Contact: Sue Sylvester, ext 7493

e-mail: sue.sylvester@hants .gov.uk

1 Summary

The following decisions are sought:

· That Cabinet notes:

a) the comparative performance indicator results for 2002/03 for a basket of key performance indicators, acknowledging that this relates to activities that occurred almost two years ago and that a different overall ranking figure will be obtained if a different methodology or suite of indicators is used.

b) the action that has been taken in the 2003/04 financial year to address the areas of concern.

· That Cabinet agree the messages in the general conclusions on performance (paragraph 14), which will form the basis for reporting in the Performance Plan.

2 Reason for the recommendations

This report supports Aim 5 of the Corporate Strategy, improving performance by ensuring that performance results are available to support decision makers.

3 Other options considered and rejected

Not applicable

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

Not applicable

5 Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee

Not applicable

6 Reason(s) for the matter being dealt with if urgent

Not applicable

Approved by: (signature) Date: (date of decision)

7 Background

7.1 This is the third report to Cabinet on Best Value Performance Indicator results for 2002/03. The previous two reports were as follows:-

· A report on unaudited outturn figures for 2002/03 for a basket of 45 key best value performance indicators (BVPIs), together with targets for 2003/04, 2004/05 and 2005/06. (27 May 2003)

· A report on final audited outturn figures for 2002/03 for the same basket of 45 key best value performance indicators, together with an analysis of performance again target for 2002/03, and performance against the previous years' (2001/02) outturn figures. (15 December 2003).

7.2 Towards the end of December 2003, the Audit Commission published the final audited outturn figures (2002/03) for all authorities on its web site, together with an analysis of average results and quartile values.

7.3 Results are reported for the `basket' of 45 key performance indicators ( a subset of the national BVPI suite) that have previously been used for comparative purposes and which are regarded as providing a reasonable benchmark both over time and for comparison with other local authorities.

7.4 It must be noted that the data in this report relates to performance in the 2002/03 financial year - so will relate to activities that occurred almost two years ago. Furthermore, the limitations of some of the performance indicators is well documented. A full commentary on each individual BVPI for 2002/03 is contained on the Performance Plan website at http://www.hants.gov.uk/bestvalueinhampshire/subcatindex.php?catid=5&recordid=49&subcatid=4 .

8 Comparative Results for 2002/03

8.1 Appendix 1 provides comparative data for the basket of 45 BVPIs, showing:

· How Hampshire's results for 2002/03 compare with those of the other 33 county councils in terms of:

a) rank (1 = highest performing county council, 34 = lowest performing county council)

b) quartile (1^st quartile = top 9 performing authorities, 2^nd quartile = next 8 performing authorities, 3^rd quartile = next 8 performing authorities, 4^th quartile = lowest 9 performing authorities)

· A three year time series analysis of Hampshire's results in terms of Hampshire's rank for each of the BVPIs for each of the three years up to and including 2002/03. A few indicators do not have all three rankings due to changes in definition, or their recent addition to the national BVPI suite.

Appendix 1 also lists the top 3 performing authorities for each indicator.

8.2 The comparative data has been analysed by Policy Grouping.

9 Policy and Resources

9.1 Performance remains within the top quartile for four out of the nine indicators and within the top two quartiles for seven out of the nine indicators. The County Council ranking improved or remained the same in the case of four of the indicators and only slipped by more than 2 ranking places for three indicators, as detailed below.

· BV 8 - Prompt Payment of Invoices. The slight reduction in 2002/03 performance (91.4%) over the previous year (92.4%) was ameliorated by the removal of the auditor's `reservation' that was given in 2001/02. Departments and staff have been reminded of the need to process invoices promptly, particularly as the measure is taken into account in the CPA assessment.

· BV12 - The number of working days / shifts due to sickness absence. There are a number of ways of recording the information for this performance indicator and for 2002/03, the SAP system was used to obtain reports on sickness absence for the first time. Differences arise between local authorities over interpretation of shift patterns. In addition, interpretation of the methodology required to collect the information has changed over time. It is now clear that this makes comparison ineffective both over time and between authorities. This has been discussed with the Audit Commission and the method of measurement will change for the next reporting period. This should result in a significant drop in number of days lost to sickness absence. Auditors removed Hampshire's reservation from this indicator for 2002/03, which is still in place for some other County Councils. The Council's internal measure of sickness absence, based on a definition by percentage rather than shift hours, has shown a level of improvement over the reporting period.

· BV 157 - the percentage of interactions that are enabled for electronic delivery. Comparison between authorities can be misleading because there are no reliable common definitions. However, the County Council performance to date matches the interim annual targets we have set in order to reach the 100% target figure by the end of 2005, although the most difficult challenges - making transactional services fully available electronically - are the ones to be tackled over the coming two years.

9.2 BV 156 - the County is currently ranked number 1 for this Performance Indicator. The County Council is recognised by the Local Government Association and Disability Rights Commission as one of the leaders in the field with a robust auditing strategy in place, alongside designated resources to implement improvements.

10 Education

10.1 Out of the 10 Education BVPIs in the basket, Hampshire performed in the top quartile for 4 out of the 10 indicators and in the top two quartiles for 7 out of the 10 indicators. However, whilst performance remained high in 2002/03, our ranking fell or remained the same for 8 out of the 10 indicators. All these indicators were within three places of their 2001/02 ranking, except the following three indicators:

· BV43a - statements issued by the authority in a financial year. The process of issuing statements of SEN was hindered in 2002/3 by problems with the IT systems, and these have continued into 2003/04. Resolution is expected during 2004/05.

· BV44 - number of pupils permanently excluded during the year. Pupil exclusions are a concern and discussions are taking place with secondary headteachers on new models to try to address this issue.

· BV 45 - half days missed due to total absence in secondary schools. The pupil absence indicators changed between 2001/02 and 2002/03 to include all absence, rather than just unauthorised absences, which has caused abrupt changes in our ranking for both this indicator and BV 46 - absence in primary schools. Whilst just falling into the 3^rd quartile, the total absence in secondary schools is at the median level for county councils. Following the Ofsted inspection of the LEA, changes were made in the way in which the LEA supports schools to ensure good rates of pupil attendance. These changes are bearing fruit.

10.2 The Education results show many areas of positive improvement. There has been good progress in keeping surplus places within the targets set.(BV 34 a&b). Hampshire schools continue to perform well, overall, in tests and examinations, when measured against national averages and the standards achieved in counties most like Hampshire. OFSTED inspections of Hampshire schools also show a positive picture. 87% of schools inspected in 2002/03 were judged to be good or very good. In value added from Key Stage 1 to Key Stage 2, which measures pupil progress from the age of 7 to 11, Hampshire pupils were very slightly below the national average, in Key Stage 2 to Key Stage 3 Hampshire was just above the national average and above the national average from Key Stage 3 to 4.

11 Social Care

11.1 Best value performance indicators are a very small subset of the range of indicators that the Department of Health (DoH) judges social services provision by. The authority has been awarded two stars by the social services inspectorate out of a possible three stars, which puts it amongst the better performing authorities in the country. Many of the Social Care BVPIs, including some of those within this `basket' of indicators have recently been discredited within the DfES and the DoH and work is underway with the statisticians within both organisations to agree a new range of indicators. It is likely that some changes will be required in the social care indicators selected for this basket in future.

11.2 When comparing Hampshire against other counties in this report it should be noted that the DoH and DfES do not normally compare performance against all county councils owing to considerable demographic and funding variations.

Children's services:

11.3 Performance relative to other county councils was generally low in 2002/03 for the five BVPIs within the basket that relate to children's services although, there was improvement in the ranking of BV50 - educational qualifications of looked after children - with performance in the second quartile.

11.4 Indicators for children's services, contained in the BVPI subset of indicators used by the Social Services Inspectorate, remain relatively consistent between years. As with many indicators based on a relatively small number of people, they tend to vary within a narrow band rather than maintain consistent improvement or deterioration across years. This problem is exacerbated by frequent, minor changes in definition which invalidate trend analysis.

11.5 A significant factor limiting performance is the shortage of social workers, foster carers and prospective adoptive parents. This curtails the ability of Social Workers to place children in suitable emergency/long term placements leading to frequent moves (BV49); perhaps limiting their educational attainment (BV50) and subsequently impacting on their employability (BV161). Adoptions, as in many authorities, are currently also being affected by delays in the legal system; both in the appointment of guardians ad litem and when obtaining hearing dates for adoptions and the removal of care orders.

11.6 The authority is doing some pilot work with the DoH / DfES around family and friends placements. This, highly commended work, is reducing the pool of children available for adoption and has been recognised in our PSA target which is a combination of adoptions and family and friends placements and is currently on target.

11.7 The Victoria Climbie Audit, following Lord Lamming's enquiry, has reduced attention from mature BVPIs towards newer indicators targeted at improving the safety of vulnerable children in need living in the community. It is expected that, following the publication of the bill based on the recent Green Paper, children's indicators included as BVPIs will alter significantly. Despite this, the recent creation of Performance Action Groups at all levels of management in Children's Services is driving performance issues to the fore, facilitating a strategic approach to problem solving involving support between teams and across client groupings. Due to this increased management focus, Hampshire is on the correct trajectory to deliver most of the improvements contained in the 2003/4 published targets.

11.8 Since the Victoria Climbie audit, management attention has been focussed on having named key workers for children in need and providing timely assessments. These areas have shown considerable improvement over the last year.

Adults and Older Persons Services:

11.9 Of the five relevant indicators within the basket, one indicator was in the second quartile, three indicators were in the third quartile and one in the fourth quartile. Regarding relative performance in 2002/03, compared with that of 2001/02, two indicators improved their ranking, two worsened their ranking and one remained the same.

11.10 Following a significant investment in intensive care, performance has improved from 6.6 in September 2002 to 8.1 in September 2003 - an increase in excess of 20%. Given that many adult recipients are no longer counted, as their care has transferred from the Social Services Department to the Supporting People Partnership, this is noteworthy performance. Further improvements are expected before year end.

11.11 All adult and older persons' indicators are showing an increase in "real" performance, although this has often been disguised by subtle changes in definitions between the years. This was confirmed by the Social Services Inspectorate in their 2003 report which graded adult and older persons services as having moved from "serving some people well with promising prospects" to "serving most people well with excellent capacity for improvement".

12 Environment

12.1 Performance was in the top quartile for 5 out of the 11 indicators and within the top two quartiles for all but one indicator (BV 96). Performance improved relative to other County Councils for 8 out of the 11 indicators and only slipped by 1 or 2 ranking positions for the other 3 remaining indicators.

12.2 The network condition indicator BV96 is relatively new. Not only is more time series data needed before any trends can be accurately determined, and in particular how changes in funding levels affect those trends, but a period of stability in the indicator is also needed so that year on year comparisons can be made.

12.3 Hampshire remained one of the highest performing county councils for household waste recycling, ranking first for BV 82a - tonnage of household waste arising which have been recycled.

13 Recreation and Heritage

13.1 Performance was in the top quartile for 4 out of the 5 indicators, retaining the high ranking positions of previous years.

13.2 While the actual number of personal visits to public library premises fell slightly, Hampshire's position in relation to the performance of other counties has been maintained. However, the use of the internet continues to increase with a target of 4.2m set for visits to the library website in 2003/4. Targets have been set to increase the number of library visits over the next 3 years through the current programme of library refurbishments to provide brighter, more welcoming libraries across the county and through provision to improve library opening hours in 2004/5.

13.3 Hampshire remains one of the highest ranking County Councils in relation to the number of visits to museums (BV 170a,b &c), ranking first for the number of pupils visiting museums and galleries in organised school groups (BV 170c). Through partnership with the Education service, the continuing work to relate the museums activities and exhibitions to the national curriculum and the Lifelong Learning agenda will aim to further increase the number of pupil visits over the next 3 years.

13.4 Regarding the length of footpaths deemed easy to used by members of the public (BV178), Hampshire was ranked 4th best county council in the country for 2002/03. Targets have been set for the next 3 years to continue the work to further improve a very good network of paths with greater emphasis on improving opportunities for everyone to enjoy the countryside and to promote access close to where people live.

14 General conclusions on performance indicated by the PI results

14.1 In the selected basket of 45, 17 indicators are in the top quartile and a further 14 are in the second quartile, demonstrating that there is a generally high level of performance. Overall Hampshire has 38% of its indicators in the top quartile and 69% of its indicators in the top two quartiles. The Council is addressing its performance in relation to the five indicators that fell within the bottom quartile.

14.2 However, for 2002/03 the ranking of more indicators fell than improved which is a reversal of results in 2001/02, where there was a net improvement in rankings. In relation to other county councils, between 2001/02 and 2002/03 the ranking of 17 indicators improved, 6 remained stable and 22 fell. Between 2000/01 and 2001/02 the ranking of 21 indicators improved, 3 remained stable and 15 indicators fell.

14.3 Many of the movements in ranking are only minor and must be considered in the context that overall Hampshire's performance in 2002/03 improved in relation to its performance in 2001/02 (see December 2003 report to Cabinet), suggesting that Hampshire's rate of improvement is merely slower than that of other county councils for certain indicators.

14.4 Hampshire ranked 2^nd highest performing authority overall. For 2001/02 results, using the same methodology, Hampshire's overall ranking was third. In both years these results were based on:-

· using the suite of 45 BVPIs only

· treating reserved indicators as any other score (ie ignoring the reservation)

· taking returns from County Councils to 2 decimal places, to facilitate individual placings wherever possible

It must be noted that other authorities, using different baskets of indicators and methods of calculation, come up with different results, in which Hampshire does not fare so well. In many cases comparison is made with the full 150 top tier authorities.

Recommendations

1. That Cabinet notes:

a) the comparative performance indicator results for 2002/03 for a basket of key performance indicators, acknowledging that this relates to activities that occurred almost two years ago and that a different overall ranking figure will be obtained if a different methodology or suite of indicators is used.

b) the action that has been taken in the 2003/04 financial year to address the areas of concern.

2. That Cabinet agree the messages in the general conclusions on performance (paragraph 14), which will form the basis for reporting in the Performance Plan.

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.

NB The list excludes:

1. Published works.

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

File Location

PI file containing returns made by Held by the central PI

departmental officers. Coordinator.