Corporate Scrutiny Committee	2 March 2026
Report of the Head of Democratic Services

Scrutiny Recommendation Tracking

Summary

1. This report presents the Corporate Scrutiny Committee with a proposed approach to monitor and track scrutiny recommendations and invites the Committee to consider how it wishes to categorise the levels of progress made against scrutiny recommendations.

Background

2. In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, scrutiny committees may make recommendations to the Executive on functions the Council is responsible for, through both formal scrutiny committee meetings and Task and Finish Group reports.

3. Developing a structured approach to scrutiny recommendation tracking was one of the recommendations arising from the review of the Council’s scrutiny function conducted by the Centre for Governance and Scrutiny (CfGS) during the 2024/25 municipal year. The CfGS recommendation to ‘Introduce a formal process to track recommendations that Scrutiny makes’ was endorsed by Council on 27 March 2025.

4. The Executive / Scrutiny Protocol for City of York Council, which was developed as part of work to implement the CfGS recommendations, was incorporated into the Council’s Constitution following agreement by Council on 18 September 2025. With reference to recommendation tracking it states that: ‘Recommendations from Scrutiny will be logged and tracked by Democratic Services and Scrutiny Committees will receive formal reports twice each year on the number of recommendations that have been accepted and incorporated through the decision-making process and the level of progress made against the recommendations.’

5. At the Corporate Scrutiny Committee meeting held on 19 January 2026, following the agreement by the Committee of the recommendations to Executive from the Budget and Medium-Term Financial Strategy Task and Finish Group (TFG), members agreed to consider an item on recommendation tracking at the present meeting.

Consultation

6. Consultation, including around examples of best practice from other local authorities, has taken place within the Democratic Services team on the below proposals which are presented for the committee’s consideration.

7. Best practice guidance produced by the CfGS highlights the importance of a structured, systematic approach to recommendation tracking; evaluating progress towards the implementation of scrutiny recommendations is an essential part of assessing the impact of scrutiny. Effective monitoring will also enable scrutiny members to more clearly identify if further scrutiny activity is required.

Proposed Approach

8. It is proposed that a Scrutiny Recommendation Tracker, incorporating recommendations made to the Executive from TFGs and any other recommendations to the Executive agreed scrutiny committee meetings, will be maintained and updated regularly by Democratic Services. A draft example tracker is included at Annex A to this report.

9. If desired by members, a review of scrutiny recommendations made during the current term of office can be undertaken by the Scrutiny Officer for inclusion, where appropriate, on the tracker.

10. The Corporate Scrutiny Committee will be provided with an update on progress made against each of the recommendations at two Committee meetings over the course of the municipal year, starting in autumn 2026. This arrangement reflects the Committee’s constitutional responsibilities as the Council’s statutory scrutiny committee, and is in line with existing practice in respect of the updates the Committee receives on both Council Motions and Petitions.

11. The tracker will include a suggested status for each of the recommendations, following a ‘traffic light’ approach as below:

· Green: recommendation achieved – monitoring no longer required;

· Amber: acceptable progress made – continue monitoring;

· Red: unacceptable progress made – lead officer / Executive Member to report back.

12. The Committee will be invited to consider and agree the status of each recommendation. In line with CfGS guidance that recommendations should not be monitored indefinitely, when it has been agreed that a recommendation has been achieved it will be deemed complete and will no longer be tracked.

Options    

13. Members of the Committee may choose to endorse, revise, or reject the proposed approach.

Analysis

14. Implementing the proposed approach would contribute to the development of a systemic and consistent approach to recommendation tracking, in fulfilment both of Article 8 Paragraph 14.5.3 of the Council’s Constitution and the recommendations of CfGS as agreed by Council.

15. The benefits of such an approach include ensuring Members are kept updated in a clear and regular way on progress made against scrutiny recommendations, facilitating clearer identification of areas where further scrutiny work might be needed, and (in conjunction with the forthcoming Annual Scrutiny Report) providing evidence to demonstrate the impact of scrutiny activity at City of York Council.

Implications

· Financial: None arising directly from this report.

· Human Resources (HR): None arising directly from this report.

· Equalities: None arising directly from this report.

· Legal: None arising directly from this report. The Council has a statutory duty to operate a scrutiny function.

· Crime and Disorder: None arising directly from this report.

· Information Technology (IT): None arising directly from this report.

· Property: None arising directly from this report.

· Other: None arising directly from this report.

Risk Management

15.    There could be a risk to the ongoing development of effective recommendation tracking should a more structured and consistent approach not be endorsed. No other risks arising directly from this report have been identified.

Recommendations

16.    Members are asked:

i. To endorse the proposed approach to monitoring and tracking scrutiny recommendations, which invites the Committee twice a year to review the level of progress made against scrutiny recommendations.

Reason: To contribute to the development of a structured and consistent approach to tracking and monitoring scrutiny recommendations.

Contact Details

Author:	Chief Officer Responsible for the report:
James Parker Scrutiny Officer Democratic Services james.parker@york.gov.uk	Julie Gallagher Head of Democratic Services julie.gallagher@york.gov.uk
	Report Approved	ü	Date	20 February 2025
Wards Affected:					All	ü
For further information please contact the author of the report.

Background Papers:

City of York Council Constitution, Article 8: Scrutiny https://democracy.york.gov.uk/documents/s185896/08%20-%20Article%208%20-%20Scrutiny.pdf

Centre for Governance and Scrutiny (CfGS), Scrutiny Impact Report: City of York Council (January 2025), https://democracy.york.gov.uk/documents/s182228/Annex%20A%20York%20Scrutiny%20Impact%20Report.pdf

Centre for Governance and Scrutiny (CfGS), Demonstrating impact – a practice guide (February 2025), https://www.cfgs.org.uk/resource/demonstrating-impact-a-practice-guide/

Annexes

Annex A – Scrutiny Recommendation Tracker – Draft example

Abbreviations

CfGS          Centre for Governance and Scrutiny

TFG           Task and Finish Group