050914-fireau-R0908162013

Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority Item 9
15/03/200514 September 2005

Comprehensive Performance Assessment (Error! Bookmark not defined.CPA) 2005
Report by the Chief Officer

Contact: David Howells, Director of Corporate Services Tel: 02380 626833

1

Summary

The Authority received a "good" rating in the first Comprehensive Performance Assessment by the Audit Commission of fire and rescue authorities in England. This is the first opportunity since publication to formally present the full CPA report to the Authority and members are asked to consider, in particular, the summary of strengths and weaknesses (see pages 18 & 19 of the report attached as Appendix 1) and to note the action that has already been taken - and that which is planned - to improve the Authority's already good performance.

2

RecommendationError! Bookmark not defined.

That the Audit Commission's report on the outcome of its Comprehensive Performance Assessment of the Authority be formally received; and that members note the action being taken to address areas for improvement identified in the report.

3

Introduction Error! Bookmark not defined.and Background

3.1

Between January and April 2005 the Audit Commission undertook Comprehensive Performance Assessments (CPA) of the 48 Fire and Rescue Services in England. CPA examines how authorities are being run. The methodology was developed independently by the Audit Commission consistent with the Government's National Framework document for the fire and rescue service in England. The assessment comprises judgements based on evidence from the Commission's own inspection activity, performance indicators and the views of others. It also uses self assessment, peer challenge, and a standard set of nine key lines of enquiry (KLOE) supported by detailed diagnostic guidance to enable judgements to be made, together with a rules-based scoring system.

3.2

CPA is about helping fire and rescue authorities improve the services they deliver for their communities. The assessment is intended to provide a baseline measurement that will help authorities focus on improvement. CPA is an assessment, at the corporate level, of how well the authority is being run. It does not give an opinion on how well the fire service responds to emergency incidents, but it did examine a number of areas of performance which directly underpin operational services (such as performance management and quality assurance processes, community fire safety and the implementation of Integrated Risk Management Plans (IRMP) and Integrated Personal Development Systems (IPDS)).

4

Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority is `Good'

4.1

The Audit Commission concluded that the way Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority is run and the delivery of its services is `Good' - on the scale: excellent/good/fair/weak/poor.
Our main strengths are identified as:
¬ clear and coherent leadership from both senior officers and members;
¬ a clear long-standing commitment to prevention activities;
¬ good people management, which is supported by effective policies and a commitment to investing in the workforce; and,
¬ robust future plans to continue to improve services for local communities.

4.2

It is good to note that our strengths - identified and summarised on pages 18 & 19 of the report - outnumber our weaknesses. Particularly pleasing was the comment in the executive summary that, "...the Authority is considered to be self-aware." Indeed, there were no surprises in the report; we had identified all the areas for improvement in our comprehensive self-assessment process.
The Commission noted (in its high level summary on its website) that we were already working on two priority areas for improvement:
¬ internal communications and the engagement of staff; and
¬ development of a culture of performance management/improvement - as opposed to performance monitoring.

4.3

The CPA process seems to show that the 48 fire and rescue authorities in England are largely providing good services to local people. There were three times as many `good' or `excellent' authorities than there were `weak' or `poor'. Only two authorities achieved an `excellent' rating, and only two were assessed as `poor'. Hampshire was one on 19 authorities that achieved a `good' assessment.

5

Improvement planning

5.1

We actually commenced improvement planning in the Autumn of 2004 as part of the self-assessment process in which we identified a number of immediate actions we needed to take to improve the way we manage and deliver our services. Some of these helped to shape and provide the content of our current Integrated Risk Management Plan. In December 2004, some members will recall that we decided to participate in a `peer challenge review' which essentially provided a `dummy run' prior to the CPA review. We used the outcomes of this review to develop an interim improvement plan. So, when the on-site CPA process was carried out in February 2005, the Audit Commission team were able to see evidence of our positive commitment to improvement planning (hence the comments in paragraph 4.2 above).

5.2

Since receiving the draft CPA report in May 2005, work has continued in developing an `Improvement Planning Matrix'. This document attempts to capture the outcomes and proposed actions from several recent audit, inspection and review processes, including: our own internal review of expectations contained in the National Framework; the Pay and Conditions Verification Studies 1 & 2 conducted by the Audit Commission; our self-assessment exercise; the peer challenge review; and the CPA report itself. Inevitably, there were many common findings and overlapping actions. The matrix has been progressively distilled and the latest draft is included as Appendix 2 to this report. The matrix has grouped findings and proposed actions under five improvement areas:
¬ Engaging staff and the community
¬ Improving management capacity
¬ Improving performance and `raising our game'
¬ Embedding Risk Management
¬ `Living our values'

5.3

From the outset, we have been keen not to develop a completely separate `improvement plan'. Instead, we want to ensure that our Corporate Plan - particularly our Integrated Risk Management Plan - is thoroughly reviewed and updated to include actions and objectives (identified in the matrix) that will deliver improvement. This approach was discussed and accepted as a sensible way forward at the post-CPA `round table' meeting held in July (when representatives from the CPA team, Her Majesty's Fire Service Inspectorate, our external auditor, the regional business change manager for the fire and rescue service, met with the Principal Officers and leading members of the Authority).

5.6

Work will continue over the coming weeks on refining the improvement planning matrix in the context of reviewing and updating the Corporate Plan, the Integrated Risk Management Plan, and the various functional medium-term (business) plans to ensure that all areas for improvement are being addressed. The Corporate Management Team have and will continue to be involved in the process and an update on progress will be provided at the next meeting of the Authority in December.

5.7

Finally, opportunities have already been taken to identify and learn from good practice in other fire and rescue authorities in each of the nine themes of CPA.

6

Contribution to Corporate Aims and Objectives

6.1

The Authority is determined to be amongst the top 20% of high performing fire and rescue services in the country. The outcome of CPA provides a useful comparative measure and the Authority can be justifiably proud of its `good' rating. There is obviously scope for improvement and priority will be given to those actions and initiatives likely to improve our next CPA rating.

7

Risk Analysis

7.1

Responding positively to the outcomes of CPA is essential if we are to maintain the confidence of our stakeholders - particularly the public and our own staff. Failure to make improvements against this first baseline (CPA) assessment would leave the Authority vulnerable to damage of its reputation. Although we are `good', we know that we cannot be complacent because unless we can demonstrate progress and improvement by the time the next round of CPA is undertaken (timing not yet known) we run the risk of being down graded.

8

Resource Implications

8.1

One of the key areas CPA examined is "Capacity: people". No fire and rescue authority achieved the maximum `4' score for this area. We are therefore acutely aware that many of our staff are having to cope with significant increases in workloads during a period of unprecedented change in the fire and rescue service. Expectations to deliver on the modernisation agenda are already high, and the need to take immediate and positive action in the wake of CPA adds to that burden.

8.2

One of the reasons for fully integrating improvement planning within the existing corporate planning process is to reduce the impact on staff. However, members of the Finance and General Purposes Committee will be aware (from the last budget monitoring report) that the opportunity is being taken to make provision (a reserve) to support the modernisation process (from underspendings elsewhere in the budget). This will include the potential to engage temporary staff or consultancy support to assist in project-managing specific pieces of work in the modernisation and improvement planning processes.

9

Equality Impact Assessment

9.1

There are no specific equality issues arising out of the recommendation of this report, but it is worth recording that the CPA process did highlight the need for us to improve our performance in the employment of black and ethnic minority staff and women in operational roles.

9.2

The proposals within this report are considered compatible with the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, the Human Rights Act 1998, and the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000.

10

Consultation

10.1

Our staff have been kept well informed of the outcomes of CPA. The Chief Officer invited staff (and HFRA members) to a special presentation of the results on 27 July 2005 - the day before the report was made public. The presentation - which included a question and answer session - was well received. It was videoed and a copy of it has been sent to every workplace so that all staff can be fully aware of the results, what they mean for us, and how we intend to deliver further improvements.

11

Conclusion

11.1

Considerable effort was put into preparing for the CPA process and the Authority can be very pleased with the outcome. There were no surprises in the final report, and the improvement planning process that actually started prior to CPA will help to ensure that the Authority can make a positive response to the detailed findings.

Background Information (Section 100D of Local Government Act 1972)

The following documents disclose the facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of the report:
"None"
Note: The list excludes: (1) published works; and (2) documents that disclose exempt or confidential information defined in the Act.

Secretarial/WP/Corporate/HFRA/Corporate HFRA 14 9 05 CPA Results DH/JMW/2/9/2005


1	Summary

	The Authority received a "good" rating in the first Comprehensive Performance Assessment by the Audit Commission of fire and rescue authorities in England. This is the first opportunity since publication to formally present the full CPA report to the Authority and members are asked to consider, in particular, the summary of strengths and weaknesses (see pages 18 & 19 of the report attached as Appendix 1) and to note the action that has already been taken - and that which is planned - to improve the Authority's already good performance.


2	RecommendationError! Bookmark not defined.

	That the Audit Commission's report on the outcome of its Comprehensive Performance Assessment of the Authority be formally received; and that members note the action being taken to address areas for improvement identified in the report.


3	Introduction Error! Bookmark not defined.and Background

3.1	Between January and April 2005 the Audit Commission undertook Comprehensive Performance Assessments (CPA) of the 48 Fire and Rescue Services in England. CPA examines how authorities are being run. The methodology was developed independently by the Audit Commission consistent with the Government's National Framework document for the fire and rescue service in England. The assessment comprises judgements based on evidence from the Commission's own inspection activity, performance indicators and the views of others. It also uses self assessment, peer challenge, and a standard set of nine key lines of enquiry (KLOE) supported by detailed diagnostic guidance to enable judgements to be made, together with a rules-based scoring system.

3.2	CPA is about helping fire and rescue authorities improve the services they deliver for their communities. The assessment is intended to provide a baseline measurement that will help authorities focus on improvement. CPA is an assessment, at the corporate level, of how well the authority is being run. It does not give an opinion on how well the fire service responds to emergency incidents, but it did examine a number of areas of performance which directly underpin operational services (such as performance management and quality assurance processes, community fire safety and the implementation of Integrated Risk Management Plans (IRMP) and Integrated Personal Development Systems (IPDS)).


4	Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority is `Good'

4.1	The Audit Commission concluded that the way Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority is run and the delivery of its services is `Good' - on the scale: excellent/good/fair/weak/poor. Our main strengths are identified as: ¬ clear and coherent leadership from both senior officers and members; ¬ a clear long-standing commitment to prevention activities; ¬ good people management, which is supported by effective policies and a commitment to investing in the workforce; and, ¬ robust future plans to continue to improve services for local communities.

4.2	It is good to note that our strengths - identified and summarised on pages 18 & 19 of the report - outnumber our weaknesses. Particularly pleasing was the comment in the executive summary that, "...the Authority is considered to be self-aware." Indeed, there were no surprises in the report; we had identified all the areas for improvement in our comprehensive self-assessment process. The Commission noted (in its high level summary on its website) that we were already working on two priority areas for improvement: ¬ internal communications and the engagement of staff; and ¬ development of a culture of performance management/improvement - as opposed to performance monitoring.

4.3	The CPA process seems to show that the 48 fire and rescue authorities in England are largely providing good services to local people. There were three times as many `good' or `excellent' authorities than there were `weak' or `poor'. Only two authorities achieved an `excellent' rating, and only two were assessed as `poor'. Hampshire was one on 19 authorities that achieved a `good' assessment.


5	Improvement planning

5.1	We actually commenced improvement planning in the Autumn of 2004 as part of the self-assessment process in which we identified a number of immediate actions we needed to take to improve the way we manage and deliver our services. Some of these helped to shape and provide the content of our current Integrated Risk Management Plan. In December 2004, some members will recall that we decided to participate in a `peer challenge review' which essentially provided a `dummy run' prior to the CPA review. We used the outcomes of this review to develop an interim improvement plan. So, when the on-site CPA process was carried out in February 2005, the Audit Commission team were able to see evidence of our positive commitment to improvement planning (hence the comments in paragraph 4.2 above).

5.2	Since receiving the draft CPA report in May 2005, work has continued in developing an `Improvement Planning Matrix'. This document attempts to capture the outcomes and proposed actions from several recent audit, inspection and review processes, including: our own internal review of expectations contained in the National Framework; the Pay and Conditions Verification Studies 1 & 2 conducted by the Audit Commission; our self-assessment exercise; the peer challenge review; and the CPA report itself. Inevitably, there were many common findings and overlapping actions. The matrix has been progressively distilled and the latest draft is included as Appendix 2 to this report. The matrix has grouped findings and proposed actions under five improvement areas: ¬ Engaging staff and the community ¬ Improving management capacity ¬ Improving performance and `raising our game' ¬ Embedding Risk Management ¬ `Living our values'

5.3	From the outset, we have been keen not to develop a completely separate `improvement plan'. Instead, we want to ensure that our Corporate Plan - particularly our Integrated Risk Management Plan - is thoroughly reviewed and updated to include actions and objectives (identified in the matrix) that will deliver improvement. This approach was discussed and accepted as a sensible way forward at the post-CPA `round table' meeting held in July (when representatives from the CPA team, Her Majesty's Fire Service Inspectorate, our external auditor, the regional business change manager for the fire and rescue service, met with the Principal Officers and leading members of the Authority).

5.6	Work will continue over the coming weeks on refining the improvement planning matrix in the context of reviewing and updating the Corporate Plan, the Integrated Risk Management Plan, and the various functional medium-term (business) plans to ensure that all areas for improvement are being addressed. The Corporate Management Team have and will continue to be involved in the process and an update on progress will be provided at the next meeting of the Authority in December.

5.7	Finally, opportunities have already been taken to identify and learn from good practice in other fire and rescue authorities in each of the nine themes of CPA.


6	Contribution to Corporate Aims and Objectives

6.1	The Authority is determined to be amongst the top 20% of high performing fire and rescue services in the country. The outcome of CPA provides a useful comparative measure and the Authority can be justifiably proud of its `good' rating. There is obviously scope for improvement and priority will be given to those actions and initiatives likely to improve our next CPA rating.


7	Risk Analysis

7.1	Responding positively to the outcomes of CPA is essential if we are to maintain the confidence of our stakeholders - particularly the public and our own staff. Failure to make improvements against this first baseline (CPA) assessment would leave the Authority vulnerable to damage of its reputation. Although we are `good', we know that we cannot be complacent because unless we can demonstrate progress and improvement by the time the next round of CPA is undertaken (timing not yet known) we run the risk of being down graded.


8	Resource Implications

8.1	One of the key areas CPA examined is "Capacity: people". No fire and rescue authority achieved the maximum `4' score for this area. We are therefore acutely aware that many of our staff are having to cope with significant increases in workloads during a period of unprecedented change in the fire and rescue service. Expectations to deliver on the modernisation agenda are already high, and the need to take immediate and positive action in the wake of CPA adds to that burden.

8.2	One of the reasons for fully integrating improvement planning within the existing corporate planning process is to reduce the impact on staff. However, members of the Finance and General Purposes Committee will be aware (from the last budget monitoring report) that the opportunity is being taken to make provision (a reserve) to support the modernisation process (from underspendings elsewhere in the budget). This will include the potential to engage temporary staff or consultancy support to assist in project-managing specific pieces of work in the modernisation and improvement planning processes.


9	Equality Impact Assessment

9.1	There are no specific equality issues arising out of the recommendation of this report, but it is worth recording that the CPA process did highlight the need for us to improve our performance in the employment of black and ethnic minority staff and women in operational roles.

9.2	The proposals within this report are considered compatible with the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, the Human Rights Act 1998, and the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000.


10	Consultation

10.1	Our staff have been kept well informed of the outcomes of CPA. The Chief Officer invited staff (and HFRA members) to a special presentation of the results on 27 July 2005 - the day before the report was made public. The presentation - which included a question and answer session - was well received. It was videoed and a copy of it has been sent to every workplace so that all staff can be fully aware of the results, what they mean for us, and how we intend to deliver further improvements.



11	Conclusion

11.1	Considerable effort was put into preparing for the CPA process and the Authority can be very pleased with the outcome. There were no surprises in the final report, and the improvement planning process that actually started prior to CPA will help to ensure that the Authority can make a positive response to the detailed findings.



Background Information (Section 100D of Local Government Act 1972)

The following documents disclose the facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of the report: "None" Note: The list excludes: (1) published works; and (2) documents that disclose exempt or confidential information defined in the Act.