Lake District National Park Partnership
13 December 2010
Agenda item: 7
Page 1
MONITORING THE PARTNERSHIP’S PLAN: THE MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR THE LAKE
DISTRICT NATIONAL PARK 2010 – 2015
1
Summary
1.1
The Partnership adopted the Partnership’s Plan at the meeting on 7 September 2010.
This paper sets out how the Plan will be monitored and the risks to delivering the Plan.
Recommendation that: a
b
c
you approve the monitoring schedule as shown in
Annex 1;
you consider and agree the risks to delivering the
Partnership's Plan in Annex 2; and
you agree risk and action owners for the risks identified.
2
Background
2.1
The Partnership's Plan is the Management Plan for the Lake District National Park 2010 –
2015, co-ordinating partnership activity in the National Park. Since the Partnership
meeting on 7 September 2010, 15 organisations have endorsed the Plan to date within
their own organisations, committing to delivering the Plan. An update of progress with
other partners will be ascertained at the meeting.
2.2
In order to make progress towards delivering the Vision we must monitor progress on
delivering the Plan. This includes monitoring performance indicators and actions in the
Plan. Additionally, the risks to delivering the Plan need to be understood and managed.
2.3
The Partnership Plan Subgroup met on 22 November 2010 to discuss how the Plan
should be monitored and risks to delivery.
3
Monitoring the Partnership's Plan
3.1
In the Partnership's Plan we state that we:



will monitor it quarterly and update an online version of the action plan
will produce a progress report and a 'State of the National Park report annually
intend to review the Plan every year.
3.2
Annex 1 sets out an annual cycle of how we propose to undertake this activity. As stated
in the Plan the National Park Authority will lead the review, monitoring and reporting of the
Plan. The National Park Authority will collect the information, but this will be considered
and presented to the Partnership by the lead organisation for each of the four outcomes of
the Vision. The Partnership Plan Subgroup will consider the results of monitoring activity,
helping push delivery of the Plan when appropriate, and will lead the review of the Plan
every year.
3.3
We will assess how we are doing by giving each action and 'key indicator of success' a
status as follows:


we are likely to achieve the target or complete the activity – a green status
we may have problems reaching the target or completing the activity within the timescale
– an amber status
we are very unlikely to meet the target or complete the activity within the timescale – a red
status.

Lake District National Park Partnership
13 December 2010
Agenda item: 7
Page 2
3.4
As you will recognise the cycle shown in Annex 1 is not in place yet, but we anticipate that
by June 2011 we will be able to follow it. In the interim the Partnership will receive the first
monitoring report at the next meeting, on 28 February 2011 (normally this will be
considered by the Partnership in December each year). This will focus on delivery and
include updates on:



actions in the Plan
data for the 21 'key indicators of success'
risks.
3.5
In June each year the Partnership will receive an update on all monitoring activity,
including:


actions in the Plan
data for all indicators, including 21 'key indicators of success' and other supporting State
of the Park indicators to provide a wider context (as previously reported to the Partnership
when we considered each of the four outcomes of the Vision)
risk updates.

At the June meeting the Partnership will also receive a summary 'Annual Report', which
summarises highlights of the past year activity and updates implementation of the
Partnership improvement plan.
3.6
In September each year the Partnership will receive an updated Partnership Plan. We
anticipate that Parts One and Two of the Plan, including the special qualities, Vision and
delivery aims, will remain the same, setting the direction for activity for the period 2010 –
2015. The Partnership Plan Subgroup will review Part Three, updating the action plan in
light of the monitoring report in June. We recognise that some actions will need to be reconsidered in light of government cuts and we may need to add new actions. We
recognise that in 2011 we will also need to review the 'key indicators of success' in Part
Four, because of national changes to performance reporting and reduced funding for
partners collecting data. We will ask for Partners to join the Partnership Plan Subgroup to
complete this task, highlighting topics where particular expertise is required. This annual
review of the Partnership's Plan will help us address issues that arise, whilst remaining on
course towards achieving our Vision.
4
Risks to Delivering the Partnership's Plan
4.1 In addition to looking at monitoring arrangements the Sub Group assessed the risks to the
Partnership Plan. The risks identified by the Sub Group are detailed in Annex 2.
4.2 The Risk matrix shows where the risks appear relative to the risks likelihood and impact.
The tolerance line (separating the shaded and non-shaded areas) gives a graphical
representation as to whether a risk is considered to be currently managed at an
acceptable level to the Partnership. Where above the line, i.e. above tolerance, additional
actions are needed to help manage the risk below tolerance. Those actions identified in
Annex 2 are only suggestions and the Partnership may wish to identify additional actions
or amend those listed. Additionally the Partnership should consider whether there are any
other risks which have not yet been recorded but which need managing.
4.3 It is recommended that the Partnership review and monitor risks at those meetings when
performance monitoring is being considered.
4.4 In summary the Partnership is asked to review the Risks to:
Lake District National Park Partnership
13 December 2010



Agenda item: 7
Page 3
Ensure there are pro active plans for risks that are above tolerance.
Monitor risks below tolerance to ensure they remain at that level.
Highlight additional areas where there may be risks that are not monitored.
Author/Post
Date Written
Kate Payne, Performance Management Adviser, Lake
District National Park Authority
Neil Solender, Policy Adviser, Lake District National Park
Authority
Stephen Ratcliffe, Director of Planning and Partnerships,
Lake District National Park Authority
26 November 2010
Lake District National Park Partnership
13 December 2010
Agenda item:
Annex 1
Monitoring the LDNP Partnership Plan
(lighter boxes show monitoring reported to Partnership meetings, darker boxes show monitoring to Partnership Plan Subgroup)
Partnership meeting
 Agree the Partnership's Plan –
annual review (what we'll do in
future years of the Plan)
Partnership Plan Subgroup
 Review the Partnership's Plan,
in light of Annual progress
report and State of the Park
report (what do we need to do in
future years of the Plan)
August
September
October
November
July
June
Partnership meeting
 Annual progress report (what we did
during the year), including
May
Partnership improvement plan
 Progress on actions
 State of the Park report – including
current state of all performance
indicators
 Risk updates
 Ask for volunteers for Partnership
Plan Subgroup (particularly if
specific issues)
December
January
February
April
March
Partnership Plan Subgroup
 Consider monitoring activity to help
deliver actions within the Plan
Partnership meeting
 Six-monthly update – progress
on actions, data for key
performance indicators and
risk update
Lake District National Park Partnership
13 December 2010
Agenda item:
Annex 2 Page 1
Partnership Plan Risk Matrix
Very High
1

High
2
Likelihood

Significant
5
3, 4
Low
6
7
Very Low
Almost
Impossible
Negligible
Marginal
Impact
Critical
→
Catastrophic
Lake District National Park Partnership
13 December 2010
Agenda item:
Annex 2 Page 2
Critical
High
Above
Critical
Significant
Above
Critical
Significant
Above
Change in
Government
policy
Marginal
Significant
Below
Existence of
partners in
current form
3
4
5
Lack of knowledge of
policy changes makes it
more difficult to deliver
Partner organisations
to continually keep
under review the
Partnership Plan and
assess the resources
available and ability
to deliver projects.
Clive Wickham to be
informed of risk
updates
Partnership to review
membership to
ensure it remains “fit
for purpose”
Partner organisations
ensure active
communications plan
Partnership and
performance
monitoring to report
progress at
Partnership Board
meetings, exceptions
report to be
produced.
No actions other than
to keep monitoring
the situation. And act
Risk owner
Tolerance level
Changes to the dynamics
of the partnership will
impact on the delivery of
particular projects
Commitment Poor communications with
of all
stakeholders lead to non
stakeholders delivery and negative PR
Non delivery Negative PR and damaged
of projects
reputation of the
Partnership
2
Negative impact on the
Partnerships ability to
deliver the Partnership
Plan
Action owner
likelihood
Above
Reduction in
income
Actions
Impact
Very High
1
Consequence
Critical
Risk #
Risk
Partnership Plan Risk Table
projects and the
Partnership Plan
6
Poor
community
engagement
Lack of partnership
support from community
and media leading to
negative and disruptive PR
Marginal
Low
Below
7
Changes in
the way
performance
is monitored
Inability to measure
success and lack of trend
analysis makes it harder to
guide and direct projects
and ultimately the
Partnership Plan.
Critical
Low
Below
on any information
that may be forth
coming from the
Government.
Ensure that all the
project streams have
an active and
effective
communications
strategy.
Whilst it is being
managed effectively
at present, it will be
important to monitor
the requirements of
the Plan and of the
Government.
Risk owner
Action owner
Actions
Tolerance level
likelihood
Agenda item:
Annex 2 Page 3
Impact
Consequence
Risk #
Risk
Lake District National Park Partnership
13 December 2010