Contact: Jenny Heath, ext 7402

e-mail: [email protected]

1 Legislative background

1.1 The Local Government Act 1999 introduced the statutory obligation for every local authority to maintain a five year programme of Best Value reviews, covering all its functions. The requirement was amended in 2003 and guidance given through ODPM Circular 03/2003. Paragraph 44 states:

'The requirement for authorities to review all their functions over a five-year cycle was revoked in SI 2002/305. This change does not remove the legal requirement on local authorities to review their functions.... Rather it enables them to focus reviews on priority areas arising from their Comprehensive Performance assessments and other considerations.'

 

2 The position to date

2.1 Since the first year of Best Value reviews in 2000, the Council has sought to minimise the bureaucracy originally associated with the regime and to ensure that the resources invested in reviews yielded practical improvements to services.

2.2 The Council's approach to the review programme was based on circular 03/2003.  The cross-cutting Best Value reviews undertaken have primarily reflected recommendations in our CPA Corporate Assessment although they have also taken account of other initiatives, as identified by lead officers in those areas, eg Lifelong Learning. Service reviews have continued only where departments have felt there is scope for improvement or changes needed.

2.3 The methodology for the above reviews remains rigorous in its application of the four Cs (Challenge, Compete, Compare and Consult) required by Best Value guidance and in the engagement of Members, who are key in agreeing the review outcomes. Over time the review process has become less prescriptive and relies more on having experienced review facilitators, who guide review teams in their exploration of issues and options for improvement.

2.4 The majority of the Council's services have been reviewed since 2000: the first programme was `front-loaded' to comply with the original requirement to review every service in 5 years, while some that were scheduled for later still went ahead, as departments felt they were a good catalyst for implementing a performance culture. The best value website, accessed through the Performance Plan provides details of all the reviews undertaken and a summary of the outcomes.  

3 Planning review activity in the future

3.1 Having reached the end of the legacy of the original five-year programme and of the Hampshire Improvement Programme (CPA), 2005/06 is the right time to reconsider the Council's approach to its review programme. The proposals for taking the review programme forward were discussed with the local auditor, who indicated that they are appropriate, pragmatic and comply with the spirit of the legislation.

3.2 The proposal is that the Council will not have a separate 'Best Value Review Programme' but that such a programme will be the sum of the Council's review activity at both strategic and service levels. Appendix one identifies the types of review activity currently in place across the Council.

3.3 As with former `Best Value Reviews' progress with reviews and subsequent improvement plans will be reported in the Performance Plan which is published in June every year.

3.4 Taking a step back from day-to-day operations and reviewing services has proved to provide opportunities for the Council to consider the best way of achieving its priorities and delivering high quality services as efficiently and economically as possible.

3.5 Following Cabinet's agreement to the approach to developing a single review programme in March 2005, departmental management teams and the corporate management team considered:

· the definition of a `review'

· which reviews should form the corporate programme,
with further information on the people responsible, the timescale and the mechanism for engaging Members or seeking political approval

3.6 All departments have now contributed to this process and a report will be taken to Cabinet on 27 June in order to meet the requirement to publish the review programme in the statutory Performance Plan on 30 June.

4 Definition of a review

4.1 There are several reasons for review activity (see appendix 1). It is helpful to include the following in the Council's single review programme:

· Looking for ways to resolve a known / perceived problem

· Identifying ways to improve a service or function, looking at efficiency, economy and effectiveness

· Evaluating a pilot or trial before further roll-out or development

Mechanisms for identifying review topics include: performance results, audit / inspection recommendations, comparative studies, survey results and member / stakeholder interest.

4.2 The Council may also be involved in review activities generated by external organisations or as part of a national scheme. Inspection / audit activity or `peer review' may fall into this category. While it is helpful to register this activity these will not be considered as an integral part of the single review programme that will ultimately form the Council's best value review programme. These have therefore been listed separately as `externally led reviews' in appendix two.

4.3 For the sake of clarity it is helpful to state that work to implement an improvement plan, after a review has identified the preferred way forward, will NOT be included in the review programme.

5 The scope of the review programme

5.1 The aim of this corporate review programme is to identify all strategic reviews, so the Council can meet its statutory obligations under best value, while avoiding duplication of effort. This approach should also ensure that the way reviews are carried out is appropriately inclusive, challenging and innovative, while arriving at evidence-based conclusions and gaining appropriate political engagement and approval, as well as involving the staff who deliver the services.

5.2 Review activities take place across the organisation at all different levels from the strategic, through operational, to individual development plans. Consequently the scope of reviews included in the single review programme should:

· cross organisational boundaries - either internal or external, or

· have a significant impact, or

· demand significant resources

5.3 Again for the sake of clarity it is helpful to state that improvements that can be identified and implemented by a single service manager within normal budget and resources would NOT normally be included in the corporate review programme.

5.4 It will be important to ensure that there is clear accountability for the reviews and the appendix highlights current thinking about review leadership, timescales and reporting mechanisms. At the end of each financial year, progress with reviews will need to be reported in the following year's Performance Plan and the Corporate Performance Team will ensure that normal performance reporting processes capture this information.

6 Which reviews?

6.1 Appendix two provides the draft schedule of reviews, which have been clustered to show how they contribute to the Government's efficiency agenda (by reference to the Efficiency Technical Note). The final details are still being researched before the report is prepared for Cabinet. It is worth bearing in mind the corporate assessment recommendation arising from the Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA) in 2002, that the council becomes more outcome-focused in determining its priorities.

6.2 A number of potential review activities have also been identified. The forward programme lists these separately from the main programme and provides a way to prioritise review activity and to spend some time clarifying what should be reviewed and why.

7 Scrutiny reviews

7.1 Share D'All has seen the schedule of reviews from the perspective of her review of democratic processes. She anticipates that in addition to providing a mechanism to publish the list of member reviews once agreed, it may also prove a useful source of topics for members to consider to scrutinise.

Recommendations

1 That the Policy and Resources Scrutiny and Select Committee considers the draft review programme and uses it to inform its own work programme.

Appendix 1 Types of review activity

Projects / general reviews

Departmental returns identify reviews to evaluate proposals, such as pilot projects or feasibility studies, as well as reviews of cross-cutting areas which they may be either leading or participating in. Projects which are being dealt with as part of the normal service delivery have been filtered out, unless they have significant impact. Projects which have reached the implementation stage will also be excluded from the review programme

Service reviews

Departments are already beginning to identify the desirability of continuing to review services - over and above the process of annual service planning updates.  They do not plan to review every service at this level each year: their selection of which services to review will be based on a number of factors, including performance as identified by performance reporting, but also including factors such as cost / efficiency / impact on the community. The departments are at different stages in developing their approaches to this, with informal performance networks providing a mechanism for sharing good practice.

Procurement reviews

The Corporate Procurement Network has identified a number of areas which it is reviewing with the aim of achieving greater efficiency and cost savings. Progress is reported to the Buildings, Land and Procurement Panel.

Scrutiny reviews

The Policy and Resources Scrutiny and Select Committee identified a number of scrutiny reviews it is progressing as part of the scrutiny pilot.

The Health Review Committee also has an ongoing review programme

Efficiency reviews

Efficiency has always been a key factor in the Council's budget, procurement and routine decision making by the Cabinet and Executive members. Efficiency is also central to established review processes as set out above, and in consultancy work commissioned both internally (primarily from the Treasurer's Consultancy Team) and externally. That said, the production of a formal and targeted efficiency plan requires that:

· the efficiency elements in such reviews (and in the service planning process as a whole) be made more explicit, and quantified with a clear identification of what is cashable (ie capable of leading to either a reduction in net service cost or reinvestment in alternative additional services) and what is not; and

· Chief Officers both within their departments and corporately through CMT (and, perhaps, through cross-departmental working groups) identify areas with a potential to deliver efficiency savings and commission reviews accordingly. Performance and procurement information will be key criteria for deciding that a service or function has the opportunity to make efficiency gains and should be reviewed. The focus of such reviews should be to improve efficiency without detriment to service quality.

These characteristics differentiate an efficiency review from either a programme of budget cuts or a policy which focuses primarily on service improvement.

E-government reviews

There is a significant work programme related to e-government, much of which incorporates review activity prior to projects being undertaken. The corporate e-government & ICT Steering Group have reviewed, during 2004, the County Council's e-government programme and workstreams against the IEG return to the ODPM, the Priority Outcomes established for e-government and the Council's corporate e-government & ICT strategy. Each individual workstream has been risk assessed and management arrangements put in place to ensure that the relevant outcomes are delivered through the programme.

It is not proposed to include this activity in the `Best Value Review Programme' because of the inter-dependency between these elements of the Council's e-government strategy and the existing rigorous regime of scrutiny. However, the e-government website is a valuable source of information which can help identify related activity and avoid duplicating work before a project is undertaken.

2

APPENDIX 2 DRAFT REVIEW PROGRAMME

Externally led reviews

Forward programme / suggested future topics