Archived decisions

Contact: Jenny Heath, Best Value Project Manager, ext 7402

1. Purpose

1.1 The purpose of this report is to:

· seek Member approval of the scoping report for the service review of Policy Development in the Environment Grouping

· agree the level of Member involvement with the review and how to achieve it.

2. Background

2.1 This review is part of year 2 and 3 of the five-year programme of reviews, amended and agreed by the Best Value and Performance Sub-Committee on 9 October 2000.

2.2 The attached scoping report is presented in three elements:

· Position Statement - which describes where the service is now

· Project brief - which identifies the aims of the review and the approach to achieving them

· Project plan - key dates or milestones for the review.

3. Challenging the Scoping Report

3.1 Before approving the scoping report for the service review, the Panel must challenge it to ensure that it:

· Meets national and local requirements

· Will address the concerns of the community and members

· Includes appropriate mechanisms for Member involvement.

A checklist is attached to help Members with this.

4. Scoping the Review

4.1 Members will also need to consider the scope of the review, for example, by asking:

· Is it clear which services are included within the review and which are not?

· Have the boundaries with other reviews been established, as well as cross-cutting issues with other Hampshire County Council reviews and those of other Best Value authorities in Hampshire?

Recommendations

1. That the scope of the review of Environment Grouping Policy Development be agreed as covering:

· the preparation of policies within the Environment Grouping, advice on their implementation and progress monitoring

and excluding the following functions which are included in other Best Value reviews:

· the preparation of corporate policies and plans, which are included in the cross-cutting review of Policy, Planning and Performance.

2. That the approach to the review outlined in the project brief and the timetable provided in the project plan be approved.

3. That Members are nominated to participate in the stakeholder workshops and wider review team.

6678a/JH

Checklist - Prompts to help Members with Best Value

Scoping Meeting to confirm:

1 The key issues facing the service:

· From the customer point of view

· From a Member perspective

· From the financial viewpoint

· From the operational point of view

2 Can you identify a key outcome or service improvement that you expect to result from the Best Value review?

3 Whether the approach to the review is robust

· Is there sufficient information to carry out a comparison and evaluate performance?

· Is there sufficient information on the market place to consider competition?

· How is an external focus to the review being provided?

· What evidence is there that the information provided is free of bias?

· Are all the stakeholders' views being sought?

· Are the identified issues the key ones to challenge?

· How will the review team assess the current strengths and weaknesses of the service?

· Is the amount of effort and resource being put into the review relevant to the cost, size and impact of the service?

· Is the amount of effort and resource being put into the review realistic and achievable?

4 Will the review make sure the following questions are answered?

Challenge

· What does the service do?

· Why do we provide this service?

· What statutory obligations are there?

· What opportunities are there for discretion?

· What other influences are there?

· How does the service link to the corporate aims/priorities?

Compare

· What do other authorities/organisations/volunteers do?

· How do they do it?

· How much does it cost?

· How many people/other facilities do they use to provide the service?

· What do the comparisons tell us?

· Do we need to dig further?

· Do we have existing performance measures?

· Do we need to develop better performance measures?

· Do we need to work with others to develop comparable measures and evaluate performance?

· Can we improve our performance?

Consult

· Who are the stakeholders?

· Who benefits from the service?

· Who pays for the service?

· What influence do they have over the service?

· Do we know their views?

· Have we taken account of them/acted on them?

· Are there gaps in the groups of stakeholders we consult?

· How should we consult?

· What questions do we need to ask?

· How do we encourage/make it safe for consultees to answer?

· What feedback do we give to consultees?

Compete

· Who are our competitors/are there any other providers?

· Do we know and understand the market this service operates in?

· Do we need to develop a market?

· Are our arrangements competitive? (see compare)

· Would we improve quality by buying in the service?

· Would we reduce costs without losing quality if we bought in the service?

· What impact would there be on our staff/skill base if we contracted out?

· Would the decision be reversible?

· What is the cost of contracting out:

· as an exercise

· to maintain a client role

· in staff terms

· What level of competition exists

· Would contracting out lead to a monopoly supplier situation?

· Would a partnership offer benefits?