager.
From the 16 issues identified during
the audit 12 have been rectified
with updated DBS information and
21 of 24
30
September
2016
identified through testing will be
chased and DBS checks will be
completed.
Annex B
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Date
checks. For the four remaining they
have not been received; on one
occasion a new form was sent in
January 2016 and the Station
Manager has been contacted, one
is with the Local Police Force which
has been chased by Sutton and
Merton, the LFB’s DBS service, and
the remaining two are still being
chased by the team with new forms
sent.
Of the four above one requires an
enhanced check; the staff member
has been pulled from completing
Youth Engagement work until a
satisfactory check comes back.
Testing a new sample of basic
check renewals from September
2015 to January 2016 identified one
check has been completed; one
was no longer required; two have
been chased with the respective
Station Managers; and one stated
the forms had not been received,
these have now been resent.
Further Action
To continue to chase any
outstanding DBS request for both
Basic and Enhanced checks.
Ensure all chasing is adequately
documented and in line with the
revised chasing timetable.
22 of 24
Annex B
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Date
Follow Up of Risk Management 2013/14
Original Recommendation
The LFEPA need to:
Medium
Responsible Officer:
Risk
and
Continuity
Manager
Follow Up Finding
(ii) The new manual will be ready in
time for the year end reports – by
31 July 2016.
N/A
Issued April 2016
There has been improvement in the control
environment since our original review.
These improvements include:
- A review of the departmental risk
registers and the provision of advice to
the departments
- Inclusion of outstanding actions from
the previous Risk Management Strategy
in the current 2014/17 strategy
- Development of a Risk Management
Manual to replace of the draft Risk
Management Policy
- Half yearly reporting of progress against
the action plan in the Risk Management
Strategy 2014/17 to GPAC
- A review of the training available to
support risk management
It was agreed that risk escalation would not
be reviewed separately, but would be
included in the review of the Risk
Management
Framework,
which
was
completed in April 2016.
i) Review how risks could be
escalated/de-escalated and how
process is evidenced in the
Action Plan of the RMS.
Further Action
The action will be completed as
part
of
the
2014/15
risk
management audit.
ii) A review is carried out of the
skills required by staff and
guidance issued as per the
Action Plan to show progress.
(ii)
Skills
required
and
subsequent guidance will be
reviewed as part of the renewed
risk management approach.
Original Recommendation
The LFEPA needs to consider
the best method for linking risks
identified,
assessed
and
monitored.
This recommendation has been
made in order to achieve a
higher maturity score under the
Alarm risk management model
for processes. In practice, risks
do not necessarily link to each
other in the same way that
Medium
Responsible Officer:
Risk
and
Continuity
Manager
Follow Up Finding
Work has concentrated on helping
departments
understand
what
elements of risk controls should go
into department plans. Plans are
improving over time, and this will
remain as a work in progress item.
Further Action
None.
23 of 24
N/A
Annex B
Priority
Responsibility
Agreed Action
Date
activities and tasks in plans (for
example) do, and there is limited
value to reviewing the risk
management system content for
the few that do. Better value is
to be had from drawing and
linking active key risk (control)
actions into plans so that they
are monitored, delivered and the
risk is managed. It is this linkage
that we are proposing to action.
24 of 24
Report title
Internal Audit – Review of 2015/16
Meeting
Date
11 July 2016
Report by
Document Number
FEP 2614
Public
Summary
This report is submitted in accordance with Financial Regulation 18a (Internal Audit) which
requires that a report be submitted within six months of the close of the previous year, reviewing
that year’s activities for Internal Audit. The report provides Members with the Head of Internal
Audit’s annual opinion on the effectiveness of the London Fire Emergency and Planning Authority
(LFEPA) internal control framework and details of progress on work undertaken during the year
2015/16.
Recommendation
Introduction and Background
1. This report contains the Head of Internal Audit’s annual opinion on the effectiveness of the
London Fire Emergency and Planning Authority (LFEPA) internal control environment. It also
summarises the activities and performance of Internal Audit during the financial year 2015/16.
The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) provides the LFEPA internal audit service
under a shared service arrangement that has been in place since November 2012.
2. The Head of Internal Audit is required to give an opinion at least annually and this is based on
an assessment of the systems of governance, including risk management and the adequacy of
the internal control framework. The evaluation of the adequacy of control is noted from risk
and assurance audits, advisory work and the results of any investigations.
3. The LFEPA governance framework is clearly defined and is in line with best practice to meet
statutory requirements. The risk management framework in use within the Authority is also
based upon recognised best practice and has a clearly defined risk appetite. Audits conducted
during the year show that overall the internal control framework can be assessed as adequate.
The Head of Internal Audit’s overall opinion for 2015/16 is that LFEPA has an adequate internal
control environment and controls to mitigate risks are generally operating effectively.
4. The Internal Audit Annual Report for 2015/16 is attached as Appendix 1.
Head of Legal and Democratic Services Comments
5. The Head of Legal and Democratic Services has read this report and has no comments.
Director of Finance and Contractual Services Comments
further comments.
Sustainable Development Implications
7. There are no sustainable development implications in relation to this report.
Consultations Undertaken
8. No staff side consultation was undertaken in relation to this report.
9. There are no equalities implications associated with this report.
Appendix 1 – Internal Audit Annual Report for 2015/16
1.
2.
3.
4.
The Greater London Authority Act 1999 (Section 127)
LFEPA Financial regulations
The Accounts and Audit (England) Regulations 2011
FEP 86 – Authority (22.3.01)
Proper officer
Sue Budden, Director Finance and Contractual Services
Contact officer
Telephone
Email
Lindsey Heaphy/ Cassie Proctor / Karen Mason
07917557084
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
APPENDIX 1
DIRECTORATE OF AUDIT, RISK AND
ASSURANCE
Internal Audit Service to LFEPA
ASSURANCE
Annual Report
2015/16
LFEPA Annual Report 2015/16
Page
Annual Assurance
1
Governance Framework
2
7
Internal Audit Performance
11
Appendix 2 - Assurance Criteria
14
Introduction
1. This report contains the Head of Internal Audit’s annual opinion on the
effectiveness of the London Fire Emergency and Planning Authority (LFEPA)
risk and internal control environment. It also summarises the activities and
performance of Internal Audit during the financial year 2015/16. The Mayor’s
Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) provides the LFEPA internal audit
service under a shared service arrangement that has been in place since
November 2012.
2. The Head of Internal Audit is required to give an opinion at least annually on the
effectiveness of the risk and control environment and this is based on an
assessment of the systems of governance, including risk management, and on
the adequacy of the internal control framework. The evaluation of the adequacy
of control is obtained primarily from risk and assurance reviews. Advisory and
compliance work together with the results of any investigations also help inform
that opinion. This continues to be a time of significant change for the Brigade
with an ongoing need to increase efficiency and achieve better value for money
whilst maintaining an effective fire service. Internal Audit has, therefore, reported
on opportunities for improving efficiency and value for money in all aspects of its
work during the year. This has led to a slight change in focus with more
emphasis on advisory work.
3. The internal audit programme evaluates and concludes on the effectiveness of
the control mechanisms that are in place to mitigate risks that could impact upon
the achievement of the Authority’s strategic aims and objectives.
Annual Assurance
4. The LFEPA governance framework is clearly defined and is in line with best
practice to meet statutory requirements. The risk management framework in use
within the Authority is also based upon recognised best practice and has a
clearly defined risk appetite. Internal Audit reviews conducted during the year
show that overall the internal control framework can be assessed as adequate
which is a fairly typical rating indicating that systems and controls have been set
up to achieve objectives and generally operate as intended. To maintain this
level of control whilst meeting the challenges of delivering operational services
against a backdrop of ongoing financial pressures and staff reductions, is
indicative of the positive way in which the Authority has responded to, and
continues to address promptly, the issues we highlight.
5. This will help to provide the Authority with a sound platform for achieving an
overall assurance rating of substantial, which is the highest rating. This level of
control is indicative of a fully effective control framework with systems designed
to maximise efficiency and effectiveness with evidenced and consistent
monitoring of activities proving assurance on the achievement of objectives.
However, the benefits of achieving this level of assurance should always be
balanced against the costs involved, current and future risk exposure and the
1
stated risk appetite of the Authority. An assessment of this nature will help to
inform the Authority’s approach going forward and is an essential component of
effective risk management.
The Head of Internal Audit’s overall opinion for 2015/16 is that:
LFEPA has an adequate internal control environment and controls to mitigate
risks are generally operating effectively.
LFEPA Governance, Performance and Audit Committee (GPAC)
6. The GPAC, comprising LFEPA members, has a clearly defined Terms of
Reference that is reviewed each year in line with best practice. The Committee
helps management to discharge its responsibility for maintaining sound systems
of internal control, risk management and governance. It also provides
independent oversight and challenge and is a key mechanism for demonstrating
transparency and openness within the Authority.
7. The Committee met regularly during 2015/16 and received assurance reports
from management and other key assurance providers including Internal and
External Audit and the Risk Management function. These reports, including the
Annual Governance Statement and the External Auditors’ Annual Report,
provide assurance to LFEPA and key stakeholders about the integrity of the
financial information contained within the annual accounts and the mechanisms
in place for managing the key risks facing the organisation. The information
reviewed by the Committee sets out how the Authority ensures value for money,
complies with the regulatory framework, protects its people and assets and
demonstrates appropriate business ethics.
Internal and External Audit Arrangements
8. The need for an internal audit service is laid down in the Accounts and Audit
(England) Regulations 2015. Regulation 5 requires the Authority to undertake an
effective internal audit to evaluate the effectiveness of its risk management,
control and governance processes taking into account Public Sector Internal
Audit Standards (PSIAS). This includes a review of the effectiveness of the
internal audit function at least once every five years by a qualified external
assessment team and is supplemented by an ongoing internal QA process. This
forms part of the system of internal control referred to in Regulation 3 below.
9. Regulation 3 of the Accounts and Audit (England) Regulations 2015 requires that
‘the relevant body (i.e. the Authority) is responsible for ensuring that the body
has a sound system of internal control which facilitates the effective exercise of
that body’s functions and which includes the arrangements for the management
of risk. Under Regulation 6, the Authority is also required to review at least once
2
a year the effectiveness of its internal control systems for inclusion in the annual
governance statement. The work of Internal Audit informs that process and has a
key role to play in assisting the Director of Finance and Contractual Services to
fulfil the statutory roles required by this legislation.
10. MOPAC (DARA) has provided an internal audit service to LFEPA during 2015/16
under a shared service arrangement effective from 1 November 2012 and prior
to that on an interim basis commencing in September 2011.
11. Plans to change the way External Audit services are delivered is a key
component of the Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014. A new local audit
framework commenced during 2015 following the closure of the Audit
Commission in March 2015. Transitional arrangements saw responsibility for the
management of audit contracts transferred to an independent company created
by the Local Government Association (Public Sector Audit Appointments
Limited). Under these new arrangements they will oversee the Commission’s
existing External Audit Contracts from April 2015 until December 2017. As part
of this process, a private firm continued to provide the external audit service to
LFEPA for the 2015/16 financial year under transitional arrangements.
12. The Local Audit and Accountability Act 2014 give the Authority responsibility for
appointing a local auditor. Following a public sector consultation the Secretary of
State (DCLG) agreed to phase in the implementation of the new framework with
larger ‘principal’ bodies including the Authority (or its successor body) moving to
the new arrangements in 2018. In the interim the transitional arrangements will
continue until 31 March 2018. Going forward, an audit panel will be set up to
appoint external auditors and Officers have had initial discussions with the GLA
with a view to having one GLA group audit panel for their functional bodies.
These considerations may, of course, be influenced by the recent transfer of
responsibility for Fire policy from DCLG to the Home Office with the Authority
actively considering the impact of proposed new legislation (the Policing and
Crime Bill) on future arrangements.
Corporate Governance Framework
13. LFEPA has clearly defined corporate governance, strategic planning and
performance management frameworks which are regularly reviewed to ensure
they are in line with best practice and meet statutory requirements.
Performance Management Framework
14. The Performance Management Framework is reviewed regularly by Members,
the Corporate Management Board and the Directorate Management Boards.
The framework has been recognised and referenced by previous external audits
conducted by assessors including the Audit Commission.
15. The framework is aligned with the quarterly monitoring cycle which is a formal
process by which LFEPA reviews progress against targets, aims and objectives.
3
Every quarter, a dedicated Performance Corporate Management Board is held
with Heads of Service using a performance dashboard report showing
performance indicators for corporate objectives, risks, projects, budgets and
individual departmental performance. LFEPA also has a dedicated Performance
Management Framework (PMF) IT system which provides a central repository
for performance data ensuring that there is one consistent foundation for
decision making.
Risk Management Framework
16. The Authority has an embedded risk management framework with a clearly
defined risk appetite. The framework or other aspects of risk management are
reviewed annually by MOPAC DARA to provide an independent opinion on the
adequacy of the risk management framework itself and on the arrangements in
place to identify, treat and monitor risks. Our 2015/16 advisory review of risk
management – review of key controls concluded that the framework was
adequate and we have provided advice to the team concerning a refresh in
some areas. The corporate risk register includes the strategic risks identified by
the Corporate Management Board, the management of which is pivotal to the
achievement of the Authority’s strategic aims and objectives and is supported by
departmental risk registers. There is a well-established reporting process
whereby risk, continuity and governance reports are completed and are reviewed
by the Corporate Management Board before submission to GPAC for
consideration and comment. Information contained in these reports is also
included in the Annual Governance Statement.
17. Risk management is one of a number of disciplines used to guide strategy,
implement Mayoral objectives and make the best use of resources while acting
properly and transparently. It is interwoven with corporate governance, business
planning and performance management. Internal Audit work alongside the
Strategic Risk team to provide independent assurance on the effectiveness of
the control mechanisms that are in place to mitigate identified risks. Our final
audit reports are copied to the Head of Strategy and Inclusion and any risk
issues identified are considered and included within the risk management
process. This has improved synergy between the two functions and facilitates
an integrated approach to risk management.
Audit and Other Assurance Providers
18. Current best practice recommends the use of a ‘Three Lines of Defence’ model
to help clarify roles and responsibilities for assurance provision. Internal Audit,
along with External Audit, are responsible for providing independent assurance
as a key part of the third line and are part of the Authority’s internal assurance
framework. Each assurance provider has a distinct role within the process and
Internal Audit liaises regularly with the second line groups, to discuss their
respective plans, approach and scope of work. Collaboration between the
respective assurance providers is essential to ensure that:
4




All work is properly co-ordinated
Any assurance gaps are identified
Work is not duplicated
Assurance provision is mapped to key risks
19. This process also provides a mechanism to ensure that resources are used
efficiently and effectively and are directed to areas of highest risk and strategic
importance to the Authority. Internal Audit will continue to help raise awareness
of this approach.
Material Systems Work – Key Financial Controls
20. There has been a long established approach to material systems work within the
Authority whereby the External Auditor seeks to rely on work carried out by
Internal Audit, where necessary, to complement their own work programme. The
key financial systems that are material to the audit opinion on the financial
statements are reviewed using a risk-based approach and for 2015/16 included
Debtors, Creditors and the Firefighters Pensions Scheme. This work is
supplemented by our annual key controls testing of the main financial systems
which for last year included Payroll, Main Financial Systems, and Non-Current
Assets. Internal Audit has concluded that the control framework for these
systems is adequate with controls generally operating effectively.
Counter Fraud Work and National Fraud Initiative
21. The Fraud Response Plan and Counter Fraud Strategy are contained within
Authority Policy Documents. They can be found on the Authority’s website and
are also distributed to contractors together with a copy of the Authority’s
Whistleblowing Policy. Under the shared service arrangement, responsibility for
the provision of a counter fraud service now rests with MOPAC. As part of this
arrangement the MOPAC counter fraud team have undertaken National Fraud
Initiative work, proactive counter fraud analysis and investigations into suspected
irregularities as part of a planned programme of work.
22. The Audit Commission’s powers to conduct National Fraud Initiative Work
transferred to the Cabinet Office on 1 April 2015 although data matching
arrangements continued as before. The pension, creditor and payroll datasets
were submitted for the National Fraud Initiative (NFI) 2014/15 exercise with the
matches received in quarter 4. A protocol for processing the matches was
agreed and training provided which allowed the work to continue during 2015/16.
23. There were a total of 2,326 matches in 20 reports that were reviewed during the
year. The exercise has now completed with all recommended matches checked
and resolved except one case which is currently being reviewed by HR
concerning an individual’ s immigration status. There are no other frauds or
errors to report.
5
24. The MOPAC Counter Fraud Team investigated two cases of suspected fraud
and/or financial irregularities during the financial year 2015/16. These cases can
be categorised as follows:

One related to a direct debit for a nominal amount being drawn from an
LFB account. The payment was identified through LFB internal controls
and the money was refunded by the bank. There is no indication of inside
involvement and no loss to the LFB.

A second investigation concerns the alleged misuse of an LFB fuel
card and enquiries are continuing. The outcome will be reported to
the Committee in due course.
25. There has been a reduction in the number of potential fraud cases reported to us
over the past couple of years (reducing from 12 in 2012/13 to 3 last year). To
help us to understand the reasons for this and to raise awareness of fraud
indicators and potential fraud risks in general, a series of fraud awareness events
were delivered to operational Borough Commanders and Station Managers. In
addition, a bespoke risk workshop was held with representatives from Finance,
Procurement and Technical and Support Services to discuss the management of
fraud risks in the non-operational areas. The output from this work is being
analysed and will help to inform the scope of our forthcoming review of Counter
Fraud Arrangements across the Authority.
26. In accordance with the government’s Transparency Code 2015 (February 2015),
the Authority must publish information annually on its counter fraud work. This
includes the total number of employees undertaking investigations and
prosecutions of fraud, and the total number of fraud cases investigated. The
information required to be published is set out on the Authority’s website:
http://www.london-fire.gov.uk/FraudWhistleblowing.asp
6
Annual Assurance
27. Overall, Internal Audit work this year has concluded that the LFEPA internal
control framework is adequate. There were 33 audit reviews (including audit follow
ups) finalised during the year and that were reported to the GPAC. The control
framework assessment for the 25 full reviews conducted was 64% adequate, 20%
substantial, 12% limited, 4% not applicable (this was a consolidated report
drawing together common themes from the fire station work). Follow up reviews
are not provided with an updated assurance ratings although our independent
assessment confirmed that the respective control environments had improved.
Further detail is provided as follows:
Overall Assurance Rating
2015/16
Substantial
5
20%
Adequate
16
64%
Limited
3
12 %
No
0
0%
Not Applicable
1
4%
Total
25
100%
28. Appendix 2 contains the definition of assurance levels. The three limited
assurance reviews were for Statutory Water Supply, Disclosure and Barring
Service, and Fire Stations – Operational Equipment on Appliances (Thematic
Review). Following the issue of the final reports for these reviews, prompt
management action was taken to address the areas identified. Two actions
remain outstanding for the Disclosure and Barring Service review, including one
categorised as high risk, concerning the timeliness of returns for enhanced
checks, but work is now underway to address this issue and we will report
progress to the next meeting. Six of the nine medium risk actions for the
Operational Equipment review have already been implemented although the
report was only finalised in June.
Risk and Assurance Reviews
29. A breakdown of the individual risk and assurance reviews reported to GPAC for
2015/16 is shown below indicating the assurance scores they received (three
substantial, 11 adequate, and two limited) and the GPAC meeting dates. The
table also includes 8 follow up reviews. We liaise, on an ongoing basis, with the
departments concerned to establish the status of the agreed actions arising from
these reviews. The outcome is included in our progress reports that are reported
to GPAC each quarter.
7
Date of Audit
Report
Assurance Rating
Score
GPAC Date
Statutory Water Supply
June 2015
Limited
14/09/15
Fire Safety Department
July 2015
Adequate
14/09/15
Firefighters’ Pension Scheme
August 2015
Substantial
14/09/15
Disclosure and Barring
Service
August 2015
Limited
14/09/15
September 2015
Substantial
16/11/15
September 2015
Adequate
16/11/15
Data Integrity
October 2015
Substantial
16/11/15
Major Contracts – Fleet and
Operational Equipment Items
Management and
Maintenance
October 2015
Adequate
16/11/15
Health and Safety
October 2015
Adequate
16/11/15
October 2015
Adequate
16/11/15
October 2015
Not Applicable
16/11/15
October 2015
Not Applicable
16/11/15
November 2015
Adequate
07/03/16
Corporate Debt Collection
December 2015
Adequate
07/03/16
Creditors
December 2015
Adequate
07/03/16
Budgetary Control (Follow
Up)
December 2015
Not Applicable
07/03/16
Officer Expenses (Follow Up)
December 2015
Not Applicable
07/03/16
December 2015
Not Applicable
07/03/16
January 2016
Not Applicable
07/03/16
March 2016
Not Applicable
11/07/16
April 2016
Not Applicable
11/07/16
April 2016
Adequate
11/07/16
April 2016
Adequate
11/07/16
May 2016
Adequate
11/07/16
Audit Title
Environmental Management
System Framework
Environmental Management
System – Data Quality
Major Contracts – PFl
Building Contract
Recruitment Process (Follow
Up)
Statutory Water Supply
(Follow Up)
Programme Management
Office
Operational Policies and
Procedures (Follow Up)
Procurement Activity (Follow
Up)
Disclosure and Barring
Service (Follow Up)
Risk Management (Follow
Up)
ICT Review – Cyber Security
Material Systems – Key
Financial Systems
Internal Communication
Tools
8
Fire Station Compliance and Thematic Reviews
30. A breakdown of the Fire Station compliance and thematic reviews reported to
GPAC for 2015/16 is shown below indicating the assurance scores they received
(two substantial, five adequate, one limited and one not applicable) and the
GPAC meeting dates. We liaise, on an ongoing basis, with the departments
concerned to establish the status of the agreed actions arising from these
reviews. The outcome is included in our progress reports that are reported to
GPAC each quarter.
Audit
Dowgate Fire Station –
Financial Audit
Ealing Fire Station –
Financial Audit
Chelsea Fire Station –
Financial Audit
Erith Fire Station – Financial
Audit
Hammersmith Fire Station –
Financial Audit
Kensington Fire Station –
Financial Audit
Financial Audits at Fire
Stations – Consolidated
Review
Thematic Review of Fire
Stations – POMS
Thematic Review of Fire
Stations – Operational
Equipment on Appliances
Date of Audit
Report
Assurance Rating
Score
GPAC Date
January 2016
Substantial
07/03/16
January 2016
Substantial
07/03/16
January 2016
Adequate
07/03/16
January 2016
Adequate
07/03/16
January 2016
Adequate
07/03/16
January 2016
Adequate
07/03/16
January 2016
Not Applicable
07/03/16
January 2016
Adequate
07/03/16
June 2016
Limited
11/7/16
Systems Development and Control Advice
31. Internal audit provide advice and assistance to departments as part of our annual
plan. This can be in response to a specific request for assistance or as part of an
ongoing arrangement with the department concerned. Due to significant changes
taking place during the year with ongoing financial pressures and the need to
demonstrate enhanced efficiency within processes and systems, a number of our
planned Risk and Assurance reviews became advisory. This followed discussion
with management to ensure that our approach better reflected the changing
landscape. This included work on Succession Planning, where the new system
was at an embryonic stage of development, Service Charge Provisions and Risk
Management. Key areas of advice provided during the year included:

Disposal of Operational Equipment – We provided advice to the group on
matters relating to disposal of operational equipment within the Authority.
9

Succession Planning – We have provided advice and assistance to the
business in respect good practice to develop succession planning.

Grant Certification – FIRED-uP - We have provided assurance and an audit
certificate on the European FIRED-uP grant which had reached its final
year.

e-HR Solutions - We have provided advice to the business in respect to the
arrangements and value added in place within the implemented e-HR
systems.

Service Charge Provisions – We have provided advice to the business on
matters relating to available and billed charges available to the Authority.

Business Processes – We provided the business with on-going advice and
assistance in relation to ensuring effective business processes throughout
the Authority.

Declaration of Interests – Internal Audit provide on-going advice and
assistance to the business in respect of the current policy and process
regarding the declaration of interests within the Authority.

Risk Management – Advice and guidance has been provided on how the
risk management process can be refreshed to support risk owners and
further embed risk management.
Acceptance and Implementation of Internal Audit
Recommendations
32. Following the change of approach to reporting on the status of recommendations
and agreed actions during 2012/13, the GPAC is now provided with a detailed
quarterly update on the status of all reported recommendations and/or agreed
actions that are outstanding. The figures shown below demonstrate how the
control framework continues to improve following the implementation of agreed
actions. This new approach also provides more transparency and independent
scrutiny which are key components of an effective governance framework.
33. From the 33 audits finalised during the year 2015/16, there was a total of 98
recommendations/ agreed actions reported to the Committee. All had been
accepted by management. From this total of 98, 14 were not due for
implementation at the date of reporting (from those previously reported to
committee). There were six actions where the implementation date has been
deferred. The remainder of the recommendations/ agreed actions have been
implemented or the risk accepted due to the low materiality of the risk in question.
A breakdown of this information is reported to GPAC in the quarterly progress
reports.
34. We continue to liaise with the departments concerned to determine the current
status of the remaining outstanding recommendations and an update will be
reported to the next GPAC in September.
10
Strategic Approach
35. We continued to use a risk based approach to our annual planning cycle, linked,
where possible, to the Authority’s corporate and departmental risks. As part of
this process, we discussed and agreed with CMB members and Heads of
Service the areas upon which they required objective assurance. We used this
approach during our assignment planning and delivery, making sure that our
work focussed primarily upon reviewing key risks and areas that were identified
as material to achieving LFEPA objectives. In addition, we continued providing
assurance on the management of ICT risks in collaboration with an outsourced
provider. This approach is designed to meet the statutory requirement for an
annual opinion on the adequacy and effectiveness of the LFEPA internal control
environment, whilst recognising this is a time of significant change with a
demand for improving efficiency and achieving better value for money.
36. Completion of the 2015/16 annual plan has enabled the LFEPA Head of Internal
Audit to provide the opinion on the effectiveness of the control environment
which will in turn inform the Annual Governance Statement published with the
LFEPA Annual Accounts. We have worked in consultation with management,
striking the appropriate balance between providing assurance, challenge and
advice. We also look to report on opportunities for improving efficiency and value
for money in all aspects of our work.
37. Looking forward to next year, our Annual Plan for 2016/17 was presented to
GPAC in March 2016 (FEP2561) and outlined our proposal to work towards a
reduction of 275 days planned audit days whilst maintaining an adequate level of
audit coverage. This reduction took account of improvements in Internal Audit’s
productivity and the changing nature of the Authority’s organisational structure,
work processes and financial position. The intention is to use the 2016/17
financial year to assess whether this can become a permanent reduction in
planned days and we will keep this under review during the year.
Planning and Delivery
38. Internal Audit completed 95% of the risk and assurance audit plan to report
stage. The remaining 5% are being progressed. . The higher percentage of work
completed reflects that reports are now being drafted and agreed more quickly
with management.
39. Of the planned audits finalised this year 95% were completed within budget
subject to authorised revisions.
11
Working in Partnership
External Review Agencies
40. Internal Audit has effective working relationships with the External Auditors and
we work in liaison with them to optimise the use of resources and avoid
duplication.
Audit Forums
41. The MOPAC Director of Audit, Risk and Assurance is a panel member of the
CIPFA Better Governance Forum. We also contribute to the London Audit Group
and sub-groups set up to exchange best practice on auditing procurement, major
contracts and ICT. Our involvement ensures we keep at the forefront of
professional developments and provide a responsive audit service.
Counter Fraud Groups
42. MOPAC Directorate of Audit, Risk and Assurance (DARA) work with other public
sector bodies to combat fraud and to develop an effective counter fraud
response. We are represented on the steering group of the London Public Sector
Counter Fraud Partnership, which brings together over 120 local authority,
central government and NHS bodies to promote counter fraud activity and share
good practice. The DARA Fraud Prevention Manager chairs the crime prevention
working group of the Partnership and we are a member of the joint public and
private sector London Fraud Forum. We will use our knowledge and experience
in this area to assist our work in LFEPA where appropriate in the coming year.
Shared Internal Audit Services
43. DARA has taken the lead in providing shared internal audit services to the GLA
group. Along with delivering the internal audit function for the MPS, MOPAC and
GLA from October 2011, we have continued to manage the audit service for the
London Fire Brigade, under the shared service arrangement that was finalised in
November 2012. In April 2015, we also entered into a Shared Service
Arrangement providing Internal Audit Services to the London Legacy
Development Corporation (LLDC). This has resulted in savings across the GLA
group and provides the opportunity to optimise the use of all available
professional and specialist audit skills. We continue to work in partnership with
the private sector drawing from a GLA wide framework agreement to meet our
specialist ICT audit resource requirements.
Professional Standards
44. All MOPAC DARA work is conducted in line with professional standards and
recognised best practice. The Public Sector Internal Audit Standards (PSIAS)
provide the benchmark for the delivery of our service, including the requirement
for all the audit team to be professionally qualified.
12
Equalities and Diversity
45. Auditors and investigators receive appropriate training in equality and diversity
issues and their performance within LFEPA is monitored. Our work is designed
to provide as wide a range of coverage of the LFEPA as is possible and
practicable.
13
Assurance Criteria
Appendix 2
Assurance Criteria
Overall
Rating
Criteria
Impact
Substantial
There is a sound framework of
control operating effectively to
mitigate key risks, which is
contributing to the
achievement of business
objectives.
There is particularly effective
management of key risks
contributing to the
achievement of business
objectives.
Adequate
The control framework is
adequate and controls to
mitigate key risks are generally
operating effectively, although
a number of controls need to
improve to ensure business
objectives are met.
Key risks are being managed
effectively; however, a number
of controls need to be
improved to ensure business
objectives are met.
Limited
The control framework is not
operating effectively to mitigate
key risks. A number of key
controls are absent or are not
being applied to meet business
objectives.
Some improvement is required
to address key risks before
business objectives can be
met.
No
Assurance
A control framework is not in
place to mitigate key risks. The
business area is open to
abuse, significant error or loss
and/or misappropriation.
Significant improvement is
required to address key risks
before business objectives can
be achieved.
14

Agenda Document for Governance, Performance and Audit

Transcription

Similar documents

I`m helping to end MS by participating in the 2016 Jayman BUILT MS

The Board of Directors of Qatar Fuel (WOQOD) is pleased to invite

5 `S` Training Program at ABV-IIITM, Gwalior on 21.07.2016

4 star ALOE HOTEL, PAPHOS

AGM 27th April 2016 - Sønderborg International School

Trans-tasman regulatory findings

2016 MW Alliance Raffle - Manitowish Waters Alliance LTD

HERE - Perfect Shots Photography

2016 Sponsorship Prospectus

maryland division of financial regulation