Archived decisions

Hampshire Fire and Rescue Authority

Performance Review Committee Item 7

16 June 2006

Review of partnership arrangements

Report by the Chief Officer

Contact: David Howells, Director of Corporate Services, Tel: 02380 626833

e-mail: [email protected]

1

Summary

In its Integrated Risk Management Plan for 2005/06 - and as key action of its Best Value Performance Plan (2005/06) - the Authority decided to carry out a review to examine the effectiveness and value for money of its current partnership arrangements. It was also agreed that this review would be best carried out by an external consultant. The review has now been completed and the final report is attached. For ease of reference, the recommendations (modified for clarity only) are set out below.

2

RecommendationError! Bookmark not defined.s

That it be a recommendation to the Authority that:

2.1

The Authority considers the assessment of the current arrangements for the management of its partnership working (set out in paragraph 5 of the consultant's report) and seeks ways of building on the strengths of its current approach to ensure it is fully `fit for purpose' in respect of the Audit Commission's principles of good governance for partnership working.

2.2

The Authority builds on the recent rationalisation of current partnerships through the review of its Partnership Register by undertaking a further `light touch' audit of the arrangements for those partnerships that remain (using the checklist set out in Appendix 1 of the consultant's report) to reassure itself and its partners that the criteria for partnership working are satisfied.

2.3

The checklist be used by the Authority at both a strategic and an operational level -recognising that much partnership work is initiated by Group Managers - in its assessment of all future partnership proposals.

3

Introduction Error! Bookmark not defined.and background

3.1

The Committee approved the need to undertake this review at its meeting on 15 June 2005. Owing to internal capacity issues and taking into account the nature of the review, it was considered that it would be best carried out by an external consultant. Accordingly, tenders were invited from external management consultants to: "Examine the effectiveness of current partnership arrangements and to make recommendations on how these could be improved to help fulfil the Authority's corporate aims."

It was expected that the review should include:

· Identification of good and poor practice in the Authority's current approach to, and management of, partnership working to be obtained from a survey (questionnaire) of a representative group of partnerships

· Follow-up interviews with selected key partner contacts and respective HFRS lead officers to assess the effectiveness of current engagement

· Identification of any good practice in the management of partnership arrangements operating in other fire and rescue authorities

· Proposals for a simple `diagnostic' or `toolkit' to help the Authority assess and prioritise the potential value and key requirements for the management of effective partnerships

SOLACE Enterprises (the trading arm of the Society of Local Authority Chief Executives) was successful in its bid to undertake the review and this was carried out by Richard Penn as senior consultant.

3.2

In setting up a Steering Group of Members and officers to oversee the review, it was agreed that Cllr Rod Baulk and Cllr David Simpson would be appointed to the Steering Group.

3.3

As the consultant's report is reproduced in full, the substance of it is not repeated in this covering report.

4

Contribution to corporate aims and objectives

4.1

We recognise that if we want to be in the top 20% of high performing fire and rescue services in the country, we need to be able to demonstrate our commitment to improving our delivery of services to the public and, increasing, this includes working in partnership with other key stakeholders. Indeed, if we are to achieve our aims to:

· reduce fire deaths and injuries in the home by 20% by 2010;

· reduce the number of fires in buildings by 3% by the end of 2006; and,

· reduce fires started deliberately by 10% by 2010;

... we are unlikely to do so without engaging in effective partnerships with other agencies.

4.2

While we can point to some obvious and well-established partnerships, we are conscious that some may not be as effective as others at making a genuine and positive impact in achieving our corporate aims. While we readily understand that partnerships are more likely to be successful where the aims of the different organisations involved are shared, we are also acutely aware that our `can do' culture may occasionally leave us vulnerable to entering into partnerships that might not always give us the best return from the perspective of achieving our own corporate aims. This review sought to take a critical look at this important aspect in our approach to partnership working.

5

Risk analysis

5.1

In recognising that we did not have a clear and systematic approach to partnership working, we considered that we were at risk of entering into partnerships without sufficient consideration of the potential resource implications (costs versus benefits).

5.2

The proposed `checklist' recommended in the review will provide a useful control in dealing with this risk.

6

Resource implications

6.1

Human resources

While the recommendations require some management time to implement (e.g. the need to carry out the analysis in the checklist), the intention will be to prioritise any work associated with evaluating existing partnerships within existing resources. More importantly, it is intended that the processes involved in the checklist should become embedded as day-to-day good management practice.

6.2

Physical resources

There are none

6.3

Information and Communications Technology resources

There are none

6.4

Financial resources

There are no tangible resource implications arising from the recommendations in this review. Importantly, it is anticipated that implementing the recommendations will ensure that the Authority has a more robust approach towards assessing the cost/benefit of its partnership arrangements in the future.

7

Equality Impact Assessment

7.1

There are no equality issues that have been highlighted in the review.

7.2

The proposals within this report are considered compatible with the provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights, the Human Rights Act 1998, and the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000.

8

Consultation

8.1

The consultant, Richard Penn, interviewed a range of key people involved in managing our current partnership arrangements - including those involved from external organisations. We will need to ensure that both current and potential future partners are made aware of our proposed more structured approach to assessing the value and effectiveness of the management arrangements.

9

Conclusion

9.1

This review has provided a useful critical analysis of our current approach to partnership working and has highlighted the problems of drifting into partnerships without carrying out a thorough analysis of costs and benefits. The `best practice' checklist welcomed and is already being used to evaluate one of our existing partnership arrangements to determine whether it should continue.

Background Information (Section 100D of Local Government Act 1972)

The following documents disclose the 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 the report:

· Report by Richard Penn, Associate Consultant, SOLACE Enterprises (attached and on website) Review of partnership arrangements

http://www.hantsfire.gov.uk/review_of_partnership_arrangements_april_2006.pdf

Note: The list excludes: (1) published works; and (2) documents that disclose exempt or confidential information defined in the Act.