Archived decisions

Contact: Jenny Heath, ext 7402

1. Background

1.1 Following Cabinet's agreement to the approach to developing a single review programme in March 2005, further work has clarified:

· 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

2. Definition of a review

2.1 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.

2.2 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.

2.3 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.

3. The scope of the review programme

3.1 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.

3.2 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

3.3 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.

3.4 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. While not all reviews will be reporting directly to Cabinet or Committees, the engagement of County Councillors in review activity is a basic principle of best value and the programme of reviews has identified how this engagement will be secured.

3.5 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.

4. Which reviews?

4.1 Appendix two provides the proposed programme of reviews, which have been clustered to show how they contribute to the Government's efficiency agenda (by reference to the Efficiency Technical Note). 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.

4.2 The scope of some reviews is not fully clear from the attached programme and some review activities are more strategic than others. It is anticipated that the Council will be able to refine the way the programme is presented over time, although it may always be best to limit the top level programme to review `titles' and make further information about the boundaries and scope of each review available on request.

4.3 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.

4.4 Given the nature of review activity, in that it is often the first response to changing circumstances or new Government initiatives, the programme is likely to change during the course of the year. Collating improvement activity in a single review programme highlights the significant volume of work the Council is already engaged in and provides a useful mechanism for reviewing priorities.

5. Scrutiny reviews and avoiding duplication of effort

5.1 The Scrutiny Manager 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.

5.2 The most useful aspect of the single review programme for scrutiny members is that it provides a reference point for information that is already being collected or may be available, so that scrutiny reviews should not need to duplicate data collection or research activity. Instead scrutiny committees should be able to call on those leading other reviews to provide information for areas they may wish to scrutinise.

Recommendations

1. That Cabinet approve the appendix as the Council's (Best Value) review programme for 2005/06 and that it will be reported in the statutory update of the Performance Plan on 30 June 2005

2. That additional review activity will be considered in the light of the resources already engaged in delivering this programme and priorities amended as appropriate.

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 single 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.

1.

APPENDIX 2 2005/06 REVIEW PROGRAMME

Externally led reviews

Forward programme / suggested future topics