The Planning Quality Framework is a collection of tools and techniques that use planning data to help councils understand their development management service performance and benchmark against others. It involves quantitative data like application counts and approval rates, as well as qualitative customer surveys. The framework provides regular reports to give councils insights into the value and quality of their work. It is a low-effort way to focus improvement efforts compared to traditional benchmarking approaches.

1. The
Planning Quality Framework
Leadership essentials Oct 2014
Steve Barker
PAS
www.qualityframework.net www.pas.gov.uk

2. Today – Planning Quality Framework
Me
• Why do we need it?
• What is it? How does it work?
• What does it do?
You
• Is it useful?
• 2 exercises to help us develop it
• Q&A as we go

3. Quality?

4. “top quartile” performer
(this is not uncommon)

5. or is quality…
Leading to:
Time for a change?

6. why we need a quality framework
the focus will always be on speed until
there is something better to care about
did that work?
focused improvement
wasted time/effort
routine / unusual
validation
big stuff / small stuff
conditions
how much of what?
permitted development
do customers like us?
neighbours feel ignored?
good ideas did we/do we add value?
evidence / guesses
measures not targets
VFM
end-to-end

7. leadership…
… does not manage the status quo;
it challenges it
• planning - passive, reactive to change?
• time to create the change agenda?
• ‘designation’ = ‘how can we get quicker?’
• better questions: how do we measure and
deliver value and quality? and ‘how do we
resource in an unpredictable world’?

8. councillors: better value from data
• Previous PAS work – officer focused
• Councillors: not just about access to data
• elected members need access to
performance data they can use

9. demonstrate the value of your work
“There’s nothing new under the sun”
Ecclesiates 1;9
• performance management
• customer care, customer satisfaction
• pre-app and post app reviews
• annual monitoring reports, design guides

10. demonstrate the value of your work
“There’s nothing new under the sun”
Ecclesiates 1;9
• performance management
• reporting system data (e.g. PS1/2 returns)
• customer care, customer satisfaction
• pre-app and post app reviews, AMR
PQF: re-frames and enhances what you
already do and applies some standards so
that you can report and compare.

11. what is the
planning quality framework?

12. in a nutshell
A collection of tools and
techniques…that use data…to make
reports…that help councils
understand DM service
performance…and/or benchmark
against others.

13. no single measure of quality
The work Agents
Applicants
Quantitative Qualitative
Neighbours
Reviewer(s)
Organisational - (ICT,
teams, headcounts etc.) C’llrs
Amenit
y
Groups
Staff
Outcomes
Resources “Value”
Process What if ?
Design build PoruatcocmteisceQ&A Tips ?

14. Overview
Outcome
s
The work Agents
Applicants
Neighbours
Reviewer(s)
C’llrs
Amenit
y
Groups
Staff
Quantitative
Q&A Tips ?
Resource
s
“Value”
Process What if ?
Qualitative
Opinions
Facts
Organisational - (ICT,
teams, headcounts etc.)
Design, build,
outcomes Practice helpful tools

15. quantitative: applications data
The work Outcomes
Resources “Value”
Process What if ?

16. data standards

17. qualitative: 8 customer Surveys
Agents
Applicants
Neighbours
Officer
Staff C’llrs Amenity
Groups
Organisational - (ICT,
teams, headcounts etc.)

18. practice
• NPPF integrated into policy
• Appeals / refusals based on design
• Focus on design at PreApp
• Design guides / panels
• BREEAM
• Building for Life
• In house design expertise
• Councillor reviews of development
Design negotiation outcomes Pre/post app

19. It’s a framework
The work Agents
Applicants
Resources “Value”
Neighbours
PrQocess uWhata if ? lity
Reviewer(s)
Outcomes
How are you organised ?
(ICT, teams, headcounts
etc.)
C’llrs
Amenit
y
Groups
Staff
Design negotiation outcomes Pre/post app

20. 1. Quantitative
Quarterly reports: the ‘rounded’ picture:
Q: how many expensive process reviews
focus on speeding things up but fail to notice
that the service says ‘yes’ more often than its
peers, creates less waste and has happier
customers?

21. …less of this
35 pages of histograms ?????!

22. more of this…
Structured ‘story’
Part 1 – The work
Part 2 – The outcomes
Part 3 – Value/non-value
Part 4 – Resources
Part 5 - Process
Part 6 - Surveys
Council Planning
Quality Report
Online
Trends over time Database – DIY reports

23. PART 1 - THE WORK
1a. development categories
Big stuff

24. PART 1 - THE WORK
1b. Application Counts/ Fee Comparator
Purpose: To understand your work and fee income and
compare with your peers..
For review:
• Are you very different from
your peers?
• Are peers seeing more of a
particular type of development?
• Something to learn?
• Do the applications / fees mix
represent any risk?
• Are you managing this risk
appropriately ?
work profile fee profile

25. PART 2 - OUTCOMES
2a. Approval Rates
Purpose: What types of development are we saying 'yes' to and
how often?
For review:
• Granting more permissions?
• Messages for stakeholders?
• Is the %age of permissions always
a positive?
• Do your approval rates differ
significantly from your peers?
• What might be happening
elsewhere that you can learn from?

26. 2a. Approval Rates

27. PART 3 – VALUE/NON VALUE
3a. Withdrawn applications
Purpose: Rate of withdrawal. A 'waste' indicator. Where
possible they should be reduced to near zero.
For review:
• What is the overall trend ?
• Are you doing anything - is it
working?
• What’s the cost? Fees don’t
cover costs. Then the 'free go‘?
• How many occur at the request
of the council?
• What do your developer
community think ?

28. 3b. Follow-up applications
Purpose: Permission to start? 'follow-ups‘ – series’ of apps for
same development. Often the market (EoTs, some NMA),
sometimes required by us (vary/remove conditions).
For review:
• These don’t cover the costs
• Is there anything to be done?
• Complex Vs simple
• What do developers think?
• Is there a positive/negative
story here?

29. 3b. Follow-up applications

30. 3d. Non-heritage applications zero fee

31. PART 4 – RESOURCES
4b. Headcount estimate
Purpose: how well matched are resources (FTEs) to the
volumes of work?
For review:
• How does the FTE
estimate compare to
reality?
• Caseloads?
• Does the trend
correspond with volumes?
• Are there opportunities to
re-focus resources?

32. 4c. Development investment
Purpose: What is the investment value that development
proposals represent? For review:
• significant inward
investment £sum Vs cost
of planning
• What do the trends
(rising/falling) mean for
your place?
• Significance between this
and fee income (e.g.
future resources
available)?
• FTE estimate (e.g. can
you handle a growing
upward trend, or re-focus
resources for a downward
trend)?

33. PART 5 – PROCESS
5a. Valid on day 1
Purpose: Shows the proportion of applications received
that can be worked on straight away.
For review:
• This is avoidable time and
cost
• Causes. Don't assume are
the sole fault of the
applicant/agent.
• Are your procedures,
processes, consistency
and guidance as good as
it could be?
• What are your customers
saying?
• Are some application more
vulnerable than others?

34. Quick guide to box plots
Why do we use boxplots?
• Shows variation in a set of data –
something an ‘average’ doesn’t.
• e.g. average decision 48 days. Hides
fact that most are issued between
35 and 54 days.
Knowing this you can:
• be clearer to customers
• improve the process – what is
stopping us making 35 days?
Average
Improvement
opportunity

35. 5c. end-to-end decision times
Purpose: Shows the number of days between applications
being received and a decision notice being issued.

36. avoid this

37. WHAT IF…?
• compare me to my peers (you’d expect that)
• compare me to “best of breed” (interesting)
• make me look like the best (very interesting)

38. Exercise 1
Task:
Design a ‘dashboard’ of key planning
measures for councillors
Hints/tips:
• No more than 5 or 6
• What do you need at your finger tips?
• Who’s your audience(s)?

39. Part 2 - customer surveys
Agents
Applicants
Neighbours
Officer
Staff C’llrs Amenity
Groups
Organisational - (ICT,
teams, headcounts etc.)

40. ‘customers’ part 1
(regular, application - specific)
• applicants (members of the public that
have made a planning application)
• agents (a professional person or company
making a planning application)
• neighbours (a person/organisation that
has commented on an application)
• officer case review (for the council to
assess how well it did)

41. How
• web-based, by email
• Each council gets it’s on toolkit
• surveys have common themes:
– how helpful?
–manage time well?
– use information well?
– clarity of decision?

42. survey results
Helpful
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
-0.5
-1
-1.5
-2
Use of time
Use of information
Clarity of decision
Applicant
Neighbour
Review
Application Ref: HA/FUL/4456/14

43. Customers – part 2
annual surveys
(planning more generally)
• councillors (what’s the community view, avoid the
political)
• amenity groups (representative views from
organised communities)
• staff (are we helping them to do a good job?)
• Head of service – how the service is set up
Beyond “things are different” to “this appears to be
why things are different”

44. Exercise 2
Task:
Design a ‘councillor survey’
Hints/tips:
• Ward councillors - communities
• 4/ 5 questions
• Avoid politics
• What can councillors tell those running
the service that others can’t?

45. 3. Practice
assessment Notes
a) Quality of planning Did we mediate well ?
b) Quality of
Has the development
development
met its objectives?

46. quality (of planning)
How do we collect data on quality of
planning?
• Policy
• Pre Application work
• Design Guides
• Building for Life
• BREEAM
• not much point in comparison

47. quality (of development)
How do we collect data on quality of
development?
• short term: go on site visits (with committee)
• longer term goal: link planning data with
completions data. Understand what actually
gets built and outcomes.

48. Bringing it all together
Annual Report
• The annual report process is a catalyst to bring
everything together and publish it
• We can help collect & collate, but it’s your
report. Your commentary. Your conclusions
about whether you are delivering “quality”
• We want it to become a “badge”. Over time.
• Combine data into a holistic framework.

49. PQF: better for management
• multi-layered views
• database is yours – climb inside the numbers
• focus on the important; no more expensive
‘blanket’ improvement projects
• improve, defend, protect
• evidence-based change
• culture shift: customer focused service alongside
timely decision making
• members?

50. what’s the commitment ?
• No £cost
• 4 days a year of your time
You get:
• quarterly, annual reports
• free customer survey system, free tools
• new focus for cost and vfm, investment and
resources

51. sign up
• To sign up: email
admin@qualityframework.net
• name of main contact and a sub
• a JPEG file of your council’s logo on a white
background
• the email address that you’d like the surveys
to be emailed from (this might be a person or
a generic email e.g. planning@council.gov.uk)
• Portfolio holder (optional)

52. thank you – QUESTIONS?
email martin.hutchings@local.gov.uk
web www.pas.gov.uk
phone 020 7664 3000

53. In comparison to benchmark
Benchmark Quality framework
You have to do it all Modular
Once per year Just start
Snapshot Ongoing & regular
Industrial strength
Low hassle
accounting
Internal management tool External badge
Councils only Councils, developers and
RTPI
Understand value for
money
Understand quality