URL: https://democracy.runnymede.gov.uk/ieDecisionDetails.aspx?ID=1653

Decision Maker:

Outcome: Recommendations Approved

Is Key Decision?: No

Is Callable In?: No

Purpose:

Content: The Committee was presented with the Council’s Corporate Risk Profile for Quarter 4 of 2025/26, in line with the approved risk management framework.  Officers sought to provide assurance on the Council’s principal risks, how they were managed, and how the risk profile had changed since the last update.   Officers reported that all service areas reviewed their risks during February and March 2026, overseen by the Corporate Leadership Team (CLT), to ensure consistency and appropriate challenge.   Members noted that at the end of Quarter 4 there were 261 recorded risks across service, project and contract risk registers.  There were 86 risks which scored above the escalation threshold of 10 post?mitigation.  In addition, of these, 29 were classed as ‘significant’, scoring above 15.   Members were referred to the Risk Dashboard which reflected the scale and complexity of the Council’s activities, rather than any deterioration in risk controls.   The Committee was advised that the majority of significant risks continued to sit within Financial, Operational and People categories which was consistent with the Council’s wider operational environment.  Members noted that there were ongoing financial pressures across local government, increased regulatory scrutiny, particularly in Housing, and workforce pressures, including uncertainty linked to Local Government Reorganisation (LGR).   Risks scoring above the threshold had been reviewed by CLT to determine whether they should be escalated to the Corporate Risk Register.  Officers confirmed that at the end of Quarter 4, 36 risks were formally designated by CLT for inclusion on the Corporate Risk Register, as set out in the Appendix.  They had been sorted by post?mitigation score.  In addition, two risks were newly added in Quarter 4.  These were the Cost of provision of Temporary Accommodation, and Failure to recruit high calibre, quality key staff.  However, Officers stressed that both additions reflected emerging pressures rather than failures in existing controls.   Members noted that 11 risks had trended upwards, 19 risks had trended downwards, and there was one upward?trending risk sitting on the Corporate Risk Register.   As reported elsewhere, the most notable change related to housing regulatory compliance, following the Regulator of Social Housing’s inspection and C4 judgement. Members were aware that a corporate Housing Improvement Programme was now in place to address this.   Officers advised that two of the five newly identified risks arose from arose from internal audit work.  Although these currently scored below escalation thresholds, they were included for transparency and to demonstrate continuous improvement in the risk management system that learning from audit activity was now captured.   The Committee was informed that Officers were asked to review risks in light of LGR, which was considered to be a compounding factor across several workforce, operational and data?related risks.  Members were assured that these impacts were being monitored closely and reported regularly to CLT.  In addition, Officers explained that the LGR Implementation Planning Board had oversight of all associated risks by keeping risk registers which were discussed in the various workstreams set up to transition the East and West Surrey Councils.   Members agreed that overall, the report demonstrated that risks were being actively reviewed and challenged, escalation was occurring in line with the agreed framework, emerging issues were being identified early, including through internal audit, and the Council maintained clear visibility and oversight of its principal risks.   The report was duly noted.

Date of Decision: May 28, 2026