Agenda item

To present the report of the Head of Audit and Risk.

The report of the Head of Audit and Risk providing an update as at 30 September, 2025 on the audits completed since the previous update as at 30 June 2025 was presented for the committee’s consideration. The report also set out the current workload of Internal Audit and its priorities for the short to medium term going forward. Members of the committee were provided under separate cover with copies of the assurance reports finalised in the period in relation to Managing the Poverty Risk (YM11) (Reasonable Assurance), Continuous Monitoring – Payroll (Reasonable Assurance), and Continuous Monitoring – Creditors (Reasonable Assurance).

The report was presented by the Head of Audit and Risk who provided an overview of the three assurance report completed in the period along with the issues identified. Regarding the Continuous Monitoring – Creditors audit review, she highlighted that since the last review in September 2024, approximately £60,000 in previously identified duplicate payments has been recovered. The Payments Team continues to pursue the £65,000 still outstanding as resources allow. She further noted that this annual exercise is undertaken in collaboration with the Payments Team. This follows a leading software supplier, working with neighbouring councils, quoting approximately £53k for a three year contract to carry out a similar exercise.

During the ensuing discussion on the update report, the committee raised the following matters –

·      The committee questioned the rationale behind assigning a “Reasonable assurance” rating to the Managing the Poverty Risk review. The committee suggested that the issues identified, classified as moderate, were in fact more substantial and the rating should therefore be revised accordingly.

In response the Head of Audit and Risk explained that the Council’s risk assessment matrix is used to evaluate risk, weighing likelihood against impact and that the auditor has deemed the risk to be moderate (Yellow). While appropriate processes and mechanisms are in place for managing the poverty risk, improvements are needed which include ensuring that actions are SMART and strengthening the socio-economic duty within the Tackling Poverty Strategy, particularly by giving greater attention to intersectionality. In response to further queries regarding the availability of action plans, the Head of Audit and Risk clarified that the Council’s Tackling Poverty Strategic Plan is supported by an operational plan which is separate from the action plan developed to address the six issues/risks identified in the audit review. The committee requested copies of both plans.

·      The committee sought clarification of the observation in the Managing the Poverty Risk audit review that staff engagement remains limited. Members queried whether this indicated a deeper systemic risk that should be formally highlighted.

The Head of Audit and Risk explained that the issue stems from the Council’s service delivery plans. While the socio-economic duty is acknowledged within broader strategic plans, it is not sufficiently embedded within the Tackling Poverty Strategy and greater integration between the two is needed. The strategy also lacks adequate consideration of  intersectionality where people affected by socio-economic disadvantage may also face challenges due to race, gender or sexuality. This dimension is not currently covered by the Tackling Poverty Strategy. The Head of Audit and Risk also clarified that although the  strategy is formally owned by the Director of Social Services, it is applicable across all council services and each department has a role to play in addressing poverty.

·      The committee raised concerns about whether the Managing the Poverty Risk review considers broader factors, specifically the percentage of children still living in poverty and the number of assaults against staff in the primary school sector, as previously discussed in the Health and Safety Annual Report. Members questioned whether there might be a link between these issues, suggesting that the poverty risk may be manifesting in such behaviours and that the review should draw these strands together.

The Head of Audit and Risk acknowledged the point, noting that it reinforces the need for collective ownership of the Tackling Poverty Strategy. She confirmed that she would pass the observation to the Director of Social Services who holds formal responsibility for the Strategy.

The Director of Function(Resources)/Section 151 Officer advised that the poverty risk is twofold: firstly, the Council’s role in supporting Anglesey citizens affected by poverty; and secondly, the impact on Council services. He emphasised that as the number of people experiencing poverty increases, so too does the demand for services, particularly in adult and children’s social care, housing and benefits hence the inclusion of the risk on the strategic risk register, as it has the potential to significantly affect Council resources.

It was resolved to note the outcome of Internal Audit’s engagements, the assurance provided and its priorities going forward.

Additional action: Head of Audit and Risk to circulate the Tackling Poverty Strategy Operational Plan and Managing the Poverty Risk audit review action plan to the committee’s members.