Published on

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide


  1. 1. Agenda Item 3(ii) REPORT TO THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE LAA Performance Management Friday, 5 September 2008 1. Purpose of the Report 1.1. To inform the Executive Committee of lessons learnt from performance management arrangements used for the old Local Area Agreement (LAA) and seek approval for revised arrangements for the new LAA. 2. Recommendations 2.1 The Executive Committee is requested to: i) Note performance management arrangements and lessons learnt from the old LAA, as set out in section 3.2.19 ii) Approve the principles of the proposed new arrangements, as set out in section 3.3.13 iii) Agree that final detailed procedures should be agreed in consultation with individual partners, as set out in section 3.3.14 3. Report Detail 3.1 Introduction 3.1.1 Walsall’s new LAA received Ministerial approval on 30 June 2008. It contains 25 national indicators together with 5 local indicators which reflect the key priorities for the Borough over the next three years. New Local Area Agreements (LAAs) form the heart of the new local performance framework. They help deliver the ambitions for the place and its people, set out in the Sustainable Community Strategy; they set out the ‘ deal’ between central government and local authorities and their partners to improve services and the quality of life in a place. LAAs will be the only vehicles for agreeing targets between local government and their delivery partners and central Government (except for the 16 statutory education and early years targets). (Creating Strong, Safe and Prosperous Communities: Statutory Guidance, Department for Communities and Local Government) 3.2 Performance Management under the old LAA and Lessons Learnt 3.2.1 Previous Arrangements 3.2.2 At the time the original LAA was submitted it was recognised that effective performance management arrangements would be critical to its success.
  2. 2. LAA Performance Management - 05.09.08 3.2.3 Performance management was already embedded within Partnership structures and its key partner organisations. Walsall Borough Strategic Partnership (now Walsall Partnership) was supported by the Council’s Performance Management Team in developing detailed arrangements. 3.2.4 In summary, high level monitoring was undertaken by the Partnership Board who received quarterly performance reports containing the latest position on progress in meeting the LAA outcomes. 3.2.5 The Executive Committee received regular reports. The reports monitored the full range of indicators, including programme and financial management information and reflected the detailed delivery of commissioned work. The Executive Committee held the Pillar Executive Groups (PEG’s) to account for underperforming indicators. 3.2.6 The four PEG’s received progressively more detailed monthly reports which included information about the delivery of specific programmes where links with spend, managed through the Partnership’s commissioning arrangements, were made. As a result timely corrective action plans could be requested for underperforming indicators and their effectiveness monitored and reported to the Executive Committee. 3.2.7 A key component supporting these arrangements has been the use of the Council’s web- based performance information management system (PIMS) to assemble and hold data. Initially Partnership staff collected relevant data from non-Council organisations but in many cases this can now be achieved through a secure internet connection directly into PIMS. 3.2.8 Lessons Learnt and suggested improvements 3.2.9 One factor that has impacted on all aspects of the old LAA was that it contained far too many indicators. The implications in performance management terms have been to add to the burden placed on partners and to spread resources too thinly. 3.2.10 Otherwise, the performance management approach has proved to be basically sound. In particular, • The use of PIMS has improved data availability and should be extended so that more partners can input directly to the system • PEG’s have been able to identify under-performance quickly and request corrective action to be implemented – the principle of making the first intervention as close as possible to the point of delivery should be retained in the new arrangements • The Executive Committee have been able to challenge PEGs over continuing under- performance – again this principle should be retained and its implementation strengthened 3.2.11 Three areas can be identified where the performance arrangements themselves have not quite lived up to expectations and where some fine-tuning is needed. 3.2.12 First, responsibility and accountability has not always been clear. For each indicator a responsible officer and a technical contact were established. The PEGs were charged with monitoring progress using data supplied by the technical officer and by holding the responsible agency to account in the event of under-performance. However, because the old LAA contained a mix of service-specific and more cross-cutting indicators, many of which were already being managed within partner organisations, it was not always clear where responsibility lay for initiating and following through the corrective action planning cycle. 3.2.13 Under the new arrangements roles and responsibilities must be clear - it is essential that the distinction is made between who manages performance and who monitors it. For each
  3. 3. LAA Performance Management - 05.09.08 target it will be necessary to set out who is responsible for delivery and who holds them to account. 3.2.14 In reality it is likely that performance will be managed at varying levels in the partnership depending on the indicator concerned. A consistent approach to identifying and rectifying under-performance should be adopted so that the body held responsible can be assured that due process is being followed. 3.2.15 Secondly, monitoring the thread between outcomes and indicators and their link to detailed activities and initiatives was not always satisfactorily achieved. The Target Action Planning (TAP) process, which was developed as a comprehensive planning tool specifically for the implementation of the LAA, requires all existing activity to be mapped upfront. This enables new activity and any opportunities for rationalisation to be identified. However, TAPs were not developed for all indicators in the old LAA and for some only Neighbourhood Renewal Fund (NRF) funded activity was mapped against the outcome. (see agenda item 3(i)) 3.2.16 For the new LAA the links between outcomes, indicators and activity must be made clear and to ensure this can happen it is essential that TAPs are developed for all indicators. The Partnership has already agreed that TAPs will be grouped by Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) priority and that all existing activity will be mapped. 3.2.17 The third area of weakness covers a range of technical and data issues, predominantly relating to indicators that use nationally collected data and include infrequent collection, lengthy periods between collection and release of data, small samples and changing definitions. As a result, the need to develop proxy measures to track performance in a timely manner was recognised. While this has been achieved in some cases, in others the most reliable proxy indicator has been the level of activity undertaken, but, as indicated above, a complete picture of this has not always been captured. 3.2.18 Through the new LAA performance arrangements accurate and timely data must be accessible. Government have improved the reporting period for a number of measures contained in the National Indicator Set (NIS), but there are still a significant number which are only out-turned annually. By tracking all activity against each LAA indicator it will be possible to get a more frequent and up to date picture of likely future performance and at the same time obtain the necessary evidence to assess the effectiveness of activities on LAA targets. 3.2.19 The Executive Committee is recommended to note the performance management arrangements and lessons learnt from the old LAA. 3.2.20 Additional Good Practice from the Children’s Pillar 3.2.21 Of the four existing pillars Children and Young People have developed the most robust performance management processes. Two features of their approach are worthy of incorporating into the arrangements for the new LAA. 3.2.22 As well as identifying officers and agencies responsible for delivering individual targets, an overall outcome lead and outcome performance lead have been appointed for each of the five Every Child Matters outcomes. 3.2.23 The outcome lead is a member of the Children’s Executive Group (CHEG). They develop a consistent and detailed understanding of the indicators within their outcome and provide regular, informed reports to the PEG. Translating this into LAA terms would mean that a lead officer would be identified for each of the nine SCS priorities. 3.2.24 The performance lead is responsible for ensuring outturn data is available for all indicators and exploring the reasons for under-performance. Performance leads meet prior to CHEG
  4. 4. LAA Performance Management - 05.09.08 to identify indicators which are under performing, explore any mitigating factors, recommend initiating corrective action plans and monitor its success. The big advantage of this Group is to lighten the load placed upon CHEG and to speed up the process of bringing performance back on track. 3.3 The new LAA and transition from the old LAA 3.3.1 In developing the new LAA, Walsall’s starting point was that indicators must have a direct impact on the priorities set out in the then draft SCS. In addition the Partnership agreed that indicators should be cross-cutting and benefit from being delivered in Partnership. This has resulted in many of the higher level, outcome focussed indicators from the NIS being chosen. 3.3.2 The criteria set by Government allowed for up to 35 indicators to be selected. Drawing on the lessons leant from the original LAA the Partnership decided early in the process that even this was too many indicators and that a more tightly focussed set should be selected. 3.3.3 As a result the new LAA comprises 25 main indicators from the NIS, plus another 5 local indicators. 3.3.4 For the current year it will also be necessary to closely monitor the performance of the 19 stretch targets from the old LAA as these may be eligible for Performance Reward Grant depending on achievement against targets for 2008/09. 3.3.5 Appendix 1 sets out the new LAA indicators together with the 16 statutory education and early years indicators. It also shows the stretch targets from the old LAA mapped against the SCS priorities. 3.3.6 Over the coming months TAPs will be developed for each LAA indicator, within SCS priority groupings which have been slightly amended to reflect organisational responsibilities. This will allow for trajectories and milestones to be set. 3.4 Proposed Performance Arrangements for the new LAA 3.4.1 General principles 3.4.2 Using a combination of what worked for the old LAA, lessons learnt and good practice elsewhere, it is proposed to adopt similar performance arrangements for the new LAA. 3.4.3 PEG’s1, or their equivalents, will be responsible for monitoring performance, initiating and tracking corrective action and escalation, where necessary. They will be accountable to the Executive Committee (or its equivalent) who, in turn, will report regularly to the Partnership Board. 3.4.4 Support for PEGs and the Executive Committee will be improved by more efficient use of existing resources, including nominating SCS priority lead officers and performance leads to coordinate indicator based information and by making better use of PIMS to hold and manage performance data. 3.4.5 More Detailed Proposals and Future Development 3.4.6 A lead agency will be identified for each indicator. It will nominate a named point of contact to act as the lead officer. They will be responsible for ensuring that data is provided in a timely manner to the SCS priority performance lead (paragraph 3.4.9), explain performance trends, draw up corrective action where necessary and highlight risks to future performance. 1 Partnership structures are currently under review – reference to the Executive Committee and Pillar Executive Groups will be amended as the new structure is agreed.
  5. 5. LAA Performance Management - 05.09.08 3.4.7 The indicator lead officer will provide details of the activity to be undertaken as part of the TAP to the Council’s Performance Management Team to enable PIMS to be populated with information which will allow performance to be tracked between the release of indicator outturn data. Also as part of the development of individual TAPs equalities implications will be identified, and, where appropriate, it will be possible to monitor the differential impact of activity on minority groups within the Borough. 3.4.8 A lead officer for each SCS priority will also be identified. They will be selected from the Council’s Assistant Directors, or officers from partner organisations at the same level. They will liaise with lead officers for individual indicators into order to compile a quarterly performance report for PEGs. 3.4.9 A performance lead will be identified to support the priority lead. They will be drawn from the Performance Account Managers within the Council, or equivalent officers from partner organisations. 3.4.10 PEGs will receive quarterly reports prepared by the performance lead for the relevant SCS priority. Reports will contain information about indicators exceeding or on target and will focus on under-performance, recommending where corrective action is needed. 3.3.11 PEGs will report their actions to the Executive Committee. When corrective action has been unsuccessful the Executive Committee will ask the PEG to ensure that the activity being commissioned is appropriate to the achievement of the target. 3.3.12 Once the above process is agreed following further consultation, detailed procedures will be drawn up with partners. A key stage will be to bring together performance officers and indicator lead officers at a workshop in October to develop procedures and reporting timescales. 3.3.13 The Executive Committee is recommended to approve the principles of the proposed new arrangements 3.3.14 The Executive Committee is recommended to agree that final detailed procedures should be agreed in consultation with individual partners Contact Officer; Tim Ferguson, Head of Partnership and Performance (01922) 652481;
  6. 6. LAA Performance Management - 05.09.08 Walsall Local Area Agreement and Statutory Education and Early Years Indicators 2008 – 2011 SCS Theme SCS Priority 2008 2009 2010
  7. 7. LAA Performance Management - 05.09.08 NI 5 Overall/ general satisfaction with local area PEOPLE NI 8 Percentage of adult population who participate in sport  % of under 16s who have been looked after for 2.5, or more, years living in the same placement for at least 2 years, or are placed for adoption  % of children newly looked after placed at 31 March, more than 20 miles from their home address from which first Creating placed (PAF CF/C69)  opportunity and % of children who had been looked after potential continuously, for at least 12 months, and were of school age, who missed a total, of at least, 25 days of schooling, for any reason, during the previous school year (PAF CF/C24)  NI 112 Under 18 Conception Rate (L) The number of conceptions to under-18s per thousand females aged 15-17, as measured by ONS statistics and reported on a calendar year  NI 16 Serious acquisitive crime rate  NI 19 Rate of re-offending by young offenders  NI 20 Assault with injury crime rate  NI 30 Re-offending Rate of Prolific and Priority Offenders  NI 56 Obesity among primary school age children in Year 6  NI 120 All age/all cause mortality  The number of infants born in Walsall who weigh less than 2500 grams at birth, expressed as a percentage of all live births in Walsall  The number of people who attended NHS Stop Smoking services in Walsall, who are confirmed to have quit smoking at the four week review  Supported admissions of older people to permanent residential and nursing homes, per 10,000 population, aged 65 or over  NI 135 Carers receiving needs assessment or review and a specific carer’s service, or advice and Feeling safe and information  being healthy NI 136 People supported to live independently through social services  NI 17 Public perceptions of ASB (L) Number of accidental fires in dwellings  Number of arson fires in buildings other than dwellings  Number of deliberate fires in vehicles  Domestic violence (L)
  8. 8. LAA Performance Management - 05.09.08 NI 141 Percentage of vulnerable people achieving PLACES Improving independent living  housing choice NI 154 Number of additional houses  NI 187 Tackling fuel poverty  NI 191 Residual household waste per head  Improving the NI 188 Adapting to climate change  quality of our NI 198 Children travelling to school; mode of environment transport used  NI 186 Per capita CO2 emissions in the LA area (L)
  9. 9. LAA Performance Management - 05.09.08 NI 116 Proportion of children in poverty1  (W) PROSPERITY NI 152 Working-age people on out-of-work benefits1  (W) The difference between the number of people in employment, who are aged between 16 and Improve access 64, expressed as a to employment, percentage of all people services and between those ages in facilities/ England, minus the Working with same percentage in Walsall  employers to The difference between create jobs and the number of people in opportunities employment, who are aged between 16 and 64, expressed as a percentage of all people between those ages in the West Midlands, minus the same percentage in Walsall  NI 172 VAT-registered businesses in the area showing Accessible, growth  sustainable Total number of VAT places for registered businesses  business Levels of support to new and existing business (L) NI 110 Young people's participation in positive activities  NI 117 16- to 18-year olds who are NEET  (W) % of 16-18 year olds, not in education, employment or training (NEET)  % of all pupils in LEA maintained schools, achieving 5, or more, A*- C grades, including English and Maths, at GCSE  NI 163 Working-age population qualified to at least level 2 or higher  (W) The number of working age people in Walsall with NVQ level 2 qualification  The number of working age people in Walsall with NVQ level 3 qualification  NI 72: Achievement of at least 78 points across the Early Years Foundation Stage with at least 6 in each of the scales in Personal Social and Emotional Development and Communication, Language Literacy (S) NI 73: Achievement at level 4 or above in both English and Maths at Key Stage 2 (Threshold) (S) Education and NI 74: Achievement at level 5 or above in both English skills and Maths at Key Stage 3 (Threshold) (S) NI 75: Achievement of 5 or more A* -C grades at GCSE or equivalent including English and Maths (Threshold) (S) NI 83: Achievement at level 5 or above in Science at Key Stage 3 (S) NI 87: Secondary school persistent absence rate (S) NI 92: Narrowing the gap between the lowest achieving 20% in the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile and the rest (S) NI 93: Progression by 2 levels in English between Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 (S) NI 94: Progression by 2 levels in Maths between Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2 (S)
  10. 10. LAA Performance Management - 05.09.08 Main LAA Indicator (L) Local Indicator  2006 LAA Stretch Target (S) Statutory Children and Early Years Indicator (W) Working Neighbourhoods Fund Reward Grant Indicator