REASON FOR DECISION Sample Clauses

REASON FOR DECISION. To provide Members with the opportunity to consider the history and context of this project prior to Council determining the way forward at a future meeting.

REASON FOR DECISION. 3.1 The recommendations are sought to ensure continuity of services to support people with Dementia and their carers / families and ensure the Council is complying with its obligations under the Care Act 2014 whilst a strategic review of Dementia day services, led by Joint Commissioning across the London Borough of Hammersmith and Fulham (LBHF), the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea (RBKC) and Westminster City Council (WCC) is concluded. 3.2 Under the Care Act 2014 local authorities have a statutory duty to provide a diverse range of services that prevent, delay or reduce care needs. These services are key to ensuring that people are supported to live well in the community, preventing the need to access more costly

REASON FOR DECISION. The decision is being put forward to enable TfN to operate once it becomes part of Transport for the North once it becomes a Sub-national Transport Body on 1 April 2018. The reasons for NECA deciding to become part of TfN is set out in previous reports to the Leadership Board. Overall one of the main benefits of NECA becoming part of TfN is the added influence a Sub-national Transport Body can have with the Department of Transport and the national delivery agencies of Network Rail and Highways England when setting and allocating national infrastructure spending.

REASON FOR DECISION. Planning permission was granted by Manchester City Council, however the development impacts Edge Lane, Droylsden, therefore a Section 278 agreement is required for works being undertaken in Tameside. ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS REJECTED (if any): Do nothing – this would mean that works may not be completed to an adoptable standard which would potentially leave Tameside MBC at risk for defective work/potential hazards CONSULTEES: None FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS: A Section 278 Highway Agreement, under Highways Act 1980, is required to ensure the works undertaken in Tameside are completed to a satisfactory standard under the provision of a financial bond, to protect Tameside MBC from any potential liability, prior to completion of the works. The value of the bond is £74,900 (returnable to National House Building Control on completion of the works to an appropriate standard) The Council will also charge a supplementary fee of £5,618 to cover the costs incurred by the Engineers section in terms of Inspection fees, checking of technical drawings and site supervision.

REASON FOR DECISION. An anticipated 3-month delay to the Health and Care Bill’s final approval means that Integrated Care Systems (ICSs) will now, not have a statutory footing until the summer of 2022. Therefore, to meaningfully plan for the impact of legislative changes on local governance and joint commissioning arrangements, it is preferable to move the development of a new S75 during 2022.

REASON FOR DECISION. As outlined in the Urgent Decision Report.

REASON FOR DECISION. As set out in the report. Necessary for continuity of care to individuals, to award contracts in line with procurement regulation and to continue to meet statutory duties under part 1 of the Care Act 2014

REASON FOR DECISION. The development hereby allowed would have no adverse effect on the principle of development within the rural area beyond the green belt, on neighbouring residential amenities, the visual amenity of the locality or on highway conditions in the vicinity of the site and, as such, would comply with the policies of the relevant development plan as summarised below. North Hertfordshire District Local Plan No 2 with Alterations Policy 6 - Rural Area Beyond the Green Belt Policy 14 - Nature Conservation Policy 16 - Areas of Archaeological Significance and other Archaeological Areas Policy 29 - Rural Housing Needs Policy 51 - Development Effects and Planning Gain Policy 55 - Car Parking Standards Policy 57 - Residential Guidelines and Standards

REASON FOR DECISION. 3.1 The recommendations are sought to ensure contracts are in place and to ensure continuity of service whilst a H&F CCG led strategic review of dementia day services across H&F and neighbouring boroughs is undertaken. The purpose of the review is to look at whether there are any synergies for wider development of care pathways, sharing of good practice, expertise and possibly resources. The outcome of the review will lead to new contracts being in place from 1 December 2016. 3.2 Please also refer to Appendix 1 (contained in the exempt report on the exempt Cabinet agenda). 3.3 Negotiations with the service providers to identify savings, in return for the award of these contracts have commenced:  Housing and Care 21 have offered to freeze the costs set out in Table 1 above for the duration of the 2 year contract term.  Alzheimer’s Society has offered a saving of 4.3% of the annual contract value. This equates to £13,743 per annum across the contract. 3.4 With regards to these negotiations it should also be noted that Alzheimer’s Society have recently seen a reduction in their H&F Third Sector Investment Fund allocation for the period December 2014 – May 2016. The organisation had requested £59,105 per annum to continue to provide a full time Dementia Support Worker, offering information and advice, casework and facilitation of a dementia café, but was awarded £15,000. This has seen this element of their service reduce from five days per week to one. 3.5 These services (St Vincent’s Day Centre and Activity Plus) are working with increasingly complex dementia customers. Although the prevalence of dementia within age bands is not expected to change, the improved survival from other diseases such as heart disease and stroke means that more people are also surviving into old age. The increase in complexity of customer needs makes it additionally difficult to achieve a reduction in costs and still provide a good quality service.

REASON FOR DECISION. Urgency: The procurement exercise took considerably longer than first anticipated. It was commenced in accordance with the project plan, however, the repeated need to clarify bids throughout the process delayed evaluation such that the decision could not be taken at the Leadership Board held on 16 January 2018. Programme funding approvals anticipated project completion by 30 September 2018 and delays to this completion date will have a detrimental effect on funding and may impact on price certainty.