Archived decisions
Hampshire County Council Environment Policy Review Committee 3 March 2004 Environment Department - Best Value Review Progress Report of the Director of Environment |
Item 9 |
Contact: Peter Brown, ext 6256 email: [email protected]
1. Summary
1.1 This report outlines progress made during the last year on the Best Value Reviews and Best Value Improvement Plans associated with services in the Environment Department.
1.3 Monitoring progress is key to achieving Aim 5 of the Corporate Strategy, Improving services, as without such information Members would be unaware of what improvements are being made and what effect the improvements are having on service delivery.
2. Background
2.1 March 2004 marks the end of the fourth full year of the continuous improvement regime first established under the Best Value regime and now integrated within Comprehensive Performance Assessments (CPAs).
Environment Department Best Value Review Progress
2.2 Following on from the `Pathfinder' review of Highways Management in 1999/2000 four full Best Value reviews have been completed on services within the new Environment Department. These are:
(i) Passenger Transport - This review was formally audited by the Audit Commission and found to be a good service with good prospects for improvement;
(ii) Road Safety (including a review of the School Crossings Patrol Service previously undertaken through County Education) receiving a favourable "desktop" audit report by the Audit Commission;
(iii) Transport Network Improvements (involving the design and delivery of the transport capital programme); and
(iv) Policy Development (covering the processes involved in the development of plans and strategies, including the Minerals and Waste Local Plan and Local Transport Plan).
2.3 The action plans for the first three of these reviews were formally closed at the meeting of this Committee on 5 March 2003. However, a brief summary of ongoing improvement actions is set out in Part A of the attached appendix, along with the improvement activity arising from the most recent Review, that for Policy Development (Part C). A fuller summary will be reported in the forthcoming Best Value Performance Plan 2003/04.
Other Best Value and Service Reviews
2.4 In partnership with Education and Social Services, the Environment Department also made a major contribution to the cross-cutting review of Passenger Transport, which examined the use by the County Council of transport services to facilitate delivery of its front-line services. A report on the implementation of the action plan was submitted to the Policy and Resources Policy Review Committee on 22 January 2004.
2.5 Most of the action points arising from the cross-cutting Passenger Transport Review have now been addressed. Consequently, focus has switched to how new opportunities for transport provision can be integrated into the County Council's Second Local Transport Plan (LTP) to ensure that the County Council's direct contribution to improving access and mobility, either through the transport it provides as part of its other services or the travel arising in connection with people accessing services, can be considered within its wider context.
2.6 Initial thoughts are to promote three local area-based pilot projects, at Ringwood, Basingstoke and Leigh Park, to investigate how the need to travel could be better managed by both the County Council and its key partners. This approach should also integrate with the investigations being undertaken by the working group looking at transport as part of the Members' priorities. It is expected that a full report outlining the way forward on all these initiatives will be presented to Members in spring/summer 2004.
2.7 The Best Value review principles have also been used in a less formal way to identify possible service improvements. Members may recall that such a process was used for a review of the Department's Highways Development Control service. Consequently, proposals to amend the ways in which highways advice is provided for planning applications, legal agreements are prepared and land charge searches undertaken were considered and recommended by this Committee on 21 July 2003 (see appendix - Part B).
2.8 The role of the Development Control service based within the former County Planning Department was also reviewed, as a pilot for a more streamlined process that has evolved into the County Council's new regime of Service Planning. An explanation of the process and its outcomes was included in the report on Minerals and Waste Planning in Hampshire 2002/03 considered by this Committee on 3 December 2003.
The Review benefited from similar reviews in other councils nationally available through the Audit Commission, and guidance from the Planning Officers' Society. The Review identified a short list of key improvement areas now being acted upon.
2.9 In line with changes to the Best Value regime nationally, Best Value reviews are now only undertaken on strategic, wide cross-topic and sector services. The ongoing review of waste services with Project Integra partners is such an example.
Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA)
2.10 In December last year, having considered the County Council's 2003 update of the LTP, the inspection report for the Best Value Review of Passenger Transport services in 2001 and Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPIs) for waste, transport and planning, the Audit Commission concluded that the County Council's environmental services remain strong. The 2003 CPA refresh judgement for the environmental services once again gained a top score of 4 out of 4. This judgement is less robust than the initial 2002 CPA assessment because, while performance against the BVPIs for Waste and Planning is generally strong and rated 4 out of 4 (see item elsewhere on the agenda), the transport assessment of 2.9 out of 4 was affected by the Department for Transport's updated judgement of the LTP as `average' with a score of 2.5.
2.11 In the 2004 `refresh', the `good' judgement of the Best Value Review of Passenger Transport (which comprises 60% of the CPA assessment for transport and currently underpins the assessment of the transport service) will be ineligible. The performance of the service will depend wholly on BVPI and the LTP Assessment, with the LTP counting for 60% of the final transport score.
3. Continuous Improvement through Service Planning
3.1 More specific short-term opportunities for service improvement are now being pursued through the new corporately-driven initiative to develop service plans that identify distinct improvement objectives. In the Environment Department this will be achieved by preparing one overall Departmental Service Plan that sets out the overarching service aims and key improvement topics, complemented by a number of individual Service Delivery Plans that set out more detailed action plans and improvement measures for each of the main activities of the Department. These plans will also set specific performance indicators, including BVPIs, relating to each part of the service.
3.2 This corporate approach is being adopted in tandem with an updating of the Quality Management System that was previously in force within the County Surveyor's Department. Recent modifications to the system have ensured that it complies with ISO 9001:2000 and further work to cover a wider scope of the Environment Department's work is underway. This system will implicitly encourage a much stronger customer focus and will ensure greater interaction with, and scrutiny of, customer contacts and feedback.
Recommendations
1. That the progress in implementing the Best Value Improvement Plans referred to in the report and summarised in the attached appendix be noted.
2. That this Committee recommends the Service and Delivery planning regime outlined in paragraph 3.1 as an effective and integrated way of reporting service improvements.
Section 100 D - 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. | |
NB the list excludes: | |
1. |
Published works. |
2. |
Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act. |
TITLE |
LOCATION |
None. |
8560/PNB
APPENDIX
Monitoring the Implementation of Best Value Improvement Plans
A. Summary of Continuing Progress on Best Value Improvement Plans formally closed in March 2003
Passenger Transport
Success with a major Rural Bus Challenge Bid will allow the roll-out of further CANGO services in and around Alton, Basingstoke and Romsey during a two-year period from Summer 2003. Another successful bid to the Countryside Agency for an award under the Parish Transport Grant scheme will allow the development of improved services in rural areas of Hart district. The EU-funded MIRACLES project in Winchester will bring about a QBP for three bus services. The aim is to reduce the environmental impact of the Winchester bus fleet and attract new passengers. Measures include trialling alternatively-fuelled buses and improved publicity.
The development of the Quality Partnership schemes on the A3 south of Waterlooville and in the Blackwater Valley and the Basingstoke Quality Partnership will start to lead to improvements to bus services in these areas. In addition, a programme of direct marketing is being undertaken on selected Quality Partnership routes to build on the improvements made, with the aim of further increasing ridership.
The implementation plan for the Passenger Transport Information Strategy was the subject of consultation with partners during Summer 2003 and the outcomes will be reflected in service planning activity for 2004/05.
The proposal for the future responsibilities for maintenance of shelters together with funding arrangements was the subject of consultation with District Councils during Spring 2003. Subject to budget and other agreements proposals may be reflected in service planning activity for 2004/05.
Road Safety Services
Work has continued to support the activities of the South Eastern Counties Service Improvement Group (SECSIG) Road Safety Sub-Group, to help further improvements of the County Council's Road Safety (Education, Training and Publicity) and Safety Auditing Services. That group will continue to benchmark both output performance indices and best practice processes in seeking continuous improvements to services. This approach has been welcomed by the Audit Commission's Best Value Inspectorate in its desktop audit of the County Council's Road Safety Services Best Value Review as it offers a sound basis for seeking further improvements to service quality and value.
The deployment of GIS based casualty mapping systems has continued which has had the added bonus of supporting the operational case for the plans of the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Safety Camera Partnership.
The development of updated training of staff into Safety Auditing principles has continued together with raising the awareness of the existence of the service to other County Council departments. Monitoring the effectiveness of safety auditing has continued through the benchmarking work of the SECSIG Road Safety Sub-Group.
Monitoring the benefits of transferring the School Crossing Patrol service from the Education Department to the Environment Department continues to demonstrate support from the staff for the key changes made as a result of the transfer. Recruitment has improved. New ways are being explored to ensure that highway defects identified by staff during their patrols are effectively and efficiently dealt with. Work is underway to correct defects at high priority sites.
Transport Network Improvements
Through the umbrella of County Surveyors' Society South East and South West counties have continued to develop regional and national benchmarking schemes and share best practice. Procurement initiatives are being trialled and development of sustainable solutions is a key issue. Liaison with consultants and contractors in 'partnering' approaches has led to improved development of smarter projects.
Good practice identified through benchmarking has enhanced the development of schemes against SMART objectives and monitoring of outcomes. Improved reporting processes through the Annual Performance Review to Department for Transport is assisting in ensuring focus on delivering objectives and not just completing works.
Guidance on engagement practices has been developed and further improvement in consultation processes is being achieved using specialist consultants. This has been a key topic area within the Environment where a key objective has been to focus effort on working with partners and the community to harmonise expectations and delivery.
Protocols and procedures initiated as part of the Investors in People programme, including more structured personal development reviews and the Business Planning processes has raised the profile of human resource issues. A learning and development process is being implemented aimed at ensuring skills meet demands and staff potential is maintained. Recruitment of skilled staff remains an issue and more work is being done with educational establishments to promote work in these service areas.
B. Improvement Plans following Best Value Principles
Highways Development Control
A management review following Best Value principles resulted in the following improvements:
Amendments to procedures and new protocols to:
· increase the threshold levels above which the County Council is consulted giving the District Councils greater control over larger applications; and
· enable District Councils to take financial contributions of up to £50,000 as agents for the County Council under a Section 106 Agreement;
Further work to identify options for speeding up the completion of 106/278 Agreements, including extension of current delegated powers;
A revised approach to Section 38 Agreements and Advance Payments Code which will result in Hampshire Highway Units checking and inspecting designs: as a general guide, schemes over £100,000 to be checked by the Engineering Consultancy as at present. Schemes under £100,000 to be checked by Hampshire Highways Units; and
The highway element of all land charge searches for the former island agency areas to be completed centrally by the County Council, with a move towards modernising the system in line with e-government initiatives.
All but one of the 11 Districts will be signing a new Agency Agreement in due course. New Forest District Council has declined the offer and therefore will be handing back both the Section 38 and Highways Development functions to the County Council.
C. Progress on outstanding Best Value Improvement Plans
Policy Development
1. Name |
Policy Development | |
2. Purpose |
To develop a policy framework for meeting the sustainable development and transportation needs of Hampshire residents, communities and businesses whilst safeguarding and improving the quality of the environment. | |
3. Proposed improvements |
The Improvement Plan encompasses actions in the following areas: | |
1. |
Joined-up working and internal/external communications, including e-government. | |
2. |
Speeding up the process of preparing policies. | |
3. |
Community engagement, consultation methods and transparency of decision-making. | |
4. |
Monitoring and implementation of policy and monitoring the Service's performance. | |
5. |
Costs and comparisons with others. | |
6. |
External provision/working in partnership. | |
7. |
Innovative, inclusive and integrated policies. | |
4. Progress on implementing the Improvement Plan |
The Improvement Plan proposed the formulation of a communications strategy for the Service. This has been overtaken by the preparation of a Departmental communications strategy which is expected to be completed in April 2004. An appointment to a new post of Department Communications Manager has been instrumental in this. | |
To speed up policy preparation, Member decision-making has been streamlined within the arrangements for steering the sub-regional spatial strategy work and the revised transport panels. Expedited decision making has been introduced for some items dealt with by the Strategic Planning Joint Advisory Panel. Formal project planning has been introduced for the preparation of the Minerals and Waste Development Framework. | ||
All partners, stakeholder groups and LSPs have been engaged from the outset of preparation of the Minerals and Waste Development Framework and this will be standard practice for future policy development. A questionnaire has been sent to around 60 organisations who are the Service's main customers to obtain their views on the Service's performance. A representative smaller number are being invited to join a Customer Forum which will meet annually for an interactive discussion of the Service's performance. | ||
The Implementation and Monitoring Group (of Members appointed by this Committee) has met twice over the last year to monitor the implementation and effectiveness of the Improvement Plan. | ||
An exchange visit has been arranged with one of Hampshire's comparator counties to share good practice. Service officers participate in benchmarking clubs (for those policy areas where they exist). | ||
5. Future Plans |
A Forward Plan of the policy work to be undertaken over the year will be prepared containing the lead officer's name, milestones, nature and timing of other Departments' and other organisations' involvement, etc. | |
An audit of project leaders' competence in project management is to be undertaken to enable identification of those who need project management training. | ||
A customer charter is being developed covering service standards for communication, consultation, reply-times, information availability, etc. | ||
A consultation strategy will be prepared and approved by senior management prior to consultation on any draft plan/strategy. | ||
Regular monitoring reports are published on the progress in implementing some policies/plans: the intention is to extend this to all policy areas. All new policies are to have targets/indicators to facilitate monitoring. | ||
Exchange visits with comparator county councils are planned for the coming year, together with regular reviews of the potential for partnership working with consultants. The costs of in-house service delivery will be compared annually with the alternative of using consultants. | ||