Role of the independent scrutiny function

1. Background

The Council is working with bereaved, survivors and the community to appoint an independent scrutiny function (ISF) to provide independent review, challenge and advice to help ensure the Grenfell Support 2024-2028 is delivered and monitored transparently and effectively in the interests of bereaved and survivors and the local community.

The programme has been defined and agreed as part of the Global Settlement Agreement which settled the majority of civil claims that had been lodged following the Grenfell tragedy. It set out the plans to develop the then-called Restorative Justice Programme from 2024 to 2028, and required an independent, external scrutiny partner to be appointed to scrutinise the development and consultation on the new support. The programme comprises three strands:

• support for bereaved and survivors
• support for the immediate community
• education and training support, for both bereaved and survivors and the immediate community

A consortium of two organisations was selected by the claimants (through their lawyers) to act as an External Scrutiny Team to fulfil that role. The EST’s role was to scrutinise the consultations, and to also set out the monitoring and scrutiny arrangements for the future programme. As part of those arrangements, the EST recommended that a new independent scrutiny function is established.

The Council’s Leadership Team confirmed the decision to appoint an organisation (or organisations) to act as an independent scrutiny function at their meeting on Wednesday 11 December 2024. The budget for the new ISF is £550k to £575k over four years.

2. Key roles and responsibilities

The role of the independent scrutiny function will be to bring independent assurance and challenge through scrutinising the delivery of the Future Grenfell Support programmes on behalf of:

• bereaved and survivors
• the immediate local community
• others set out within the Global Settlement Agreement

The delivery itself of the monitoring, evaluation and progress reporting relating to the delivery, reach and impact of the programme will be the responsibility of the Grenfell Partnerships Team (GPT) at the Council.

The aims of independent scrutiny are to assess and advise on whether:

• the programmes are being delivered in line with agreed plans
• reporting, on delivery, effectiveness and budget, is transparent and accessible
• delivery is being adapted as required to improve impact
• the process of delivery and monitoring centres the perspectives and experiences of bereaved and survivors and community members
• the Council exercises its power in delivering the programme appropriately and restoratively

The ISF will do this through a quarterly process of scrutinising:

• GPT’s monitoring and evaluation data
• the effectiveness of its monitoring and evaluation processes
• the process of addressing complaints
• the process of reporting

The ISF will also facilitate collective scrutiny and reflection sessions that bring together those accessing the programme with GPT to review programme effectiveness and identify changes needed, as well as the independent scrutiny function engaging with bereaved and survivors and immediate local community members to hear feedback directly. These sessions should act as an opportunity to:

• explore what is going well
• explore what needs to improve
• any changes that need to be made
• issues that need to be raised with the wider Council

The ISF’s focus will be to scrutinise the delivery of the programme. It will also be responsible for ensuring that where bereaved, survivors and residents raise issues for the wider Council or the wider system that are beyond the scope of the programme, these are followed up with the Council and recommendations made to the Council and its partners to address them. The ISF should support accountability and enable joint problem solving in a constructive and restorative way.

Throughout, the independent scrutiny function will share the findings of its scrutiny with bereaved and survivors and community members on a quarterly basis, and provide advice to GPT where improvements need to be made.

Key principles

Working alongside the GPT, the ISF should work to uphold and embed the following principles for the monitoring and scrutiny of the programme:

• transparency: the Council provides clear, honest, and timely information about the programme and decisions to bereaved and survivors/the immediate community.
• responsibility: the Council takes responsibility for delivering the programme as promised and acts on bereaved and survivors/the immediate community’s feedback about changes needed.
• accessibility: all bereaved and survivors/immediate community members can easily participate in and provide feedback to shape the programme, whatever their circumstances.
• equity: the programme is delivered in a way that recognises and addresses the diverse needs of all bereaved and survivors/the immediate community fairly and works to understand and address any barriers.
• empowerment: bereaved and survivors/the immediate community are supported and equipped to shape and influence the support they receive through the programme.

3. Key requirements, including key outputs and skills and experience

It is expected that the ISF will bring its own experience and expertise to bear on the scrutiny and monitoring work and that the approach to scrutiny and monitoring may evolve over the four years to respond to community feedback. However, the following sections set out the key expectations of the successful organisation (or organisations).

Relationships

• Work alongside the Grenfell Partnerships Team (GPT) to operationalise the model of monitoring and scrutiny
• Build relationships with bereaved, survivors and the immediate local community to understand their concerns and perspectives on the new programmes and the Council more widely

Quarterly review cycle

• On a quarterly basis, review how GPT deliver and monitor the programme, address complaints and share information about, evaluate and report on the programme. This will be based on analysing aggregated and anonymised data provided by GPT to identify any performance issues (relating to delivery, reach and impact), assessing how GPT are listening to and acting on feedback and learning, and ensuring that monitoring data gathered is meaningful.
• Create a mechanism to directly listen to any concerns from bereaved and survivors and community members.
• Hold a quarterly review meeting with GPT to reflect on what the monitoring insights tell us and identify actions to be taken as a result. To include providing ongoing advice and support to GPT.
• Share scrutiny findings with bereaved and survivors and local community.
• Work with the Council to arrange deliver communications to bereaved, survivors and local residents.

Collective scrutiny and reflection

• Facilitate regular collective scrutiny and reflection sessions that bring together bereaved and survivors and the Council and (separately) immediate community members and the Council to reflect on:
  • what has been delivered
  • what is working/what isn’t
  • changes to be made and any insights/barriers to feed into the wider Council

The sessions should draw on summarised and anonymised feedback and insights from monitoring data
as insights from session participants.

• Hold a separate collective scrutiny and reflection session, following the process set out above, for people eligible to access support through the education and training programme.
• Document insights from these sessions to inform solutions to improve delivery where issues are within the programme’s remit.

Influencing the wider Council

• Document issues arising from collective scrutiny and reflection sessions which are beyond the control of the programme and, working with GPT, share these with the relevant Council department or service area, and make recommendations where necessary to the Chief Executive about potential wider Council improvements.
• Review responses from the Council to issues raised, and scrutinise whether they adequately address the points raised.
• Escalate any concerns about progress in addressing the wider issues raised at the quarterly review meetings to the Executive Management Team.
• Meet with the Overview Scrutiny Committee, the leader and CEO of the Council at least annually to review and reflect on issues surfaced over the past year and how effectively these are being acted on by the wider Council.

Building capacity

• Throughout, build the capacity of GPT, bereaved and survivors and the community and the wider Council to engage effectively in restorative scrutiny for the Grenfell Future Support Programme. This should also help develop the practice of restorative scrutiny across the wider Council so that it reaches beyond the programme, and has a legacy once the programme ends.

Skills and experience

The function needs to be delivered independently, given the importance of independent evaluation in building trust and confidence in the programme. This means that organisations based in Kensington and Chelsea or teams including individuals who are eligible to access the support will not be able to apply.

Bids will also be considered from multiple organisations working together that are able to collectively demonstrate that they are able to deliver the recommendation set out below. Organisations applying should have the following core skills and experience:

• experience of working with and alongside communities experiencing intersectional, systemic inequalities, for example structural racism, poverty and ableism
• systemic awareness, including the ability to identify relevant systemic issues beyond the scope of the programme that need to be addressed by the wider council, and ability to communicate and influence effectively 
• experience and skill in community engagement which goes beyond consultation and is designed to meaningfully involve communities in decision making
• experience of community engagement within diverse communities 
• experience of designing and delivering creative engagement approaches which are accessible and engaging for different community groups, including children and young people
• experience of delivering, developing or advising on monitoring and scrutiny processes, including an understanding of Local Authority scrutiny approaches and the need for a focus on restorative scrutiny that supports ongoing learning and improvement
• experience of delivering restorative practice, with a particular focus on working restoratively in community settings
• experience of working with individuals and communities affected by trauma and a commitment to developing capability in relation to trauma informed practice
• an ability to work at pace, in complex, fast changing and politically sensitive environments
• experience of working with communities and statutory services to build capacity and develop sustainable approaches
• experience of working with communities in a disaster recovery context
• an ability to build relationships with, and work alongside services, organisations and local leaders in the role of critical friend, providing challenging feedback in supportive and constructive ways

4. Communications to bereaved, survivors and the local community and information sharing

As part of the delivery of the support, the Council will communicate directly with bereaved, survivors and residents in the immediate local community.

Throughout, the ISF will share the findings of its scrutiny with bereaved and survivors and immediate community members on a quarterly basis, and provide advice to GPT where improvements need to be made. They will also share these findings with the wider Council to influence change beyond the programme

5. Timescales

The aim is that the ISF will be appointed and ready to start scrutiny in April 2025 to enable timely scrutiny of the first quarter of delivery. The ISF will need to be operational for the lifetime of the programme for four years until April 2029. There may be a requirement to scrutinise some elements of the programme beyond this point, but no later than July 2029.

The grant award for the successful organisation(s) would therefore be for four years, with a break clause at the end of each year and terms built in for any extension that might be required dependent on the programme timescales beyond 2028.

6. Reporting

The Council will formally hold the arrangement with the ISF but, given the sensitivities and context of this work and independence of the ISF, attention will be focused on the delivery of this specification. The ISF will work with the Council during the grant award term in the ways set out above.

The ISF will also attend legal meetings, chaired by the facilitators of the Civil Claims process and attended by lawyers acting for the claimants, the Council, Government officials, and lawyers acting for the other contributing defendants. The meetings will be used to assure the broader group on how the programmes are working and will therefore be an appropriate place to highlight any issues or concerns and for the work of the ISF and Council to be scrutinised by key stakeholders.

In addition, it is possible that key community groups will request ad-hoc progress/ reporting meetings. Requests may be made for joint meetings with the Council or individual sessions with the ISF. In line with our commitment of ensuring bereaved, survivors and residents are at the heart of the support, any such requests should be agreed wherever possible.

7. Complaints and concerns

If a bereaved, survivor or member of the local community has an issue or concern about the support, they can raise this directly with the Grenfell Partnerships Team or via the ISF, if they would prefer. They can also use the Council’s Complaints process to register a formal complaint about the approach.

If the ISF wishes to raise any issues or concerns about the approach taken by the Council’s Grenfell Partnerships Team, they can raise these concerns directly with the Director of Fraud, Audit, Risk and Insurance (as set out below).

If a bereaved, survivor or member of the community has an issue with the conduct of the ISF, they should raise it directly with the Council’s Director of Audit, Fraud, Risk and Insurance who will investigate the complaint in line with the Council’s complaints process and report to the complainant, to the Chief Executive and (if required) the legal representative (if any) of the bereaved, survivors or community member.