The Local Government Act 1999, as amended,
requires the Council to produce an annual Best Value Performance Plan.
The plan was essentially published on the 30th June,
although we can make drafting changes to the report,
before producing a printed Executive Summary.
[Beat]
Inevitably in such a long document, there are a number of drafting changes to make.
For instance,
the stability of placements for children in our care;
is declared at 13.1% in Part 3 of the plan - a 0.5% improvement on the previous year
but presented as having got worse by text and graphics on page 5 of the Executive Summary.
However, the requirements for publication by the District Auditor
means the analysis within the document will remain unchanged.
[Beat]
Although called a Plan,
much of the scope and much of the bulk of the document is a statement of outputs and outcomes,
reported in the context of Best Value Reviews and performance indicators.
As for a Plan, Section 3 contains targets,
but I think the most significant section regarding our future
is the ‘Gearing Up’ section between pages 39 and 43 which I shall refer to later.
[Beat]
The document is 180 pages long.
A very long read.
It covers nearly all of the Council’s services
and therefore offers the opportunity for all Councillors to say something on at least one issue.
Unfortunately, such a suggestion seems to have been misunderstood previously
and taken as an opportunity for one Councillor to talk on nearly all the services.
The test of such contributions will be whether such contributions have been truly considered and adds value.
I’m afraid all bets are off.
[Beat]
What I think might be better than to plough through Appendix 3,
is to consider how well we are doing overall and
to focus on the key messages to be drawn from the report, as is presented in summary in Section 1,
and expanded upon in Section 2.
We should also reflect on the way progress has been or might be perceived by the pubic.
[Beat]
On how well are we doing, the plan says the results are mixed.
Perhaps the voters have said the same thing.
Certainly the canvassing that many of us undertook has given us a strong reality check.
However, that reality check hasn’t just been one way.
It has not only been a matter of receiving complaints that people,
but also a test of our ability to persuade people that progress is being made.
[Beat]
And I think we have been able to show progress is being made.
More people are in work.
Unemployment is down.
More people are using public transport.
We’ve refurbished more of our road network – far more than during the dearth of the mid-nineties.
There is a great pride in Nottingham and
the city centre provides excellent shopping and great social life at night.
The Ice Centre has added to Nottingham’s sense of a place to be and
provides great events – managing to break even this year.
More of our parks have been enhanced to green flag status.
The Housing Department no longer use bed and breakfast for the homeless as a matter of course.
And our Housing Benefits service has been turned around dramatically in the last 12 months.
Our social services continue to improve,
helping more people to live independent lives at home longer.
The Sure Start programme is popular and
seems to excel at involving the public and developing their capacity to do more to help themselves.
Children at our schools continue to attain higher grades at the 4 key stages of assessment, and
crucially, clapped out classrooms and school facilities continue to be improved or replaced at 20 times the rate of the John Major years.
[Beat]
Progress is being made.
We have said so on the doorsteps.
We have made the case and have been re-elected.
I know many will say, “but Labour have traditionally done well, in Nottingham”;
but we’ve also traditionally done well in Bristol, Sheffield, Hull, Mansfield and Ashfield.
It is not a given that Labour continues to do well in Nottingham.
But we do.
[Beat]
But for those who find the electoral test not to be enough,
what do other assessments of Nottingham’s services say?
What did last year’s core service assessment say?
[Beat]
Social Service is rated as 2 star,
as is environment services,
including transport for which we were picked out as Transport Authority of the year in 2002.
Our education service is rated 2 star.
And a value added score for core service assessment of our education
along with the 2 star rating on financial control
ought to have been enough to give this Council a ‘fair’ rating in the CPA.
And Yes,
I am saying
that the CPA is biased against authorities that seek to help the most challenged communities.
[Beat]
But still we know this is not the full story.
There is dissatisfaction.
It has to be addressed.
Dissatisfaction described by some of the results from the Best Value Performance Plan,
most particularly in the measurement of key performance indicators,
have not been anything like so positive.
[Beat]
And the CPA’s corporate assessment –
which I’ve found to be a highly effective way at identifying the weaknesses of the senior management of an authority –
is critical,
most starkly on our attitude to learning from others.
The Corporate Assessment suggests the potential for the Council to be a more effective agency for change is not being fully tapped.
[Beat]
And we know that the public have raised repeated concerns that must be addressed.
We know we need to do more in Housing, particularly in Repairs.
Despite the good indicators, the public want to see cleaner streets and tidier streets.
And the levels of anti-social behaviour are in the words of a Junior Minister, Hazel Blears, making many people’s lives intolerable.
Certainly, we want to see the campaign by the Police on burglary seen through and more done about on-street prostitution.
These points will feed into our Corporate Plan.
[Beat]
They were clear messages from the public,
despite the progress I’ve outlined and
the effectiveness of the work of many of our Departments; .
whatever view you take of the indicators used to measure them.
[Beat]
Caution does need to be exercised in drawing conclusions from the Performance Indicator data –
- the Performance Indicator s do not all measure things of equal importance to citizens;
- increases and decreases in performance are not all of the same significance; and
- sometimes, the results say more about our ability or inability to set targets correctly.
[Beat]
Some of these concerns about performance indicators and targets
are feeding a new national debate,
some of which we witnessed at the Local Government Association conference in Harrogate.
Indeed, the debate was widened to question the need for the Comprehensive Performance Assessment and many of the inspections.
It will be interesting to see if colleagues refer to this in the debate.
[Beat]
Despite our misgivings about the CPA,
the approach we are taking is that it should be used as a springboard for change.
Cos the dissatisfaction expressed on the doorsteps
runs deeper than dissatisfaction with levels of service, perceived or real.
It lies with a view on whether the Council is doing enough about it (or in street vernacular, “doing anything about it”).
Whatever we think we’ve been doing,
it’s certainly not been perceived as dramatic enough.
[Beat]
And here the frustration is
- having identified our priorities -
not enough progress has been made
in contrast to the general performance of our indicators.
[Beat]
So we need change.
And hence “Gearing Up”;
As described in the report to Executive Board tomorrow;
and the section between pages 39 and 43.
The section acknowledges that the full response to the last CPA has not been made.
This is essentially because we appointed a new Chief Executive, who only started in April;
and only now are some of the corporate planning and structural decisions being made.
[Beat]
A significant change is the establishment of monthly and quarterly tracking,
reporting progress at a senior management level, on
finance,
performance, and
other resource matters.
It’s possible that this may once have existed corporately.
Strong elements of it exist within departments.
But the correlation of such monitoring
to a senior management level does not and
will frustrate any ability to get more than the sum of the parts from the City Council.
[Beat]
Such reporting will also enable scrutiny to work much more effectively.
And enable the scrutiny that goes beyond saying it’s not good enough;
and move on to scrutineers being part of the process of devising improvements to what we do and the way we work.
A further report on the progress of Gearing Up,
especially in the light of success or otherwise of the first round of quarterly reporting – due out in September –
is being recommended for October’s full Council.
[Beat]
There is a lot more to do corporately, beyond the Executive, Scrutiny and Area changes we have made today.
Core city prospectus.
Community Plans.
Corporate plan.
Medium Term Financial Plans.
Local Public Service Agreements,
new ways of working and opportunities for Area Committees,
an external inspection of Housing
an external inspection of Education.
A lot to do.
[Beat]
The Private Eye is currently running a column parodying the references to the new ‘this’ is ‘that’ in news paper articles;
for example ‘grey’ being the new ‘black’
or ‘water’ is the new ‘tea’.
One of the latest of these was is an article in the Local Government Chronicle, which said
“for go-ahead leaders, stop is the new go”.
Well not in Nottingham.
With the range of work and volume of work ahead of us,
the message most definitely is
Go-ahead Nottingham!
Go for change!
Gear up for change!
Let’s create the mechanisms
to convert our aspirations for improvement in prioritised areas
into something that will have made a difference.
Comments