Board minutes – June 2025

Sharon Gilburd (SG) – Chair

Samina Ali (SA)

John-Mark Frost (JMF) (via Teams) 

Andrea Gale (AG) 

Harriet Green (HG) – CEO 

Glyn Jones (GJ) – WG (via Teams) – Items 1-3 and 5 only 

Ben Summers (BS)

CDPS Staff:

Phillipa Knowles (PK) 

Joanna Goodwin (JG) – Item 5 only 

Guest:

Joanna Pressdee (JP) – WG observer 

Apologies: 

Myra Hunt – CEO

Jonathan Pearce

Secretariat:

Jon Morris (JM)

The meeting opened at 14:00 

1.1 Apologies were noted from Jonathan Pearce and Myra Hunt, and the Chair noted a quorum had been achieved. 

1.2 Board members noted the Conflict-of-Interest Register and confirmed there were no additions needed.

1.3 The Board approved the note of the meeting held on 26 March 2025 as a true and accurate record, pending the clarification of the first sentence in 3.2. 

ACTION: JM to clarify 3.2 before publishing final note. 

1.4 The Board approved the note of the planning meeting held on 30 April 2025 as a true and accurate record. 

1.5 The action log was received. Members did not raise any concerns on progress being made. 

1.6 Board members noted the 2024-25 draft year-end finance report, previously considered at April’s ARC meeting.  

1.7 There were no matters arising which were not covered on the agenda. 

2.1 HG introduced the CEO report to the Board. She noted that this report covered the period from the start of April to mid-June, and that this report had increased in length over time. She suggested that it will be shortened going forwards due to some of the content being included in the new quarterly progress reports.

2.2 HG noted that the response from Welsh Gov to CDPS project reporting has been very positive. HG invited Board members to discuss the report and invited questions. 

2.3 Board asked if there had been any issues in sustaining projects. HG discussed the challenges in securing funding for neurodiversity projects. She emphasised the importance of keeping stakeholders engaged to sustain service improvement projects, suggesting leveraging the board's support to maintain stakeholder interest and smooth project paths. Board agreed the need for a strategic approach to maintain project momentum.

2.3 The Board offered the potential for members to support stakeholder engagement. They considered leveraging board members' specialties to strengthen stakeholder relationships and address top risks. HG and board members discussed KPIs and OKR, with an overall feeling that CDPS is on target to deliver for each quarter. 

2.4 On service assessments, HG described the initial workshop held with the partnership team to clarify the parameters and goals of service assessments. This workshop aimed to align everyone on the objectives and milestones per quarter. Board members agreed the importance of one-to-one engagements to ensure all team members are on the same page and to test assumptions within the service assessments. These engagements help clarify understanding and address any uncertainties. 

2.5 HG noted that CDPS has submitted a number of AI recommendations to the Cabinet Secretary for the Economy for consideration. These recommendations include three programmes which have been implemented and could scale, and three opportunities which could be implemented. HG invited GJ for comment. 

2.6 GJ confirmed that the recommendations had been submitted to the Cabinet Secretary for consideration as an annex to a paper from the wider public sector AI leadership group. HG and GJ discussed the significant interest in AI across Welsh Government, with various departments showing enthusiasm for AI initiatives. HG mentioned that in the provided list was the use of AI for triaging waiting lists in neurodiversity, directly aligning with one of CDPS’s in-flight projects.  

ACTION: CEOs to share CDPS’s recommendations which have been submitted to Cabinet Secretary.

ACTION: CEOs to share Cabinet Secretary’s response to AI recommendations when received. 

2.7 HG and GJ emphasised the importance of promoting beneficial AI implementation. They discussed the need to balance the focus on AI risks and ethics with the potential benefits of AI applications. 

2.8 BS raised concerns about the inherent risks of probabilistic AI, expanding that its reliance on random numbers to handle novel inputs could lead to inconsistent and potentially unfair outcomes. He highlighted that this technology might not always provide reliable results, which could be problematic in critical applications like neurodiversity case management. 

2.9 BS pointed out that while AI solutions like "magic notes" claim high accuracy (90% in some cases), the nature of errors produced by probabilistic AI can be severe and harder to detect. He stressed that these errors might look convincing but could be fundamentally flawed. HG acknowledged the importance of balancing the benefits of AI implementation with ethical and safety considerations. She mentioned that while there has been significant focus on risks and ethics, there is also a need to realise the benefits of AI. 

2.10 The Board agreed that there is an opportunity for CDPS to lead in implementing AI correctly, ensuring that ethical guidelines and safety measures are in place. This approach would involve promoting beneficial AI applications while being mindful of the associated risks. 

2.11 Members noted the difficulty in engaging with some stakeholders. SA offered to open doors for a number of LAs where she has strong relationships, mainly S & SE Wales. HG thanked SA for her offer, and noted that the policy teams in WG are the formal route to remove blockers. 

2.12 Board members enquired on the progress in engaging part-time tech leaders. HG noted that there was good progress and that the CEOs are still in the process of refining CDPS’s need, and that we may engage with 2-3 tech leaders to ensure varied viewpoints. BS stressed the importance of engaging with those in the private sector and offered to continue advising and suggesting names. BS was thanked for this offer.  

3.1 PK introduced the workplan paper and the package of reports. She thanked JMF, JP, SG and JoP for their support in developing the reports alongside PMO. PK invited comments and questions from the Board.

3.2 Board members thanked PK and the team for the effort, which was apparent in the reports, particularly finding the high-level “at a glance” extremely useful and easy to read. Members noted the effort which must have gone into the new reporting pack. This is an impressive transformation in information flow from the position three years ago where Board were unsure on what CDPS was doing, to now focussing on where we are going. 

3.3 The Board suggested some changes to help them understand the data more easily. 

1. Would like to see the assurance behind the colours. i.e., What does CDPS need to do? How do the Board know what needs to happen to mitigate or get back on track? 
2. Need to consider how the KPIs play against RAG rating as the work-plan evolves. 
3. It may be useful to include a direction of travel, so Board can see the journey – possibly in the form of trend-lines? 

ACTION: PK to iterate the quarterly workplan reporting based on feedback received from Board. 

3.4 Board members reflected that it was important to be aware of optimism bias in reporting and overview as we proceed against this year’s workplan, though raised no specific concerns on this note at this point. 

4.1 Commercially Sensitive – Item removed from published note

JG joined the meeting 

5.1 HG introduced a paper on growing CDPS’s capabilities to ensure we can meet the needs of agreed and future workstreams. She assured the board that CDPS has or can acquire the necessary skills to deliver the agreed work plan for the year, including the ongoing recruitment of business analysts and plans to bring in data architecture skills. 

5.2 HG highlighted the tension between being a delivery body and an organisation focused on changing how services are delivered across Wales. She stressed the importance of showing how to deliver services better rather than just delivering them. HG opened the discussion for Board members to comment. 

5.3 GJ expressed concerns about the lack of ambition in the paper and the need for additional technical skills, particularly in data architecture, to support the delivery projects. He suggested leveraging strategic partners and having arrangements for surge capacity.

5.4 JG highlighted the need to leverage external expertise to support delivery projects. She mentioned the potential for partnerships with universities and other organisations to access specialised skills and knowledge. 

5.5 Board members supported the need for AI and data science capabilities and suggested partnering with universities to draw on additional resources. They echoed GJ’s comments and agreed the importance of building a talent pool, suggesting using interim placements and associate networks. The interim placements could be sought from HE to build exposure for students/post-grads in Wales. 

5.6 Members also discussed the need for a clear capability matrix and the importance of credibility through mixed skills. The Board highlighted the need to be ready to pivot based on future requirements. 

5.6 The Board stressed the importance of having subject matter expertise within CDPS to maintain credibility, especially in responding to technical questions and ensuring the organisation is seen as a reliable source of knowledge. 

5.7 HG mentioned that the Senior Leadership Team plans to meet on 30 July to discuss technology and AI positions and review each service to determine future directions. She acknowledged that the paper presented might be the precursor to a more detailed one, and the team is working on developing new positions on technology and AI. 

5.8 GJ noted that the organisation should not rely solely on WG’s insights for technology-related decisions and should have internal expertise to navigate these areas. Board members reiterated the importance of preparing for future challenges, such as AI and data architecture, and suggested reallocating resources to bring in necessary expertise. Members felt that it was imperative that CDPS must be ambitious with its scope in order to lead on the change needed in Wales. 

5.9 JG assured the Board that CDPS is leveraging partnerships and existing connections to cover the technical aspects of their projects. 

ACTION: CEOs to iterate and deliver a more detailed capabilities paper to the Board, which covers plans for the remainder of this year and into 2026-27. 

GJ & JG left the meeting.

6.1 HG introduced the draft paper, noting that the roles were just for this year, where the workplan is heavily involved with WG. She explained there was nothing new in the content, but that the paper sought to formalise responsibilities in one source rather than across the Framework Agreement, Board T&Cs, Board and SLT ToRs, etc.

6.2 Board members welcomed the efforts and agreed in principle for responsibilities to be itemised for Board, Senior Leadership Team and WG Partnership Team. They felt it would be beneficial to group by topic, explaining what each body was responsible for different areas. 

6.3 The board suggested including the following overarching definitions, as well as including the board's role in horizon scanning and preparedness for future phases, especially considering the upcoming elections: 

Board's Role: The board's role is to ensure that CDPS is delivering the agreed work plan in the most effective and cost-efficient way possible. This includes providing oversight and assurance. 

Senior Leadership Team's Role: The SLT is responsible for the day-to-day management and delivery of the work plan, ensuring that the projects are on track and that the necessary resources are in place. 

Partnership Team's Role: The partnership team is expected to support the management of the CDPS backlog by helping to clarify priorities and ensuring alignment with Welsh Government's objectives. 

ACTION: PK to redraft roles and responsibilities paper thematically for presentation at October’s Board meeting. 

7.1 JM outlined CDPS’s approach to anti-racism, including developing internal and external objectives and an action plan.

7.2 The board supported the progress and emphasised the importance of inclusive design in public services. Board members were particularly keen to be involved in the development and implementation of the externally facing anti-racist objective. 

ACTION: JM to develop and finalise anti-racism objectives for CDPS, including internal and external facing objectives, and ensure they are integrated into the EDI action plan for consideration at October’s Board meeting. 

8.1 JM introduced potential dates for future Board and ARC meetings to the end of 2026, noting that the dates avoid any major festivals, school holidays and Senedd recess. 

8.2 The board reviewed and agreed on the proposed meeting dates, with some adjustments to avoid conflicts. They also discussed the need for regular catch-ups between the board chair and the ARC chair as the proposed ARC meetings will now follow the Board sessions. 

ACTION: JM to find an alternative date for the Board meeting in October to discuss progress to the end of Q2. 

ACTION: JM to add diary markers for all meetings to Board/ARC members’ calendars. 

9.1 JM highlighted that Board members would need to nominate and approve a new Chair for ARC at the Board meeting on 3 September. JMF confirmed he would discuss with Board members ahead of the September meeting. 

ACTION: JMF to seek nominations for ARC Chair from Board members.  

9.2 HG thanked SG and BS for their efforts and contributions over the last three years as this will be their final Board meeting with CDPS. 

9.3 SG noted that it had been a privilege to work with CDPS, the CEOs and the rest of the team, and will be keeping track of CDPS’s progress. 

9.4 BS stated being a Board member at CDPS had been a fascinating experience; CDPS is well positioned to do something very interesting, and he hopes CDPS will have the space to do so.

The meeting closed at 16:50.