Contact: Jenny Heath, Corporate Performance Manager, ext 7402

1 Summary

1.1 The following decisions are sought:

· That the announcement that Hampshire County Council is an excellent authority be welcomed

· That Cabinet note the action taken to improve performance data collection and reporting, in order that future reports can advise Cabinet of relevant performance indicator results, supported by interpretation and commentary from operational managers

· That Cabinet agree the proposed variations to the Best Value Review programme and approve the Hampshire Improvement Programme, as providing both the improvement plan required by Comprehensive Performance Assessment and the future Best Value review programme

· That Cabinet approve the establishment of two `task and finish' member panels to consider the Best Value reviews of Early Education and Childcare and Lifelong learning.

2 Reasons for the recommendations

· The Council is under a statutory obligation to maintain a programme of Best Value reviews, covering all its functions

· Under the Government's Comprehensive Performance Assessment regime, the Council is required to produce an improvement plan in response to the Audit Commission's assessment of its overall performance.

3 Other options considered and rejected

To develop or maintain a separate CPA improvement plan, Best Value review programme and schedule of corporate projects / initiatives.

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

None

5 Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee

Not applicable

6 Reason for matter being dealt with, if urgent

Not applicable

Approved by: Date:

7 Purpose of this report

7.1 This report welcomes the Council's Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) as an Excellent council and considers the top level results to identify areas of greatest strength or where improvements can be made.

7.2 The contribution of performance indicator reporting is examined in greater detail and Cabinet are advised that management action has been taken to deliver improvements to the process and to ensure appropriate performance indicator reporting in future.

7.3 Local authorities are required to indicate their short list of priorities for improvement in the light of the CPA. The CPA improvement plan is intended to short-list the top priorities for improvement from existing plans and initiatives. This report outlines the development of the Council's CPA improvement plan within the initiative to develop an integrated improvement programme - the Hampshire Improvement Programme - which also incorporates the requirement to have a Best Value review programme.

8 CPA results

8.1 The CPA framework¹ brings together judgements about:

· core service performance in education, social services, (housing), environment, libraries and leisure and (benefits);

· use of resources, including an audit judgement; and

· the council's ability measured through a corporate assessment

Each of the individual service judgements, the use of resources judgement, and each of the themes scored within the corporate assessment are awarded a score of 1 to 4, with 1 being the lowest score and 4 being the highest. These are then combined through the CPA assessment framework to reach an overall category for the authority, within a range of :

Poor, Weak, Fair, Good, Excellent.

8.2 Hampshire is assessed as an excellent authority. This assessment and the accompanying judgements will provide a source of positive messages for future internal and external communications, as well as being held on Hantsweb and Hantsent.

8.3 Corporate assessment

8.4 The Council's ability has been measured through the Corporate Assessment process. During April the Council prepared a self-assessment of its top priorities and plans to achieve them, in the context of the community of Hampshire. The Cabinet and Corporate Management Team worked together to arrive at the key messages, which were then evaluated during a two-week fieldwork inspection carried out by the Audit Commission's Corporate Assessment Team (CATeam).

8.5 The draft report from the CATeam, received in June 2002, gave judgements against the following themes: Ambition, Focus, Prioritisation, Capacity, Performance management, Achievement, Investment, Learning, Future plans. The indications were that the Council had been assessed to have excellent corporate capacity, although at this stage the full CPA model was not finalised and there were several `moderation' hoops to go through which might have affected the final outcome.

8.6 The Council responded in July to correct factual errors and the final report was received on 4 December, at the same time as all final reports were issued to all top tier local authorities. The scores remain the same, confirming the Council's excellent status in respect of corporate ability.

8.7 The recommendations from the report are attached at Appendix 1. These have not changed since the original report. The main body of the report has been amended to take account of the corrections to factual inaccuracies, in particular reference to partnership with the Ministry of Defence and statements about performance in education and social services. This results in a credible document which will provide a sound basis for future development work.

8.8 Service blocks

8.9 Six service blocks are assessed to arrive at a judgement about an authority's performance in delivering core services. Only four are applicable to county councils: Education; Social services; Environment; Libraries and leisure; (Housing) and (Benefits). An additional block, `Use of resources' assesses the Council's performance in delivering the infrastructure to support excellent front-line services.

8.10 The education block is assessed by OFSTED who arrive at an education profile comprising a star rating for two judgements on service performance and capacity to improve. Hampshire's education service has been assessed as three stars, the top rating, on both counts. While the improvement judgement feeds into the corporate assessment aspect of the CPA model, the service judgement is used to determine the rating for this core service block. OFSTED's judgements are based on 2001 school performance tables and a range of other measures, including the LEA OFSTED report. This latter report commended Hampshire as `a good and improving LEA' and specifically commented that `The LEA has a proven record in managing its affairs effectively while being open to suggestions for further improvement.'

8.11 The social services block is assessed by the Social Services Inspectorate (SSI). The department received its first star rating for 2001/02 in May 2002, gaining an overall two star performance rating based on the following two judgements:

· Most services for children serve people well and have promising prospects for improvement

· Some services for adults serve people well and have promising prospects for improvement

These judgements have been refreshed for the CPA using more recent data and have been confirmed as the same. They demonstrate that the Council is doing well with many social care activities but there are areas for improvement, particularly in helping people to live independently in their own homes.

8.12 The environment block draws on a range of factors to arrive at a conclusion about performance, with an overall result of 4:

· Performance indicators (PIs) - covering transport, waste and planning. The waste and planning PIs show top quartile results and those for transport are in the next-t- top quartile.

· Best Value reviews - the inspection report for Passenger Transport resulted in the judgement of a good service, with promising prospects for improvement.

· Local Transport Plan - the Council's plan has been acknowledged as well above average, the top category.

8.13 For county councils, the Libraries and leisure service block draws on performance information for the library service alone. The results comprise three elements, which give an overall result of 3:

· Performance indicators (PIs) - the PI results place the library service in the next-to-top quartile for those areas measured.

· Best Value reviews - the inspection report for the Library Service resulted in the judgement of a good service, with uncertain prospects for improvement. A re-inspection of the prospects for improvement has been scheduled for early in 2003.

· The Library Plan - The plan as a planning tool is rated as: Good, while plans to meet the public library standards are rated as: Fair

8.14 The Use of resources block draws on a number of factors which combine to demonstrate the Council's management of resources in support of front-line services, giving an overall result of 4:

· Best Value reviews - an average of all Best Value inspection results, in this case Passenger transport and Library service resulting in an assessment as `Good', the 2^nd category

· Statutory plans - an assessment by the Government Office for the South East that the Asset Management plan and Capital strategy are `Good', the top category

· Performance Indicators - 8 PIs that measure `Corporate Health' were included in the assessment. Unfortunately 7 of these were reserved by the District Auditor, resulting in the lowest scores being recorded. See the section on performance indicator reporting for action being taken.

· District Audit judgement - the statement covering financial standing, internal financial control, standards of financial control, financial statements and the legality of significant financial transactions resulted in an average score of over 3.

9 Performance indicator reporting

9.1 The validity of the national Best Value performance indicators is audited annually by the District Auditor. This year the Audit Commission required a rigorous audit of the accuracy of every indicator. The District Auditor has reserved 18 out of Hampshire's 87 performance indicators.

9.2 It is clear from the breakdown of the CPA results that the reserved PIs have featured in the overall calculations. It is fortunate that the strength of other areas of activity have ensured that poor performance reporting has not adversely impacted on the final CPA result.

9.3 Work with departments has identified the main causes of the problems as:

· Lack of perceived value or consistency in the performance indicators. (There is no doubt that the Council shares concerns with other local authorities about the relevance of some performance indicators and the stability of their definitions or methodology for calculating them. )

· Lack of ownership of the performance indicator results and their place in decision making processes

· Insufficient resources allocated to meet deadlines or to carry out quality assurance checks and analysis of the impact of results.

· Poor processes and insufficient audit trail.

9.4 The Corporate Management Team have initiated a series of management actions to address the auditor's recommendations. These are not only aimed at ensuring accurate data collection but also at improving the use made of performance information.

9.5 Elsewhere on the agenda, the report on the Best Value Performance Plan indicates that the contents of that plan should flow from a continuous cycle of performance reporting. Performance indicator results are one element of that performance reporting. The following factors will be taken into account:

· Presentation of a consistent basket of PIs. Initially a set developed by Kent County Council has been used, selected because of their consistency over time and use by other South East Counties. It will be important to revisit that selection to reflect both the structure of Hampshire County Council and the priorities in the Corporate Strategy.

· Commentary from operational managers - a synopsis of past and present performance in the context of future plans and other departmental priorities should be available and in particular reported for those PIs which show unexpected results or significant variation in trends.

· Timing of reporting - should inform decision making on key documents, in particular the revision of the Corporate Strategy.

10 Integrated Improvement Plan

10.1 Statutory framework

10.1.1 Since the Local Government White Paper - `Strong Local Leadership, Quality Public Services' - two important changes have taken place and are being given effect through the revised circular on Best Value and the Audit Commission's Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) framework.

· Local authorities are no longer required to subject all functions to Best Value reviews within a five-year period. Although all functions are still subject to review, local authorities now have the freedom to develop programmes over a longer period, addressing higher priorities first and varying the level and detail at which services are reviewed as appropriate.

· Local authorities are required to indicate their short list of priorities for improvement in the light of the CPA. The resultant CPA improvement plan is intended to short-list the top priorities for improvement from existing plans and initiatives.

10.2 Developing an integrated improvement programme

10.2.1 In advance of the Local Government White Paper, at its meeting on 17 December 2001, the Cabinet had already agreed to develop an integrated improvement plan, when carrying out the annual revision of the Best Value review programme. This has meant that work to streamline the Best Value review programme and to develop service planning has left the Council well placed to respond to CPA improvement planning.

10.2.2 The outline improvement plan has already been passed to the District Auditor, to meet his deadline of 30 November 2002. The outline plan provides the first step in agreeing an audit and inspection programme for 2003/04 and beyond, which will reflect the Council's CPA categorisation as an `excellent' local authority.

10.2.3 The original Best Value review programme was designed to review most discrete services in the first three years, enabling the Council to review more complex areas in the latter stages of the five-year programme. Following last year's Cabinet report, the review programme has focused more strongly on priorities identified in the Corporate Strategy. However, cross-cutting or issue-based reviews have proved significantly more difficult to carry out for the following reasons:

· they often require commitment from people for whom it is not the `day job'

· resources are needed to carry out the review but there is no separately identified budget

· they may consider topics for which there is no existing strategic direction.

It is, therefore, proposed that the ideal Best Value programme will in future contain a maximum of six cross-cutting reviews and that clear terms of reference will be established before the reviews begin.

10.2.4 Work has been undertaken with the District Auditor to agree an approach to service planning, which will take the best from CPA and Best Value methodologies. Chief Officers have agreed the level at which service planning should be applied within their departments to achieve effective management and to provide an effective cascade and feedback mechanism between service plans and the Corporate Strategy. The focus of service planning will be on service improvement, while recognising the value of day-to-day maintenance activity. While essentially a management activity, Members, as now, will continue to be involved in the development of services, when the service planning process identifies the need for a change in policy or strategic direction.

10.2.5 In addition, corporate projects and initiatives are a major source of development activity. The aim of incorporating them in the single improvement programme is to avoid duplication of effort and to use a consistently rigorous approach to monitoring and reviewing progress.

10.2.6 The initial version of the Hampshire Improvement Programme is aimed to meet CPA and Best Value deadlines. It is intended to be a dynamic programme, providing a single reference point for current development activity and can, therefore, be expected to grow to include new initiatives or projects.

10.3 The Hampshire Improvement Programme

10.3.1 The improvement programme has been drawn from the above sources of information to highlight the top development priorities for the Council in the immediate future. The proposed integrated improvement programme is attached at Appendix 2. Once established as a key document, it is planned to drop the use of the word `integrated'.

10.3.2 The links between the improvement programme and the Corporate Strategy are fundamental. While the Corporate Strategy focuses on significant outcomes and takes a longer term perspective, the improvement programme may:

· be short term and focus on activity in a single year, to arrive at options for improvement that may or may not be incorporated in the Corporate Strategy in future years

· support continuous, incremental improvement through service planning that would not warrant inclusion in the Corporate Strategy

· perform midway or post-implementation reviews of projects to learn lessons or take remedial action.

10.3.3 The Hampshire Improvement Programme incorporates the recommendations made by the Audit Commission's Corporate Assessment Team and the Council's own assessment of key priorities included in the CPA corporate self-assessment submission. These are attached at appendices 1 and 3.

10.3.4 It can be seen that the Hampshire Improvement Programme incorporates the Best Value review programme. A number of Year 3 reviews are starting late in the current financial year and will not complete until Year 4. Apart from these, the number of new reviews for Year 4 will reduce to five.

11 Changes to the Best Value review programme

11.1 The Best Value review programme began in April 2000. In the following paragraphs, years are related to this start date as follows:

Year 3 2002/03

Year 4 2003/04

Year 5 2004/05

11.2 In arriving at the wide-ranging changes to the Best Value review programme, account has been taken of previous Member representations that the Best Value regime should be streamlined. The removal of the five year ruling and the CPA approach to prioritisation have enabled a radical slimming down of the review programme and a focus on areas where there is more opportunity for improvement. During the current financial year, the Corporate Performance Team have also responded to this aspiration by simplifying the Best Value review process. The current Best Value review programme is provided as a point of reference for the following changes (Appendix 4).

11.3 Deletions from the programme

11.3.1 The Social Care PRC support an agreed approach with the multi-agency Drug Action Team to reviewing activity which would have been covered by the following two Year 3 Best Value reviews:

· Multi-agency approach to supporting people who misuse substances and

· Support to people with aids / HIV.

11.3.2 The scope of the `Development control' Year 3 review was largely focused on a specific service area within the Environment Department, which was also overtaken by guidance coming from central Government as part of the Planning Green paper. It is therefore proposed to delete the Best Value review. In its place the service head will pilot the new service planning regime and map the service against the new government guidance.

11.3.3 The `Managing change' review was anticipated to cover activity in the Corporate Performance Team, organisational development activity in the Personnel and Training Department and internal communications work. On reflection this would have been duplicating other work:

· Meeting the CPA and audit recommendations in relation to performance management

· The implementation of the People Strategy and the re-organisation of the Training Section

· The implementation of the internal communications strategy, monitored by the Corporate Performance Steering Group

· The Corporate Policy Unit piloting the new service planning regime.

11.3.4 Following considerable debate with representatives from all departments, it was agreed that the review of `Human resources in a changing environment' would duplicate work currently underway in the SAP Enterprise Project and in the People Strategy. However, the need for a post-implementation review has been flagged up for future consideration.

11.3.5 The following Year 4 and Year 5 reviews are recommended for deletion as they will be replaced by the development of service plans:

· Social care - Performance management

· Social care - Adoption

· IT infrastructure

· IT professional services

· Property, Building and Regulatory Services - Estates

· Property, Building and Regulatory Services - Management of Buildings

· Environment Department - Highway regulation

· Environment Department - Highway maintenance

· Chief Executives - Emergency Planning

· Property, Building and Regulatory Services - Cleaning and caretaking

11.3.6 The Year 4 social care review of `Direct payments' is also recommended for deletion on the grounds that it is a tool to deliver improvements rather than an outcome in itself.

11.3.7 The Year 4 reviews of `Cultural heritage' and `Community and cultural development' are also recommended for deletion on the grounds that they currently lack sufficient focus. It is proposed to wait until the Cultural Strategy is finalised early in 2003/04 and to decide at that time whether there are any emerging issues which would benefit from the challenge of a Best Value review.

11.4 Reviews to be delayed or postponed

11.4.1 Two social care reviews will not start until late in Year 3. This has been a deliberate decision to stagger the demands on peoples' time and to ensure information from the first review can feed into the second.

· Meeting the social care needs of people with sensory impairment

· Support for disabled people at home.

11.4.2 The education review of `Education services for vulnerable children and those educated out of school or excluded', has also been scheduled for a late start and will not complete until Year 4.

11.4.3 Due to staff changes and the importance of the issues involved, it is proposed that the social care review of `Support for older persons at home' should be delayed from Year 3 until Year 4.

11.4.4 A social inclusion review, covering equality, rurality and disabilities was scheduled for Year 4. It is proposed to defer starting this review until a clearer focus emerges and to retain flexibility in the overall scheduling of the programme.

11.4.5 A number of infrastructure services were planned to be reviewed in Years 4 and 5:

· Internal libraries

· Office services

· Administrative and clerical services

· Risk management

These should remain in the forward programme but without a specific timescale, in order to retain flexibility in the programme.

11.4.6 The procurement review will also remain in the forward programme, without a specific timescale. However, preparatory work will begin in the near future through the establishment of a corporate officer group on procurement.

11.5 The Best Value review programme for Year 4

11.5.1 Two education-centred reviews are scheduled for Year 4:

· Early Education and Childcare

· Lifelong Learning

Given the Corporate Strategy priority for universal nursery places for 3yr olds and the clear boundaries for this review set out by the existing Early Years Partnership, it seems sensible to continue with the review of Early Education and Childcare in Year 4.

There are also Corporate Strategy priorities to increase the number of 16 - 19 year olds in further and higher education and to increase adult participation in learning, which point to a need to retain the lifelong learning review in Year 4. However, this area has strong links to other areas of Council activity, in particular the outcomes of the review of economic prosperity, completed in Year 3 and issues emerging from the development of the Cultural Strategy due to be completed early in Year 4. It will be appropriate to leave the scheduling of this review more flexible to ensure Cultural strategy issues are fully incorporated

It is suggested that Member `task and finish' panels are established to lead these reviews, so that the appropriate mix of expertise and interest is gained:

· Early education and childcare - group drawn from Education and Social Care PRCs

· Lifelong learning - group drawn from Education and Recreation & Heritage PRCs

11.6 The remaining reviews for Year 4 are:

· Waste management - an inter-agency review, being led by Project Integra, which should be considered by the Environment PRC

· Community Engagement - a cross-organisational review responding to the Corporate Assessment Team recommendation to capitalise on existing consultation and external communications to develop full community engagement and which should be led by the Policy and Resources PRC

· Support for older persons at home - building on earlier reviews of day care and residential care, which should be led by the Social Care PRC.

Recommendations

1 That the announcement that Hampshire County Council is an excellent authority be welcomed

2 That Cabinet note the action taken to improve performance data collection and reporting, in order that future reports can advise Cabinet of relevant performance indicator results, supported by interpretation and commentary from operational managers.

3 That Cabinet agree the proposed variations to the Best Value Review programme and approve the Hampshire Improvement Programme, as providing both the improvement plan required by Comprehensive Performance Assessment and the future Best Value review programme.

4 That Cabinet approve the establishment of two `task and finish' member panels to consider the Best Value reviews of Early Education and Childcare and Lifelong learning

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.

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.