Councillor Alam, Cabinet Member Corporate Services and Budgeting, introduced the Quarter 1 performance report of the 2016/17 Corporate Plan.
The performance report and scorecard (Appendix A and B) provided an analysis of the Council’s current performance against 14 key delivery outcomes and 102 measures (the Corporate Plan included 86 measures however a number included different elements). The report was based on the current position of available data along with an overview of progress on key projects and activities which also contributed towards the delivery of the Corporate Plan.
At the end of the first quarter (April-June, 2016), 19 measures were progressing above or in line with the target set. Although this represented 18.6% of the total number of measures, performance showed that 43.2% of measures which had data available for the first quarter were on target. 27.3% (12) of the performance measures measured had not progressed in accordance with the target set (11.8% overall).
Discussion ensued on the report with the following issues raised/highlighted:-
- Divided opinion on the use of the different symbols. It was suggested that attention be drawn in the summary report as to whether there had been improvement or not
- There had been a significant amount of additional money put into Children’s Services but improvement did not appear to be as quick as would have been liked – this would be fed back to the relevant Cabinet Member and Strategic Director
- The Older People’s Service was facing a crisis situation but there was low performance – this would be fed back to the relevant Cabinet Member and Strategic Director
- Examples of other local authorities report formats had been used. It was difficult when some indicators were now measured on a monthly basis. Consideration would be given to alternative means of displaying the information
- Emergency Planning was 1 of the Corporate priorities and, whilst most fitted within a Directorate it was not always the case. It was believed that Emergency Planning was part of the Council’s corporate governance arrangements so the overarching lead was the Strategic Director for Finance and Customer Services
- What happened if performance was not improving? It was the role of the Improvement Board and Select Commission to ensure that the Chief Executive and Chief Officers held their managers to account
- Would the next and future reports have an additional column indicating the previous quarter’s position? There would be a clear indication of travel from the previous quarter. As well as submission to the Board, performance was reported on a monthly basis to Cabinet Members and the Strategic Leadership Team
- Was performance tracked against other authorities and nationally? The Cabinet Member had asked to ensure benchmarking took place with other similar authorities to enable Elected Members to ascertain how the Authority was performing
- How were sickness levels monitored? Clearly there was a concern with regard to levels of sickness absence. The Health and Safety Panel had set up a sub-group specifically to look at sickness absences, how they were managed, where the greater numbers were and preventative measures. It was hoped that the sub-group would help in bringing sickness levels down
Resolved:- (1) That the overall position and direction of travel in relation to performance be noted.
(2) That comments made within the meeting be taken into consideration for the format of the Quarter 2 report.
(3) That the performance reporting timetable for 2016/17 be noted.
(4) That, should there be no improvement in sickness absences in Quarter 2, consideration be given to a Select Commission Task and Finish Group being established to look into the matter further.