Agenda and minutes

There were no members of the public present at the meeting.

No declarations of interest were made.

- Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods

Councillor Ellis, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods, gave a presentation to the Scrutiny Panel on the mission/vision for the Neighbourhoods Programme Area.  She brought the Panel’s attention to the following:-

§                     The Programme Area’s restructure was based around neighbourhoods, neighbourhood management and the building of sustainable communities.

§                     The key was to reduce any disadvantages and narrowing of the gap between the most deprived and the more affluent/fortunate neighbourhoods.

§                     Encouragement of communities to be fair, inclusive and active.

§                     The aim of neighbourhood management was to build upon local circumstances and exploit local skills, strengths and experiences.

§                     The principles of developing neighbourhood arrangements were based on devolving neighbourhood engagement.  It must be capable and seen to make a difference, responsive to the needs and diversities of the community and must balance the demands with best value and efficiency.  

§                     The aim was to improve service delivery and equality, engaging more with the users of the Service and joining with other service providers in the community.

§                     It was recognised that there was some level of devolution in place already e.g. Parish Council, Tenants and Residents Associations.  The Programme Area could add and enhance to what was already taking place.  

§                     The Neighbourhoods agenda was based on the premise of working across all tenures.

§                     The Programme Area had to win the confidence of the communities.  Neighbourhood Charters would make clear the relationship between communities and the Council.

§                     The Safer Neighbourhood Partnership linked heavily with the Police and with the pooling of resources and information could work smarter and in the most efficient way.

§                     There was a need to refocus Area Assemblies and make them more effective in helping with neighbourhood management.

§                     There were difficulties that might be encountered and conflict with various interest groups and agencies when devolving certain things.

Councillor Robinson, Cabinet Member for Community Cohesion, gave a powerpoint presentation to the Scrutiny Panel on his portfolio as follows:-

§                     Social Inclusion

§                     Community Strategy (in conjunction with the Leader)

§                     Asylum Seekers

§                     Equalities Diversity and Community Cohesion

§                     Community Planning and Leadership

§                     Sustainable Development

§                     Consultation, Community Involvement

§                     Anti-Social Behaviour

§                     Parish and Town Councils

§                     Voluntary and Community Sector Liaison

together with an explanation of each.

The Panel thanked Councillors Ellis and Robinson for their presentations.

- report by Bev Pepperdine, Business Change Analyst, RBT

BevPepperdine, Business Change Analyst RBT, presented a report detailing the remit of Streetpride Phase 1 and progress with Streetpride Phase 2 drawing particular attention to the following:-

§                     Remit of Streetpride Connect Phase 1 which included the Dog Warden, Street Cleansing, Waste Management and Environment Wardens

§                     Update on Fly Tipping Scrutiny Review

§                     Update on Streetpride Phase 2 (a further 73 processes to be transferred)

§                     Update on Integration Strategy

§                     Update on E-forms

It was noted that the majority of funding for the investments in transformation activity and technical infrastructure for Rotherham Connect had been provided by RBT as part of the Service Improvement Plan including the deployment of the Streetpride Phase 1 services.  Streetpride Phase 2 formed part of a separate proposal covered under a change request which was funded by the RBT Change Pot.  There had been limited cost to the Council in progressing the programmes to date.

The Chairman reported that a meeting with the Magistrates and the Fly Tipping Review Group had been arranged for 24^th August.

Resolved:-  (1)  That the report be noted.

(2)  That the Panel be provided with a list of the 73 processes to be transferred to Streetpride Phase 2.

- report by Head of Neighbourhood Services

In accordance with Minute No. 22 of the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods meeting held on 20^th June and following the all Member Seminar held on 5^th July, 2005, the Scrutiny Panel considered the introduction of green and residual waste alternate week collection pilot.

It was proposed to introduce the next phase of the green waste kerbside collection to approximately 13,000 households adopting the alternate week collection system.

The following points were highlighted/clarified:-

§                     Research from other authorities that had introduced such a scheme had not revealed any issues regarding fly infestation

§                     The gate fee for composting material was £20 per tonne; the gate fee for residual waste was £34 per tonne

§                     A special hotline was to be set up to deal with problems and visits would be made to support members of the public.

§                     It may be possible that arrangements could be made for larger families (in excess of 6 people).

Resolved:-  (1)  That the introduction of an alternate week collection system for green waste and residual waste be supported.

(2)  That an evaluation report be produced after the 6 months’ trial.

- report by Performance Champion, Neighbourhoods

The Performance Champion submitted the Programme Area’s performance monitoring report for 2004/05 which showed that, at the end of the year, 83% of the Indicators had achieved their target.

It was particularly pleasing given the massive organisational development change and an increased burden of regulation within the Directorate, that 86% of the Key Performance Indicators had improved from 2003/04.

When compared to the most recent All England figures for the CPA Housing Block (7 KPIs), 4 were currently within the top quartile, 3 had moved up a quartile place, 4 remained the same and 1 had gone down a quartile place (BV184 – Decent Homes).  For the CPA Environment Block (I KPIs), 3 were currently within the top quartile, 3 had moved up a quartile place, 3 had remained the same and 1 had gone down a quartile (BV84 – waste per head).  The results would have a positive impact on the Council’s Comprehensive Performance Assessment rating.

The Programme Area had been able to sustain continuous improvement and had delivered the best ever performance levels.  At the end of 2003/04, 77% of the Indicators achieved their target and in 2002/03 just 50% had achieved target.

It was noted that Key Performance Indicators were to be audited by KPMG the following week.  Of the 59 across the Council, 13 belonged to the Neighbourhoods Programme Area.

There was a new suite of KPIs for 2005/06,13 of which would be managed by 2010 Rotherham Ltd., and 16 new ones.  There was new methodology to be used which emphasised performance rather than inspection.

Discussion ensued on the document with attention drawn to a number of Indicators.

Resolved:-  That the report and progress made be noted.

- report by Head of Neighbourhood Services

In accordance with Minute No. 26 of the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods meeting on 4^th July, 2005, the Scrutiny Panel considered the Safer Rotherham Partnership’s Anti-Social Behaviour Strategy.

A Strategy had been developed in March, 2005, but a number of areas were identified which required additional strengthening work.  Consultants from NACRO had been appointed to carry out the work and had held stakeholder interviews, focus group events, a workshop and a seminar.  The revised Strategy and action plan had been developed in partnership with the Safer Rotherham Partnership and Neighbourhoods as a result of the consultation process.

The Strategy contained the definition of anti-social behaviour:-

“any behaviour that has caused, or is likely to cause, harassment, alarm or distress of another person who is not of the same household”

The Safer Rotherham Partnership would ensure that all agencies engaged in tackling anti-social behaviour would adopt the Home Office categorisation of anti-social acts as the standard for recording and monitoring such behaviour (see Appendix 1 of the report).  The key objectives of the Strategy were to produce:-

§                     A 25% reduction in the total number of individuals reporting anti-social behaviour to the police, local authority and 2010 Rotherham Ltd. (the ALMO) over the 3 year period until 2008 compared to the anti-social behaviour figure recorded for 2004/05

§                     A 20% reduction in concern about being a victim of anti-social behaviour by 2008 compared to the baseline provided by the 2004 Reachout survey.

§                     A 95% satisfaction rate with the manner in which anti-social behaviour reports are received and action taken – to be measured by an annual anti-social behaviour customer satisfaction survey.

Resolved:-  That the Safer Rotherham Partnership Anti-Social Behaviour Strategy be noted.

- report of Helen Nixon, Anti-Social Behaviour Manager

The Head of Neighbourhood Services presented a report which set out the recommendations made by the Audit Commission following the Indicative Arms Length Management Inspection and the progress made to date.

Anti-social behaviour caused serious problems for tenants and residents and threatened the cohesion of communities.  Neighbourhoods, along with the Safer Rotherham Partnership, must take on board and action the comments made by the Audit Commission in order to improve services for customers and to play its part in preventing and tackling anti-social behaviour.

The Cabinet Member reported that at the September Scrutiny Panel information would be presented on the Safer Rotherham Partnership.  Consideration was being given to having a single contact point and, if successful, it was anticipated that the number of reports would increase and would then stabilise.  It was felt that there was an element of duplication currently with reports to the police, local Councillors etc.

The Chairman reported that the Anti-Social Behaviour Client Review was due for completion in September.

Resolved:-  That the actions delivered against the recommendations of the Audit Committee (Indicative ALMO Inspection) and the continuing improvements made by partners in the delivery of services to address anti-social behaviour in  neighbourhoods be noted.

- report by Janet Greenwood, Service Improvement Manager, Neighbourhoods

The Service Improvement Manager submitted a further report on the ALMO Excellence Plan which included the recommendations from the Indicative inspection report.

With the development of the ALMO (2010 Rotherham Ltd.), it had become necessary to split the responsibilities for delivery of the recommendations between 2010 Rotherham Ltd. and the retained housing functions in Neighbourhoods.  To ensure clarify the recommendations had been incorporated into the 2010 Excellence Plan which formed the first 7 objectives of the Neighbourhood Service Plan as follows:-

§                     Become a good (2*) ALMO Housing Service in terms of cost, efficiency  and service delivery by 2005 and achieve an excellent (3*) service by 2006 to draw down funding to deliver decent homes

§                     Achieve the Decent Homes Standard for all Council properties by 2010 and ensure that all Council properties achieved Secured by Design standards by 2010 to reduce domestic burglary

§                     Deliver the neighbourhood management agenda facilitated by customer focused, accessible one stop shop approach by 2006

§                     Provide an externally recognised value for money, high performance repairs and maintenance service by 2007

§                     Reducing void re-let times to become the best in class by 2007

§                     Through partnership arrangements and the development of neighbourhood partnership teams, contribute to reducing by 25% the incidents of anti-social behaviour by 2008

§                     Increase the number of active tenants and resident participants which was representative of the make up of the Borough by 100% by 2007.

Failure to keep to the milestones in the Plan would hamper the development of 2010 Rotherham Ltd. and the 2* rating needed from the ALMO inspection in November, 2005.  The risks were being managed through weekly updates from the Lead Task Managers at the Executive ALMO Board meeting.

Resolved:-  That the recommendations and the 2010 Excellence Plan be noted.

- report of Jill Jones, Neighbourhood Manager

The Chairman reported that this item had been withdrawn.

- report by Richard Gibson, Manager and Registrar

Further to Minute No. 104 of 13^th January, 2005, the Head of Neighbourhood Services submitted a report on the results of the soft market testing exercise which had been carried out to assess the potential for a partnership arrangement in the Cemeteries and Crematorium Service.

Responses had been received from 4 companies, 3 of which already had experience of Public Private Partnership arrangements with other local authorities.

It was noted that an Expression of Interest notice in the Official Journal of the European Union was to be placed.

Resolved:-  That the report be noted.

- report by Head of Neighbourhood Services

The Head of Neighbourhood Services presented the Waste Inspection Service Improvement Plan which outlined the actions that were going or were targeted for completion by 2008 to deliver the recommendations of the Waste Inspection 2004 and to drive service improvement through weaknesses identified within the body of the report.

It was designed to achieve step change improvements that were specific, measurable, achievable and realistic and timed to coincide with the Government and corporate agenda.  It would shape the Waste Management Service from 2005 to 2020 and would aim to deliver value for money services.  The key objectives were:-

§                     Providing a customer focused, accessible and responsive waste management service

§                     Delivering a long term approach to waste and recycling demonstrating value for money and minimising the need for waste disposal

§                     Increase the percentage of waste recycled/composed to 33% by 2010

§                     Provide an integrated and innovative approach to the delivery of waste management and neighbourhood cleanliness issues which will contribute to the achievement of beacon status by 2006

§                     Achieve top quartile performance for all waste related performance indicators and achieve targets against service standards by 2008

§                     Reduce the amount of waste generated and envirocrime through education, awareness raising and community involvement

§                     Develop the Waste Management Service and workforce to ensure that it was in the best position to deliver a three star excellent service by 2008.

Discussion ensued on the document.  The following points were raised:-

§                     Andy Shaw, Community Delivery Manager, Streetpride, reported that, in conjunction with Neighbourhoods, a full-time campaign was to be run on fly tipping.

§                     Lobbying continued on producer liability.  The Government was producing some guidance to the bigger companies (in excess of £5M turnover) which contained certain targets. 

Resolved:-  That the key objectives within the Waste Service Improvement Plan and the actions to be delivery under each key objective be noted.

- the Chairman to present

The Chairman presented the Forward Plan for Neighbourhoods for the period June to September, 2005.

It would be submitted on a quarterly basis.

Resolved:-  That the report be noted.

- Minutes of meetings held on 6^th and 20^th June, 2005

The Panel noted the decisions made under delegated powers by the Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods held on 6^th and 20^th June, 2005.

- Minutes of meeting held on 16^th June, 2005

The minutes of the meeting held on 16^th June, 2005, were noted.

- Minutes of meetings held on 27^th May and 17^th June, 2005

The minutes of the Performance and Scrutiny Overview Committee held on 27^th May and 17^th June, 2005, were noted.

- Minutes of meeting held on 1^st June, 2005

The Panel noted the minutes of the Asylum seekers Working Party held on 1^st June, 2005, attended by Councillors Sharman (in the Chair), Ellis and S. Wright.

The Chairman drew the Panel’s attention to his concern regarding the lack of progress with the above review.

The report had been submitted to the Corporate Management Team on 16^th May for responses to the various recommendations but no response had been received as yet.

It was felt that there needed to be a review of the mechanism for Scrutiny Reviews to avoid any delays.

Resolved:-  That the Scrutiny Review be submitted to the 25^th August Panel meeting.

It was noted that a themed meeting would take place on the 22^nd September, “Sustainable Communities and Safer Neighbourhoods, to which all Members of the Council would be invited.

A special meeting was to be held on 25^th August, 2005.