Issue - meetings

John Scott, Audit Manager:

1. reported that External Audit was required to report annually the results of  grant certification work

2. requested that members receive and comment on the findings of the External Audit Grant Claims and Returns report for 2016/17, which was largely factual and similar in format to that submitted in previous years.

Mike Norman, representing KPMG, external auditor:

1. presented the Annual Report of the City of Lincoln Council on the Certification of Grants and Returns 2016/17

2. reported on certification work undertaken resulting in adjustments having been made to the council’s housing benefit claim, as in previous years subject to a qualification letter, which reduced the overall amount of subsidy due to the council by £1129.00 

3. advised that there had been some errors in the Council ‘s Housing Pooling Return, resulting in an increase in poolable receipts of £134,000, however, an unqualified assurance report for this return was issued

4. reported the proposed fee from KPMG for certifying the Council’s 2016/17 Housing Benefit Subsidy grant at £10,173, which was still subject to approval by the Public Sector Audit Appointments Limited (PSAA)

5. added that the fee for the Housing Pooling Return had been agreed directly with the Council amounting to £3,000.

Members discussed the content of the report in further detail, asking the following questions:

: Would the Housing Benefit Subsidy grant be affected by roll-out of Universal Credit with the council having less site of what clients were claiming?

: Core assessments were based on earnings and allowances. It was feasible this could have an effect. He would look into this matter further and report back to members under separate cover.

: What did the pooling return relate to?

: It related to the sale of 40-50 council houses a year and equated to notional debt.

John Scott, Audit Manager emphasised that the Council had an incentive to keep errors as low as possible in respect of housing benefit subsidy, which was showing at 98% accuracy on the IMPS system.  

Mike Norman, representing KPMG commented that the housing benefit subsidy claim was an inherently complicated system with more claims being qualified than not.

RESOLVED that the content of KPMG’s report and members comments on the certification of grants and returns 2016/17 be noted.