Failings identified following review of Rotherham Council team

Changes: Improvements have been madeChanges: Improvements have been made
Changes: Improvements have been made
A review of Rotherham Council’s building design team has identified a catalogue problems – resulting in fears over the way then authority’s ‘big-ticket’ projects are managed.

The investigation was ordered because of ‘significant’ variations on the projected budgets for some work.

It was carried out in July this year and focused on three specific projects.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Those who conducted it found a lack of documented procedures for estimating costs, insufficient staff training, and unclear roles for project officers overseeing the capital programme.

Those issues led to concerns over the effective management of the borough’s capital projects.

Capital projects typically include infrastructure, housing, and community improvement schemes, rather than the council’s day-to-day running costs.

In Rotherham, recent capital projects have included the market redevelopment, interchange refurbishment and the Forge Island development, although it is not stated in the report which projects were reviewed.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

In the current financial year, the capital budget stands at £33.2 million.

As a result of the findings, the audit team has made seven recommendations, aimed at overhauling the project management process. Six of these focus on creating clearer documentation, improving communication, and ensuring everyone involved understands their roles and responsibilities.

A report to RMBC’s audit committee states that work is already underway to implement these changes, with the team committed to meeting a completion deadline of April 2025. However, staff turnover in the team has posed challenges, as new recruits undergo necessary training and induction.

The changes, once fully implemented, are expected to streamline project delivery, ensuring better budget control.

Comment Guidelines

National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.

Follow us
©National World Publishing Ltd. All rights reserved.Cookie SettingsTerms and ConditionsPrivacy notice