AUDIT AND RISK SUB COMMITTEE
24 February 2010
PART 1 – PUBLIC DOCUMENT
AGENDA ITEM No.
5
TITLE OF REPORT: DATA QUALITY IMPLEMENTATION UPDATE
REPORT OF THE HEAD OF FINANCE, PERFORMANCE & ASSET MANAGENENT
1.
PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1
This report provides an update on implementation of Performance Data Quality.
2.
FORWARD PLAN
2.1
This report does not contain a recommendation on a key decision and has not been
referred to in the Forward Plan.
3.
BACKGROUND
3.1
The combined Data Quality Improvement Plan is a single document which brings
together all the actions emanating from both Internal and External performance
indicators audit. It allows tracking of completed, on target or behind scheduled actions.
3.2
The Audit and Risk Sub-Committee meeting of 21 May 2009 resolved that completed
actions should not be included in any further updates presented to the Sub-Committee.
All the completed actions included in the plan presented to the September 2009
meeting have been removed from the plan attached as Appendix A. Actions now
marked as completed on the action plan here were actions completed after the last
report. To maintain proper tracking and an audit trail, actions now marked as
completed on the combined plan will be deleted in our subsequent reports to the SubCommittee.
3.3
The Sub-committee in the September meeting reviewed the current status of each
action within the Action Plan as presented at Appendix A in detail and commented on
the following issues which the Performance Manager agreed to follow up and where
applicable amend the Action Plan:
That crystal report writers should be used immediately to generate information
for the abandoned vehicles which would resolve manual and spreadsheet
errors previously experienced;
That every effort should be made for relevant officers to complete the E
Learning Data Quality Training;
That where applicable third parties should be encouraged to sign–up to the
Council’s Data Quality Protocol;
AUDIT AND RISK (24.2.10)
That where applicable all actions should be noted with an ‘outcome’ then if
relevant indicate ‘completed’;
That where applicable the status of ‘Behind Schedule’ actions should be
clarified to provide a reason for non completion and with a detailed action plan
to complete these;
That the description ‘Completed’ for each action was not enough evidence and
should be enhanced by further commentary.
4.
IMPLEMENTATION PLAN UPDATE
4.1
Crystal Report The Manager, Licensing & Enforcement, Housing &
Environmental Health Service confirmed that the Crystal Reports for BVPI 218a &
BVPI 218b (abandoned vehicles) are currently being received as weekly reports by the
Licensing and Enforcement Manager (LEM), and that the current Quality
Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) procedure dated May 2009 (v2) has been rewritten in October 2009 to accommodate for the crystal reporting process. The new
reporting tool has assisted in providing the data for the September period and the full
outcome based evidence can be provided by the end of the last quarter reporting
period. This has resolved any need for manual intervention and spreadsheet errors
previously experienced.
4.2
E Learning Data Quality Training – Officers committed to a 90% completion rate for
the training. Concerted efforts have been made to ensure that this target is met. The
latest report confirmed that 87% of staff (not FTE), identified as having responsibility for
performance data have completed the training. In addition, there are fifteen members
of staff who started the training and progressed through most of the module, hence it
was recorded as ‘incomplete’; they will complete this in due course. If these are taken
into consideration the total completed percentage would be in excess of the 90%
target. 31 members of staff who have not started the training, of which six are new
staff who commenced employment less than three months ago, who are required to
complete the training not later than three months after commencing employment. Effort
will continue to be made to ensure that those who have not completed do so.
4.2
Feedback on Third Party Data Protocol
The Third Party Data Quality Protocol (TPDQP) was rolled-out on 20 July 2009. The
one page document was sent to all the Heads of Service and relevant officers (ROs) by
email with a link to the intranet page where the document is located.
To measure the usage level of the protocol an email was sent on the 1 st of January
2010 to the Heads of Service and Managers. Relevant Managers were asked to
confirm whether they were using the protocol and where applicable how many third
party organisations had signed up to the protocol.
Analysis of information received from all the service areas confirmed that relevant
officers are using or will be using the protocol. In nearly all the service areas
confirmation was received that the protocol had been sent out to organisations they
have dealings with. A number of the service areas confirmed the organisations that
have already signed up to the protocol. Some service areas sent duplicate copies of
the signed protocol as evidence of their actions to the Performance team.
AUDIT AND RISK (24.2.10)
It is evident from the analysis that managers are aware of, and making use of the third
party data quality protocol. The Performance team will continue to work with service
areas ensuring that they continue to use the protocol.
4.3
Improvement plan update
Officers have updated the combined data quality improvement plan and have chosen a
status for each action to indicate the current position:



Completed – original action completed and implemented;
On target – Action ongoing and scheduled to be completed within the original
timescale.; and
Behind schedule - Action ongoing and (i) scheduled to be completed after the
original timescale has elapsed / (ii) the original timescale has elapsed.
4.5
As requested by the Committee, where applicable all actions have now been noted
with an ‘outcome’ and where relevant have indicated ‘completed’. Where applicable
the status of Behind Schedule actions have been clarified to provide a reason for non
completion with a detailed action plan to complete these. Further commentary has
been provided to further enhance actions taken where the description ‘Completed’ for
each action was used, and thought not enough evidence.
4.6
There are 13 actions of which 7 have been completed, 5 on target and 1 behind
schedule.
4.7
Completed
There are seven completed actions. Further commentary has been provided to further
enhance action taken.
It should be noted that action number
PPP.IA.PMDQ.2008/09/Ref.5 on page 15 – An action plan for the production of the
return be produced to support completion of the return in a timely manner - was noted
as completed, the success or outcome of actions taken will not be known until the 1st
April 2010 when the data is collated. It is hoped that action taken should enable better
outcome.
4.8
On Target
There are five actions on target. Current status and any outcome or expectation of
each action has been explained in Appendix A on the last column of the table. The
following progress should be noted in respect of each action:
Action number PPP.IA.PMDQ.2008/09/Ref.1 page 10 - A series of checks should be
performed periodically on the Covalent System. All the key milestones have been
completed and have achieved better outcomes; the Performance team basic audit
training has been programmed and will be held before the end of March. The team
continue to perform basic checks on Covalent and will agree a periodic audit plan
checks with relevant service areas immediately after the training on the Covalent
system.
Action number PPP.IA.PMDQ.2008/09/Ref.3 page 12 - Data should be reported
through Covalent when available. The DWP has not published publicly any data for
NI181 and it is still currently working on a solution to the problems. However, NHDC
AUDIT AND RISK (24.2.10)
has submitted the required data extracts. The DWP is responsible for producing and
publishing data values for all local authorities. Local authorities are only responsible for
submitting the required data extracts to the DWP.
In the absence of any published NI181 data, officers are still able to monitor the
processing time of new claims and change events using reports previously used to
calculate the old best value performance indicators BV78a (speed of processing - new
HB/CTB claims) and BV78b (speed of processing - changes of circumstances for
HB/CTB claims). However, Northgate no longer support these reports and the
availability of the data may be subject to change in the future.
Action number PPP.IA.PMDQ.2008/09/Ref.4 on page 14 - The required templates
should be issued sooner in the process to allow partners more time to prepare their
returns and LSP members should be activity engaged during the year in order to raise
the profile and significance of the indicator. The Head of Policy, Partnerships &
Community Development confirmed that a PREVENT seminar was held in December
and the district now has a working group of community representatives to take this
forward. It is anticipated that this active engagement of LSP and other partners which
has raised the profile of the action into the development of community activities will
significantly lead to an increase response rate. It will also move the partners on to the
development of joint action plans to address a wide range of ‘community cohesion’
issues.
Action number PPP.IA.PMDQ.2008/09/Ref.5 on page 16 - A programme for the
completion of procedure and guidance notes should be agreed and implemented. The
Performance team have prioritised this piece of work and it is expected that it will be
completed by March.
4.9
Behind schedule
There is only one action behind schedule: Proposal to review how the authority
handles it information management across the organisation, and to consider combining
the Data Quality Forum and Information Assurance Group to provide better coordination, not just of existing information and data handling, but that required for the
sharing of services and wider electronic delivery agenda. The Strategic Director of
Customer Services, Head of Policy, Partnerships and Community Development and
the Head of Finance, Performance & Asset were initially asked to look at this aspect
and put a proposal to CMT. The newly appointed Head of Information Technology and
Customer Services has now been tasked to lead on this. He has confirmed as a
priority this piece of work and will soon start work on it, having scoped the parameters
for the review itself. The review to be completed will include the development of an
Information Management Strategy to pull together all aspects of information
management referred to in this report.
AUDIT AND RISK (24.2.10)
5.
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
5.1
There are no specific legal implications arising from this report, the Audit Commission
published framework ‘Improving information to support decision making: standards for
better quality data’ provides a number of recommended actions which a public body
can take to improve data quality. This is in line with the standards.
5.2
The gathering, storage, issue, reporting and destruction of any data of a personal
nature by the authority will be conducted in accordance with the relevant requirements
of the Data Protection Act 1996
6.
FINANCIAL AND RISK IMPLICATIONS
6.1
This update does not envisage any additional cost implications and can be resourced
from within the existing budgets; the principle of robust data quality is that data handled
appropriately, first time, itself provides service efficiencies in the manner in which an
organisation works. Data Quality now forms part of the Audit Commission use of
resources and our AGS action plan. It is therefore incumbent on the authority to
continue to improve on the use of information and data.
6.2
Lack of improvement in our data quality could impact on the public and external
agencies’ perception of the Council (such as the CAA). This would then impact on the
Council’s reputation.
7.
HUMAN RESOURCE AND EQUALITIES IMPLICATIONS
7.1
A standard paragraph has been added to the Job Description template and the
Guidance on creating Job Descriptions in order for managers to include it in the job
description where staff have a significant responsibility for performance data quality.
8.
CONSULTATION WITH EXTERNAL ORGANISATIONS AND WARD MEMBERS
8.1
Not applicable.
9.
RECOMMENDATIONS
9.1
It is recommended that the Audit and Risk Sub-Committee notes progress made
implementing agreed actions detailed in the Combined Data Quality Improvement Plan
at Appendix A.
10.
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
10.1
The recommendation(s) contained within paragraph 9 are made in accordance with the
declared policy of the Council.
AUDIT AND RISK (24.2.10)
11.
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED
11.1
Not applicable.
12.
APPENDICES
12.1
Appendix A – Combined Data Quality Improvement Action Plan 2009
13.
CONTACT OFFICERS
13.1
Ola Alabi
Performance Manager
Tel: 01462 474659
[email protected]
13.2
Andrew Cavanagh
Head of Finance, Performance & Asset Management
Tel: 01462 474243
[email protected]
13.3
Liz Green
Head of Policy, Partnerships & Community Development
Tel: 01462 474230
[email protected]
13.4
Katie White
Legal Services Manager
Tel: 01462 474460
[email protected]
13.5
Kerry Shorrocks
Head of Human Resources
Tel: 01462 474224
[email protected]
13.6
Tim Cowland
Head of IT & Customer Services
Tel: 01462474618
[email protected]
14.
BACKGROUND PAPERS
14.1
North Hertfordshire District Council Data Quality Policy and Report - available from
the Performance Team, First Floor, Council Offices, Gernon Road, Letchworth Garden
City.
14.2
Audit Commission: Improving information to support decision making: standards for
better quality, March 2007
AUDIT AND RISK (24.2.10)
AUDIT AND RISK (24.2.10)