Minutes of The Victims and Survivors Service (VSS) Board Meeting No 120
Board Meeting Type: Quarter End
Wednesday 21st January 2026 at 9.30am (Members only) and 10.00am (All attendees)
Online via TEAMS
Board Members Present:
Catriona MacArthur (CMA) Board Member (Meeting Chair)
Sandra Horley (SH) Board Member
John Cahill (JC) Board Member
Brian Gilfedder (BG) Board Member
VSS Officers in Attendance:
Andrew Walker (AW) Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
Tara Lewsley (TL) Head of Learning and Growth
Victoria Murray (VM) Head of Corporate Services
Emma Dargan (ED) Head of Service Development
Brónach Twomey (BT) Administrative Officer (Minutes)
Apologies
Nicola Nugent (NN) Head of Health and Wellbeing
A Welcome and Introductions
The Chair welcomed all present to the meeting.
B Minutes of Previous Meeting
The minutes of the previous meeting held on 10th December 2025 were approved.
C Action Points
Action Points remaining open from previous meetings:
- 22/05/24 AP1: Invite to Sir Declan Morgan (Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery) to attend future strategic Board session. Update: Louise Warde Hunter and Lesley Carroll to attend meeting of the Board on 12 February, action closed.
- 07/08/25 AP1: Management to provide a written briefing to the Board on AI considerations within VSS and schedule review at a future strategic session. Update: Action held pending publication of the AI strategy from Northern Ireland Chief Scientific and Technology Adviser (due January). Draft VSS AI Policy is close to being finalised, this will then be shared with the Board.
- 07/08/25 AP4: Provide further information to the Board on Regional Trauma Network (RTN), including KPIs where appropriate. Update: RTN dashboard included within quarterly meeting papers, note that this will be a quarter in arrears due to timing of RTN Partnership Board. Action closed.
- 07/08/25 AP4: Management to produce a summary KPI dashboard for Board members to provide them with an overview of key organisational matters and aid identification of areas for more detailed review. Update: Remains under consideration by management due to current capacity constraints related to VSP call. Will be progressed at the earliest opportunity.
- 22/10/25 AP1: - Scope appropriate Cyber Security training courses for members to attend to assist in the discharging of governance responsibilities. Update: Scoping underway with options to issue to members for consideration.
- 22/10/25 AP2: - CEO to write to TEO on the matter of the remuneration of the Chairperson and members of the VSS Board, with reference to FD (DoF) 05/25 Remuneration of Chairpersons and Members of Public Bodies 2024-25 Update: CEO letter issued on 6th November, action closed however will remain under active review by CEO for appropriate follow up.
D Conflict of Interest
No Conflicts of Interest were noted.
E Chair’s Report
It was noted that due to a lack of an appointed Chairperson during the period, no Chair’s Report was available for Q3 2025/26.
F Quarter 3 Reporting – December 2025
F1 CEO/AO Exception Report
AW presented the report and highlighted items of note:
Victims Support Programme (VSP) Funding Call Progress
The funding call generated bids from 44 C&V organisations (36 full call and 8 small grants) totalling £12.3m in 2026/27 and £12.7m in 2027/28 against indicative annual budgets of £7.9m and £8.0m respectively. One organisation was eliminated at the initial eligibility stage, with 43 proceeding to be scored against the set criteria.
Following scoring, 6 organisations have not reached the required score threshold to progress to the next stage (value for money assessment). This outcome was communicated to unsuccessful organisations on 12 January, and these organisations will have the option to appeal. The remaining 37 organisations proceeding through the process have made bids which amount to £11.9m and £12.2m for 2026/27 and 2027/28. The programme therefore remains heavily oversubscribed. AW noted that the 2026/27 budget allocation has not yet been confirmed and highlighted this as a risk along with the associated risk around the timing of decision making, with the assessment process due to run into March 2026 leaving limited time for exit for any organisations for whom funding does not continue.
AW stated management’s view that the ongoing uncertainty around the budget and the timing of communication of funding decisions mean that it may be appropriate to consider a 3 month extension to the current programme. Management will assess the potential benefits of taking this approach and discuss with TEO at the upcoming Partnership Meeting on 4 February.
CMA commented that giving breathing space to Groups who may have become reliant on VSP funding is an excellent approach and should help to reduce any negative implications associated with cessation of funding.
AW noted that following the reintroduction of psychological therapy for children and young people into VSP, an expression of interest process opened on 19 January and runs to 30 January. Following this, any eligible organisations will be invited to complete a closed call application for funding, in an application process consistent with the original funding call. In parallel, CVS has initiated a working group to develop appropriate standards for service delivery.
AW noted that overall the most significant mitigation to budget pressure in VSP would be an increase in budget to reflect rising costs/inflation, and increased levels of need. AW stated that the hope had been to increase the amount of funding for VSP through TPDPS funding route, unfortunately however this route is now closed.
2025/26 Budget Allocation
Whilst it has not been possible to secure additional funding for 2025/26 within the December monitoring round, VSS continues to manage expenditure within the existing budgets available. In this year in particular, it is important that the full budget allocation is utilised across each area of funding. The Community Partnership team is supporting funded organisations (where possible) to manage increasing budget pressures through reallocations within existing budgets to address needs, and correspondence is currently being drafted to the groups to remind them of their budget responsibilities and the importance of fully expending annual letters of offer.
JC noted that in 2024/25 and in the current year a significant amount of budget allocation has been returned to TEO on the MBIMLW programme. AW confirmed that MBILMW budget allocations are provided in line with the approved business case, and TEO are aware that budget will be returned if demand does not present in line with original assumptions. MBMLW, HIA, TPDPS funding is ringfenced separately to T/C funding, and pressure and easements cannot be offset between areas.
Mother and Baby Institutions, Magdalene Laundries and Workhouses (MBIMLW)
The Inquiry and Redress Scheme Bill is moving through the legislative process and is now approaching the end of the Committee stage (on 26th January 2026).
VSS, along with WAVE and Adopt NI, continue to engage with the Shadow Truth Recovery and Redress Panel (TRRP) to consult on and support the design of the standardised redress scheme application process and associated support provision. The key assumption is around the number of individuals who will require support for redress and the timing of when they will come through for this support. VSS will be submitting cost options to TEO in late January for any additional resources required.
The provisional date for commencement of the redress scheme remains summer 2026, and we have captured the risk associated with scale up of support services as STG82 on the organisational risk register.
Historical Institutional Abuse (HIA) business case and contract extension
TEO has completed work on the five-year review of support service provision to survivors of HIA, as recommended by the Hart Report. In support of this review, VSS has provided TEO with cost inputs and other information for an addendum to the overall ten year HIA business case. VSS projections for years 6-10 significantly exceed the levels of funding TEO initially set for those years within the original 10-year business case.
Clarity on the budget available for future years is critical both in terms of reputation/service delivery, and for the practical planning of delivery for 2026/27 and beyond. The cost input provided by VSS incorporates a reasonable apportionment of community partner salary costs into HIA – to fairly reflect the staff input into delivery of support/services in HIA. In absence of sufficient budget within HIA for these costs, they will remain within VSP and subsequently impact upon funding available for allocation. Early clarity on the available HIA budget will therefore be essential to VSP allocation planning.
2026/27 Budget position
The Executive and all Departments face a very challenging budget position in 2026/27. In this context the operating environment for VSS is also expected to be challenging. Potential budget pressures have been highlighted within the previous items, however other general pressures are likely to arise such as pressure on INP, pressure on corporate costs in the event that additional funding is not received to support contractual staff pay increases etc.
The timing of budget clarity is also critical. In previous years, the timing of budget clarity as directly impacted the timing of SDA payments in April/May. Any delay to such payments increases anxiety for victims and survivors, increases levels of client calls to VSS, and therefore leads to concerning levels of pressure on staff. VSS will be raising this matter with TEO at the Partnership Meeting on 4 February, seeking clarity regarding budget allocations and a process for approval of SDA payments in the absence of a confirmed budget.
TPDPS
Now into the final stretches, scheme will close on 31st August 2026, no indications at the moment that there is an appetite to extend. VSS funded groups are considering whether to make representations in this regard, either directly to the Secretary of State or through the Commissioner for Victims and Survivors.
F1.1 Budget Report
VM provided the Board with an update.
Troubles/conflict
Expenditure in line with forecast at 83% of budget. V3 budget adjusted to allocate additional £271k to INP Frameworks, reallocated from corporate budget (staff and overheads underspend) and funded organisation costs. Emergent corporate underspends will be reallocated during the 4th quarter to maximise programme delivery.
TPDPS
TPDPS expenditure at 67% of budget, due to projected utilisation of add call programme expenditure in second half of year. Risk of underspend remains in both programme and staff costs, and VSS is working with each community partner individually to maximise letter of offer utilisation.
HIA
HIA expenditure is at 62% of full year budget vs year to date forecast of 70%, due to underspends in INP Frameworks and vacancies within community partner organisation. Following engagement with community partner caseworkers, increased INP consultations are now being observed, with projected awards at 71.7% of full year budget at 5 January. A full year underspend of £60k is currently projected.
MBMLW
MBMLW expenditure is at 61% of full year budget vs year to date forecast of 73%. VSS declared an easement of £975k in the October monitoring return in August 2025, but held provision for the commencement of redress support services and emergent INP needs-led demand. A further forecast easement of £128k is now projected, and this will be refined following review of Q3 claims received from community partner organisations.
PEACEPLUS Expenditure
VM noted that the significant underspend in the project to date is largely due to vacancies in the early part of the programme, along with a delay in commencement of the workforce training programme. As previously discussed, a budget modification request will be submitted to SEUPB in February 2026 to request an extension to the project time frame. CMA queried of SEUPB would be amenable to such a request, and VM confirmed that it is our understanding that this would be acceptable, although we cannot be certain on this until SEUPB have reviewed the formal request.
VM noted that in relation to the AOB item regarding the Peace IV bank account balance, approval has now been received from TEO to transfer remaining funds to the main VSS bank account.
F1.2 Organisational Risk Register
VM Provided the Board with an update.
There are currently 6 risks open, 3 red and 3 amber. 3 risks were de-escalated to operational risk registers during the quarter and 1 new risk was added (STG84), and there is currently no change to the risk rating of existing risks that are on the register.
STG50 Risk that the governance structures in place to provide oversight and guidance cannot function effectively. Update: The Board met with the Deputy Secretary on 10th October. No further progress has been made since that date.
STG79 Risk associated with cashflow management in latter stages of PEACE PLUS Project. Update: Longer term risk, on Risk Register for monitoring. Meeting with TEO each quarter.
STG80 Risk that budget pressure will reduce the capacity for service provision within the sector. Update: Remains at the maximum risk score. The focus is now on 26/27 within the context of the heavily oversubscribed VSS call. We are seeking clarity from TEO on our budget position and have formally written to them and will further discuss at Accountability meeting on 4 February.
STG82 Risk that VSS and its partners are unable to scale up MBMLW support services and adequately support individuals in line with the commencement of the redress scheme in mid 2026. Update: TL currently working with community partners to model additional resource requirements.
STG83 Risk to ability to sustain the VSS service delivery model after PEACE PLUS project ends. Update: Longer term risk. As we go through 2026 we will need to work with TEO to collate the information they will need to aid their decision making around future funding in this area. AW has identified lines within European regulations which allude to future PEACE PLUS funding programme.
STG84 Risk to the delivery of support and services for Survivors of Historical Institutional Abuse (HIA) across the remainder of the 10-year period recommended by the Public Inquiry (Hart) Update: VSS has submitted inputs to the extension of the TEO business case. Current approved value for HIA support services is £5.3m across 10 years, however VSS modelling suggests that £13.6m is needed across the 10 year period, leaving an £8.3m additional ask. TEO have accepted these figures into their business case process, and it’s currently working its way through the approval stages.
F2 Quarterly ALB Performance Report
This report was noted.
F3 Quarterly Assurance Statement
This report was noted.
F4 Delivery Plan Monitoring Report
TL updated the Board.
In Quarter 3, VSS revised its service delivery targets to reflect the additional funding allocated in Quarter 2 to community partners providing health and wellbeing support. This ringfenced funding, provided from the Troubles Permanent Disablement Payment Scheme budget, enabled an increase in service provision. Consequently, VSS has updated the 2025/26 delivery plan to incorporate these increased targets.
One target is red and will not be met, in relation to a new HIA funding call. The decision to extend existing service provision by 1 year to allow for business case approval, budget clarification and operational capacity constraints has been agreed with TEO.
Four targets are Amber, all four are in T/c business area. 3 relate to PEACE PLUS targets, and are associated with delays in recruitment at the start of the project. TL noted that although in year targets may show a deficit, overall cumulative PEACE PLUS targets remain on track and there are no concerns to note.
The other amber target relates to T/c INP Education and Training. Progress against this target has been slower than anticipated, primarily due to lower-than-expected uptake. The situation is likely to continue and is being actively monitored. Consideration is being given to reallocating funding to address emerging or unmet needs in other areas.
BG asked if there was a specific issue around recruitment and if this impacted on services to Victims and Survivors.
ED stated that PEACE PLUS recruitment process delays are mostly related to the timing of programme implementation. There has been an increase in posts which has settled down now with case workers, advocacy workers and project management staff are now in place. The nature of the programme means there will always be a turnover in staff. Discussion held around whether it is appropriate to assume an ongoing % vacancy rate when setting targets in future.
F5 PEACEPLUS Project Report
ED provided the Report to the Board.
Of the 30 Deliverables associated with this project:
· 22 are currently Green
· 6 are currently Green / Amber
· 2 are currently Amber
ED noted that in year performance against targets had previously been discussed.
The amber PEACEPLUS targets relate to the recruitment and management of the WAVE Trauma Education team. ED noted that the Head of Trauma Education post remained vacant and VSS has asked WAVE to advertise this role as soon as possible.
F6 RTN Performance Dashboard
The Board noted this paper.
G Board Sub Committees
G1 Audit and Risk Committee
JC provided a verbal update and noted that the organisational risk register is reflective of the variety of risks faced by the organisation at the current time.
BG added that the recent ARC meeting was positive with good results being produced.
G2 Health and Wellbeing Committee
SH provided a verbal update.
SH noted that that the Trauma Informed Practice Policy was introduced, which outlines the VSS commitment to embedding the 6 trauma informed principles across everything they do.
The committee also discussed employee wellbeing and credited the commitment of HR in showing VSS staff that they are valued.
H Board Workplan & Development
H1 Board Attendance and Work Plan
Members discussed the recording of Board member hours and noted that some members do not submit claims for hours of work undertaken. VM agreed to reissue the guidance on claiming of Board member hours and expenses.
H2 Board Training Questionnaire
VM noted that the questionnaire now includes a record of all member training completed to date. The Board noted the paper.
H3 Board Self-Assessment Update
VM reviewed the Board Self-Assessment actions and noted minimal change on these due to management focus on VSP call assessment.
I Standing Agenda Items
I1 Compliance Update
VM provided a summary of the paper and the Board noted its contents.
I2 Client Risk Update.
The Board noted this paper. AW advised that the challenging phone calls received during December were all from one individual, who was now engaged in the unacceptable behaviour process.
J Any Other Business
J1 Board Scheduling 2026-27
VM proposed the schedule of Board and Committee dates for 2026/27 and asked the Board to confirm content with the proposal.
BG requested an opportunity to review after the meeting and members agreed to provide any further comments by email.
J2 AOB
BG raised three questions for management to consider:
1. Can SMT consider how the organisation can achieve better value for money through the use of AI?
AW acknowledged the importance of embracing the potential of AI. At present, it is important to build from a position of training and learning for staff, understanding the risks and boundaries, then identifying opportunities and building a framework within which these can be implemented.
2. If there is a change of government in the UK after the next election, potentially with a different outlook on public expenditure, does management have a view on how VSS would respond to this, and should any associated planning be undertaken?
AW noted that VSS can and will respond to any challenges which arise as a result of any form of changing public policy. Future risks can be identified and mitigations explored – however resources must primarily be directed towards managing known risks and challenges.
3. Can consideration be given to the security and data protection risks associated with the Board accessing documents on their own devices, and how best to mitigate these?
AW noted that some consideration has been given to this internally in recent weeks. Whilst there would be some advantages to using NICS devices (primarily ability to use different sharing platforms), the improvement in security in doing so is considered minimal. Moving to NICS devices also brings cost and additional risks (such as loss of device). VSS content with the risk profile of the current approach, given the nature of the information currently shares (i.e. no sensitive personal information). AW reiterated that basic security protocols are crucial such as deleting records aster use etc).
K Date of Next Meeting
The next Board meeting is scheduled to take place on 12 February 2026 at Seatem House.