*PART 1 – PUBLIC DOCUMENT
AGENDA ITEM No.
12
TITLE OF REPORT: PERFORMANCE INDICATOR MONITORING REPORT – APRIL 2010
to JULY 2010
REPORT OF THE HEAD OF FINANCE, PERFORMANCE AND ASSET MANAGEMENT
1.
SUMMARY
1.1
To report progress against Performance Indicators, for the period April 2010 to July
2010. The full list of performance indicators grouped according to links with the
Council’s priorities are presented at Appendix A.
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 “targets” for the required level of performance against the Council’s indicators,
both National and local, were agreed at a member workshop held on 3rd March 2010.
This report, by the use of “traffic light status” enables the Sub Committee to monitor
performance against these targets. The definition of each of the symbols and terms
used can be found on the first page of Appendix A.
3.2
Where an annual update only is available, then these indicators do not form part of the
regular reporting ‘set’, and these will be reported to the Finance and Performance
Scrutiny Sub Committee once per annum only as a result. This allows greater focus to
be maintained on the indicators which can demonstrate in-year progress.
3.3
Where performance is below target, responsible officers for individual Performance
Indicators (PIs) provide reasons for the under performance and details of any remedial
action to be taken. These responses are shown against the relevant PI in Appendix A.
3.4
The information in Appendix A provides the most up to date information that can be
provided to the Sub Committee within the committee reporting timetable. The Sub
Committee are able to view the most up to date position by viewing the information
held on Covalent , the Council’s Performance & Risk Management software.
3.5
Due to the lack of any current published comparative data on National Indicators, the
Performance Improvement Officers have established an informal benchmarking group
with colleagues at the other District Council’s in Hertfordshire. This will enable some
benchmarking against some National and former Best Value Indicators that have been
retained as local indicators. If after evaluation this information is useful it will be
included in future reports to the Sub Committee.
FINANCE AND PERFORMANCE (20.9.2010)
4.
ISSUES
4.1
Performance comparison – traffic light status
The Sub Committee receives reports on 37 monthly and quarterly PIs. Two of these,
BV174 and BV175, racial incidents and resulting actions, are provided for information
only and do not have targets set for them
Of the remaining 35 indicators:



24 met or exceeded its target - “green”
8 performed within the tolerance of the target – “amber”
3 fell below the set target – “red”
This is illustrated in the following pie chart:Figure 1; Percentage of monthly/quarterly indicators at red, amber or green at
the end of the first quarter in 2010/11
Red
9%
Amber
23%
Green
68%
When compared to the same period in 2009/10 there has been a significant increase
in performance from 51% or 18 indicators meeting or exceeding their target to 68% (24
indicators) . This is an impressive 33% increase (i.e. a one third increase on 51%).
There has been an equivalent decline in the number of indicators falling below the set
target from 23% to 9%. The following pie chart illustrates the position at the end of the
first quarter in 2000/10.
FINANCE AND PERFORMANCE (20.9.2010)
Figure 2: Percentage of monthly/quarterly indicators at red, amber or green at
the end of the first quarter in 2009/10
Red
23%
Green
51%
Amber
26%
4.2
Performance comparison – direction of travel compared to the first quarter of
2009/10
A comparison of the performance in the first quarter of 2010/11 compared to the first
quarter of 2009/10 can be carried out for 34 monthly and quarterly indicators.



23 performed better than they did last year – “green”
1 performed at the same level – “amber”
10 performed worse than they did last year – “red”
68%
3%
29%
The following pie chart summarises the direction of travel (whether the performance
has improved or decreased) compared to the first quarter last year:Figure 3: Percentage of indicators for the first quarter of 2010/11 that have
improved in performance, remained the same or have declined compared to first
quarter performance in 2009/10
Worsened/
Worst
Return
29%
Improved/
Optimum
Return
68%
FINANCE AND PERFORMANCE (20.9.2010)
No Change
3%
Bearing in mind that for the first quarter in 2009/10, 66% of the indicators were
showing an improved direction of travel compared to 2008/09, we have increased this
again with 68% of indicators now showing an improvement in the first quarter of
2010/11 when compared to 2009/10.
4.3
Performance that has exceeded target levels
The following areas of good performance are commendable as not only has the target
been exceeded but the performance is better than for the same period in 2009/10.
Indicator
Definition
NI195a
% of relevant land assessed as
having deposits of litter that fall
below an acceptable level.
NI195b
% of relevant land assessed as
having deposits of detritus that
fall below an acceptable level.
NI195c
% of relevant land assessed as
having deposits of graffiti that
fall below an acceptable level.
NI 195d
% of relevant land assessed as
having deposits of fly-posting
that fall below an acceptable
level.
NI 191
Kg residual waste per
household
BV8
% of invoices paid on time
BV12
Working Days Lost Due to
Sickness Absence
FINANCE AND PERFORMANCE (20.9.2010)
Comments
We have seen a huge improvement
from 7% in the first survey of 2009/10
to 3% in 2010/11 by adopting better
working practises to ensure the
amounts of litter present within North
Herts are limited and reducing.
A significant reduction in the levels of
detritus from 39% in the first survey of
2009/10 to 17% in 2010/11
A reduction from 3% in the first survey
of 2009/10 to 2% in 2010/11
Whilst the levels of Graffiti are not an
issue by large, the withdrawal of a
significant amount of financial
resources from the Herts Highways
Graffiti fund may lead to an increase
in occurrences of graffiti upon
highway structures. Negotiations are
taking place with Herts Highways to
best manage this reduced budget and
the need for graffiti removal within the
District environments.
A reduction from 1% in the first survey
of 2009/10 to 0% in 2010/11
We have reduced the amount of
waste collected per household by
4kg. A total of over 219 tonnes.
From 1 April 2010 to 31 July 2010,
1759 invoices out of a total of 1765
were paid within 32 days of the
invoice date.
Absence is down by nearly 1 day
compared to the same quarter of
2009
LI019
LI027
NI 182
4.4
No of collections missed per
100,000 collections of
household waste
% of domestic Environmental
Health customers who rated the
service received as “very good”,
“good” or “satisfactory”
Satisfaction of business with
local authority regulation
services
On-going use of ‘problem address’
sheets is reducing the number of
incidents of missed collections. The
new Officer Area working patterns is
also limiting such occurrences and
enabling accurate reports to logged
onto Whitespace i.e. ‘Justified’ or ‘unjustified’ for the majority of recorded
missed collections.
From 1 April 2010 to 30 June 2010
we achieved 88.89% compared to
80.95% for the same period last year.
From 1 April 2010 to 30 June 2010
we achieved 82% compared to 74%
for the same period last year.
Performance that is below target
At the end of the first quarter in previous years, a higher number of indicators were
behind target (8 in 2009/10, 5 in 2008/09 and 7 in 2007/08).
The 3 performance indicators reported with a red status in this report, are also showing
a decline compared to the same period last year. The table below shows these
indicators, why the performance has fallen and what is being done to rectify the
situation where we are able to influence the performance.
Indicator
BV170b
LI 026
Definition
Visits to and use of
Museums & galleries
– Visits in Person
% of H & E H
programmed
inspections completed
on time
FINANCE AND PERFORMANCE (20.9.2010)
Comments
Fewer people than expected attended our
special events and the exhibitions held in the
first quarter. However in July 2010, the visitor
numbers were significantly higher at 3466 that
would have brought performance to “amber” if
this indicator had continued to be monitored on
a monthly basis. It is anticipated that the
summer exhibitions and events will continue to
attract visitors in person to the museums.
The current poor performance of this indicator is
largely attributable to officer vacancies on the
Commercial, Environmental Protection and
Licensing & Enforcement Teams throughout the
reporting period. Recruitment to these posts has
now commenced following the recent relaxation
of the recruitment pause and therefore
performance in this area should stabilise once
officers, or contractors, are in place. However,
given that substantial inspection backlogs have
accrued over this period the indicator will,
regrettably, remain below target for the
remainder of this financial year.
NI 16
4.4.1
Serious acquisitive
crime rate per 1,000
population
“acquisitive crime” covers a number of offences
such as burglary, robbery and theft (including
motor vehicle theft). Serious Acquisitive Crime
for qtr1 of 2010-11 has seen a 3% increase in
comparison to the same period last year.
However this is still a 13.5% reduction
compared to the same period for 2008/09. The
current status is a result of the challenging
targets that the partnership has set to further
reduce incidents of serious acquisitive crime.
LI026 – percentage of Housing & Public Protection Service programmed
inspections completed on time. This indicator has shown a decline in performance
in the first quarter with 135 inspections being completed out of a total of 244 (55.3%).
This local indicator covers a variety of inspections in this service area. Details of these
are provided below with the performance for each for the first quarter:




Housing – Park Home Sites (one inspection planned and completed - 100%)
Environmental Protection – Permitted processes (one inspection planned but
not completed - 0%)
Food hygiene – High Risk and Non High Risk premises (119 planned and 62
completed - 52.1%)
Licensing – Animal Welfare, Licensing Act 2003 premises, Gambling Act 2005
premises and other licensed premises.(123 planned and 72 completed 58.53%)
4.4.2
In response to the difficult operating environment earlier this year, the Housing and
Public Protection Service carefully reviewed its inspection plan and reprioritised its
resources to those premises that represent the highest risk in terms of potential impact
on public health and safety (this mainly relates to the preparation and sale of food and
the management of large scale events).
4.4.3
Given the gravity of the situation the Head of Service, and Portfolio Holder, escalated
this issue in order to secure permission to recruit, albeit temporarily, a freelance
Environmental Health Practitioner (EHP) to assist with the inspection of food premises.
An EHP has now been retained to undertake planned inspections. Also, officers have
worked with their colleagues in Luton Borough Council, Stevenage Borough Council,
Welwyn Hatfield Council and St Albans City and District Council in order to secure
mutual aid as regards the inspection of licensed premises and the management of the
Sonisphere music festival at Knebworth Park in July/August. Luton Borough Council
has been contracted on a three month basis to provide a part-time member of staff to
assist the Licensing & Enforcement Team with higher risk premises inspection activity.
4.4.4
The Environmental Health Manager will shortly publish his Value For Money (VFM)
review of the Commercial Team and this will seek to formally clarify the public health
risks associated with the food safety and health & safety functions and how best the
Council can mitigate them having regard to overall programme cost. This VFM report
should, if accepted, underpin the minimum levels of resources needed to deliver
sustainable services in this area and therefore avoid a recurrence of the recruitment
problem encountered earlier this year.
FINANCE AND PERFORMANCE (20.9.2010)
4.5
The Place Survey
The Department for Communities and Local Government announced on 10th August
that the Place Survey is to be deleted and there is no longer a requirement to report
against the National Indicators (NI’s) previously measured by the Survey.
These NI’s were not included in the previous quarterly update reports presented to
PARC. The NI’s that will not be collected through this survey in 2010/11 are:
National
Description
Indicator
% of people who believe people from different backgrounds get on well
NI 1
together in their local area
NI 2
% of people who feel that they belong to their neighbourhood
NI 3
Civic participation in the local area
NI 4
% of people who feel they can influence decisions in their locality
NI 5
Overall / general satisfaction with local area
NI 6
Participation in regular volunteering
NI 17
Perceptions of anti-social behaviour
Dealing with local concerns about anti-social behaviour and crime by the
NI 21
local council and police
Perceptions of parents taking responsibility for the behaviour of their
NI 22
children in the area
Understanding of local concerns about anti-social behaviour and crime by
NI 27
the local council and police
NI 41
Perceptions of drunk or rowdy behaviour as a problem
NI 42
Perceptions of drug use or drug dealing as a problem
NI 119
Self-reported measure of people’s overall health and wellbeing
NI 138
Satisfaction of people over 65 with both home and neighbourhood
The extent to which older people receive the support they need to live
NI 139
independently at home
NI 140
Fair treatment by local services
Officers are considering if our Corporate Consultation programme needs to be
amended to capture public perception on some of the areas considered in The Place
survey.
5.
LEGAL IMPLICATIONS
5.1
There are no direct legal implications arising from this monitoring report.
6.
FINANCIAL AND RISK IMPLICATIONS
6.1
Failure to perform against those indicators which pose significant financial or reputation
risk to the Council, such as increasing recycling rates versus the higher cost
implications of sending waste to landfill, are further managed through the Council’s risk
management framework. The risks are recorded on Covalent and linked to the
relevant performance indicator.
FINANCE AND PERFORMANCE (20.9.2010)
7.
HUMAN RESOURCE AND EQUALITIES IMPLICATIONS
7.1
There are no additional HR implications other than those already identified in the
Corporate Plan.
7.2
All the actions taken in the delivery of Performance Indicators must conform with the
Council’s corporate equality agenda.
8.
CONSULTATION WITH EXTERNAL ORGANISATIONS AND WARD MEMBERS
8.1
Not applicable.
9.
RECOMMENDATIONS
9.1
That the Finance & Performance Sub Committee notes and comments as necessary
on the progress of Performance Indicators, for the period from April 2010 to July 2010.
10.
REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS
10.1
To enable the Sub Committee to fulfil its Terms of Reference to review the
performance of the Council in relation to its performance targets.
11.
ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS CONSIDERED
11.1
None applicable
12.
APPENDICES
12.1
Appendix A – Performance Indicators Management Report from April 2010 to July
2010.
13.
CONTACT OFFICERS
13.1
Fiona Timms
Performance & Risk Manager
Tel: 01462 474251
[email protected]
13.2
Andrew Cavanagh
Head of Finance, Performance & Asset Management
Tel: 01462 474243
[email protected]
FINANCE AND PERFORMANCE (20.9.2010)
13.3
Katie White
Corporate Legal Manager
Tel: 01462 474315
[email protected]
13.4
Kerry Shorrocks
Corporate Human Resources Manager
Tel: 01462 474224
[email protected]
14.
BACKGROUND PAPERS
14.1
Information recorded on Covalent the Council’s performance and risk management
software.
FINANCE AND PERFORMANCE (20.9.2010)
THIS PAGE IS BLANK
FINANCE AND PERFORMANCE (20.9.2010)