Contact: Jenny Heath, Corporate Performance Manager, ext 7402

1 Summary

1.1 The following decisions are sought:

· That the revised approach to developing the Best Value Review Programme is endorsed

· That the interim revision of the five year programme of Best Value reviews is approved

2 Reasons for the recommendations

· The council is under a statutory obligation to develop a five year programme of reviews of all functions. The first programme was approved by the Best Value and Performance Sub-committee on 9 December 1999, when the sub-committee also agreed to keep the programme under review.

3 Other options considered and rejected

To leave the programme unchanged.

4 Conflicts of interest declared by the decision maker, or a member or officer consulted

None

5 Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee

Not applicable

6 Reason for matter being dealt with, if urgent

To ensure the revised programme meets the publication deadline of the Best Value Performance Plan and to clarify work commitments of those who will be involved in reviews

Approved by: Date:

7 Background

7.1 The original five year programme was approved by the Best Value and Performance Sub-committee on 9 December 1999. It was developed by prioritising the county council's services, with reference to residents', members' and officers' views. This resulted in a large number of reviews, examining areas of service that mirror the structure of the organisation. It had the advantage of being easy to understand and to draw the boundaries of each service, with clear ownership of the review by its managers and staff. However, the key disadvantage was that the reviews were not examining anything new, with the unsurprising result that the improvements identified were incremental, unlikely to develop innovative solutions with other service areas or organisations and leaving the impression that Best Value reviews were only adding to the management burden.

7.2 A revised programme was approved by the Best Value and Performance Sub-committee on 9 October 2000 and is still current. This revised programme sought to address the disadvantages of the original programme by reducing the number of service-based reviews and focusing on cross-cutting functions which were identified as priorities within the Corporate Strategy. This approach learnt from the Best Value experiences in Year 1 and has generally been acknowledged as best practice by government and auditors.

8 The national context

8.1 The government is currently engaged in a review of Best Value which will report by the end of the year. The focus of the review is fairly narrow and primarily concerned with employee and contracting issues.

8.2 The government is planning further changes to Best Value in its White Paper on Local Government. This is anticipated to simplify the Best Value framework and is likely to draw on the conclusions reported in the Audit Commission's annual statement Changing Gear. The thrust of Changing Gear is to differentiate the approach to audit and inspection at each authority, according to an assessment of current corporate performance.

8.3 The county council has been accepted as one of 40 authorities engaged in a national pathfinder project being run by the Audit Commission. This is examining mechanisms to integrate audit and inspection and to deliver a differentiated approach. This is a short term project which it is hoped will also influence the White Paper.

8.4 Recent discussions with both the District Auditor and the Best Value Inspectorate have confirmed their view that top-performing councils should also be able to differentiate their own improvement programmes and to focus their resources on those significant areas where they can make a difference. They have particularly mentioned the benefit of streamlining review programmes so that service areas are not subject to multiple scrutiny.

9 Further lessons learnt

9.1 This second year of Best Value has provided further lessons in managing the process and the review programme:

· Officer and Member resources continue to be stretched to cover the number of reviews within the programme

· The timing of reviews within a single financial year and within a limited time frame each year, leads to bottle necks as support staff find their skills in demand at the same time. This was originally intended to ensure that the outcomes of Best Value Reviews are linked to the budget planning cycle. In reality, mechanisms other than the outcome report drive changes to budget planning and these can run simultaneously with the review as long as there is effective internal communication.

· Service Managers, especially those managing business units, have found reviews to be excessively bureaucratic, given their need to carry out a similar process as part of their business planning cycle.

· Considerable resources are needed to support cross-cutting reviews to ensure there is commitment to and ownership of the review and its outcomes, when it can seem peripheral to the core business of a unit or team.

· Certain statutory plans follow a rigorous, often prescribed, process and are subject to external approval. There appears to be little benefit in duplicating the review of services or functions already covered by the development or review of such statutory plans.

· The Best Value review process has been instrumental in effecting cultural change towards a customer focus and performance management and in most reviews there have been positive outcomes and benefits for those involved - alongside the additional work.

· Members have found the approach to considering review topics beneficial as they have been able to participate at both the `idea generation' stage and in discussions with a wide range of stakeholders. However, enthusiasm is diminished if the area under review has little relevance to the community.

10 An integrated improvement programme

10.1 Currently the Best Value review programme has been developed to cover all functions or services provided by the county council, without making allowances for the work already carried out to review some of these activities under other programmes. It is proposed to develop a holistic approach to improvement programmes that recognises both Member and Officer initiatives and combines them into a single integrated programme. The proposed model will have the following elements:

· The Best Value review programme - a five year programme comprising the themes which make up the priorities in the Corporate Strategy. This programme will therefore have a strong community focus, although in an ever-changing environment, there will also be a need to review support activities to maximise opportunities to increase efficiency.

· The business planning programme - an annual cycle of business planning which is already in place for Financial Regulation 20 business units and some other sectors of the county council. Work will need to be carried out to ensure the process adopts the rigour of the 4 Cs and that there are mechanisms to monitor this. This process should also be fully integrated with the performance development strategy, which collates individual performance reviews into team or unit plans.

· The development and revision of statutory plans - there should be no need to duplicate the effort put into to developing plans which are subject to a prescribed statutory process and/or external scrutiny. The mechanisms should be examined to ensure they also encompass the principles of Best Value.

· Policy Review Committees: policy development programmes - these programmes are currently under development and are likely to consist of a short term (3 - 6 month) rolling programme of reviews based primarily on the Forward Plan.

11 Next steps

11.1 There must be consultation with interested parties in order to develop an effectively integrated improvement programme. It would also be prudent to wait for the outcomes of the government review of Best Value and the White Paper before making radical changes to the five year review programme. However, given the lessons that continue to be learnt (paragraph nine), it would seem wasteful to continue with reviews which are either unlikely to deliver significant service improvements or where the scope of the review is unclear. A revised programme is, therefore, appended, which particularly focuses on addressing these issues in Year 3. The key changes are listed below.

11.1.1 The removal of the following reviews which will report through the business planning process:

· Printing / graphics (year 3)

· Stores / supplies (year 3)

· Hilliers Arboretum (year 5)

11.1.2 The removal of the following support service reviews, which will be covered through performance management audit:

· Corporate Policy, Planning and Performance (year 3)

· Management information (year 3)

· Education Information (year 3)

11.1.3 The removal of the following reviews, which will be subject to external scrutiny through the development of statutory plans:

· Housing to meet the needs of Hampshire people - the strategic element will covered by the Structure Plan development (year 3), while the operational element will be replaced by the Social Services review of Supporting People (year 3)

· Children with Special needs - covered by the Education Development Plan and the Behaviour Support Plan (year 4)

11.1.4 The clarification of the scope of the following reviews:

· Personnel and training review to become: Human Resources Service Delivery in a Changing Environment (year 3)

· Development Control is currently narrowly defined as the service provided by the Environment Grouping. A wider, cross-cutting definition is being considered.

· Welfare of Children - to focus on the Education Welfare Service, in the light of anticipated changes to the service (year 3)

11.1.5 The addition of the following cross-cutting support function reviews, which have been identified as having significant impact by the officer Best Value Steering Group:

· Management of change - to incorporate the internal communications aspect of the year 4 communications review; to cover the people and organisational development aspect of the personnel and training review (year 3) and to incorporate the organisational and change management aspect of the policy, planning and performance review (year 3).

· Risk management (year 5)

· Procurement (year 5)

11.1.6 The addition of the following community focussed cross-cutting review

· Lifelong Learning (year 4)

11.1.7 The delay of the Early Education and Childcare review in order that it can tie in with the planned revision of the strategic plan (year 4)

Recommendations

1 That the change in approach to the review programme be developed as proposed

2 That the interim revision to the five year Best Value programme be approved for inclusion in the Best Value Performance Plan 2002-03

Section 100D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers

The following documents disclose 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 this report.

1. Records of meetings with departmental officers, held on file in the Chief Executive's Policy Unit

N.B. The list excludes:

1. Published works

2. Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.