To report performance for the period April-December 2009-10 against the Council’s key indicators and associated projects and programmes in its Annual Operating Statement 2009-10.

The Committee considered performance for the period April-December 2009-10 against the Council’s key indicators and associated projects and programmes in its Annual Operating Statement 2009-10.

The report to Cabinet on 18 February 2010 was appended.

The Corporate Policy and Research Manager (CPRM) presented the report, focusing on the highlights as set out at paragraphs 7-8 of the report.  He highlighted the following additional information:

·         Whilst performance in relation to target NI117, 16-18 year olds not in education, employment or training (NEET) was behind target it should be noted that, despite the recession, performance had slightly improved compared with the previous year and was better than both regionally and nationally.

·         That it appeared that performance against target NI132 (timeliness for social care assessments) may well now be achieved, However target NI133 (timeliness of social care packages) would not be met, staff resources having had to be diverted to the  safeguarding of vulnerable people in some residential homes.

·         In relation to both Children’s Services and Adult Social Care it should be noted that progress was being achieved at the same time as measures were having to be taken to control expenditure to reduce projected overspending.

·         It was now appeared likely that the target for NI156 (Households in temporary accommodation) would be achieved.

·         Despite an increase in the use of the county’s libraries, performance against the wider measure NI9, which included a wider range of library services was significantly behind target.

·         Performance against the Local Area Agreement (LAA) indicators was improving overall and action plans were now in place and being implemented for all indicators.

In the course of discussion the following principal points were made:

·         A concern was reiterated that, further to the Committee’s consideration of the Medium Term Financial Strategy (MTFS) in February 2010 the pages in the report listed a number of significant projects, for example the relocation of Hereford Library and the extension of the refurbishment of the City Centre, but stated no funding was identified.  If there was no funding it seemed misleading to list the projects as commitments in the way that they were.

The Director of Resources commented that the approach being followed was consistent with that of other local authorities.  It provided an indication of where the Council would allocate resources if they were to become available.

·         In response to a query about the thoroughness of assessments undertaken in  relation to NI 59 (initial assessments for children’s social care carried out within seven working days of referral), the CPRM reported that this area had received the closest attention by Children’s Services and was rigorously and regularly scrutinised by OFSTED, which had commented favourably on the arrangements in its latest annual assessment.

·         Members reiterated concern as to whether enough was being done to improve future performance in respect of the measures of educational achievement, particularly as regards the proportion of pupils achieving 5 good GCSE passes, including English and Maths,  set out at page 26 of the agenda.  It was noted that the Strategic Monitoring Committee had referred the issue to the Children’s Services Scrutiny Committee in December 2009 and it was requested that the Children’s Services Scrutiny Committee’s response be reported back to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

·         In response to a suggestion that it could be difficult for members of the public to understand from the report the difference between direction of travel, which was assessed against performance at the same point of the previous year, and changes since the previous quarter’s report, the CPRM drew attention to the key to the judgements in the report in Appendix 1. He said he would consider how best to make the reports clearer in this respect.     

·         It was suggested that the judgement that performance in relation to reducing carbon emissions was on track presented a more favourable assessment than that which would be reported to the Environment Scrutiny Committee on 22 March.  The CPRM said that, pending the reporting of data on levels of carbon emissions, the judgement in the integrated corporate performance report was based on performance against the action plan intended to secure reductions.  The new performance management system, which would operate from April, was designed to provide a more accurate means of tracking progress, including highlighting where information or commentary had not been updated.

·         In response to a concern that a number of the targets were measuring processes and the development of policies  rather than the achievement of what mattered to the public, the CPRM said that most targets in the corporate plan were – and would continue to be - in terms of improvements that would benefit people and communities. 

·         It was observed that the commentary on performance against the target for the number of vacant posts as a proportion of the approved establishment indicated that work was ongoing to confirm the establishment.  The CPRM acknowledged the importance of establishing this baseline and said that he was aware efforts were being made to bring the necessary validating work to a conclusion. 

·         It was noted that the Customer Insight Unit had been established and would begin producing analyses and reports from April 2010.

RESOLVED

That    (a)        the report and points raised by the Committee be noted;

(b)       the Children’s Services Scrutiny Committee’s consideration of performance against a range of education attainment targets should be reported back to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.