Master Slides For EPIP Session

The Future of Environmental

Services, the Future of EPIPServices, the Future of EPIP

Friday 28th September 2007

Welcome & Introductions

Keith Lowe

Agenda

11.00 -11.05 Welcome and introductions Keith Lowe

11.05 -11.20 Achievements of the past year and group

discussion Keith Lowe

11.20 -11.50 The CAA and how the environment theme will 11.20 -11.50 The CAA and how the environment theme will

look Susan Bennett

11.50 - 12.20 Making better use of data to deliver Value for

Money (VfM) Susan Bennett

12.30 -12.30 Making better use of data to meet customer

needs Dominic Campbell

12.30 -13.15 Lunch

Agenda

13.15 -13.45 What it all means for performance improvement

in environmental services

Mick Lowe, LCS Limited

13.45 -14.30 Feedback from the EPIP review and group 13.45 -14.30 Feedback from the EPIP review and group

discussion

Dominic Campbell, LCS Limited

14.30-15.00 Future direction and possible new initiatives

Mick Lowe/All

15.00 End

What we aim to achieve

• Sharing the inspection and improvement agenda ahead of us and

how ‘comparing’ can assist

• What the Comprehensive Area Assessment looks like and its likely

impact upon the ‘environment’ portfolioimpact upon the ‘environment’ portfolio

• How you might make better use of available information about your

locality to ‘place shape’

• To explore an approach to ‘value for money’

• To hear what you said about the Partnership

• An opportunity to reflect on achievements

• To see if there is a future for EPIP and if so where should it focus

attention

How do we know we are providing VFM?

Achievements of the past year and group discussion

• Review of Street Lighting

• Review of Highways & Footways Maintenance

• Review of Parking

• Discussion on outputs

• 2005 2006 Performance Indicators

• Re-vamp of website

Comprehensive Area Assessment

(CAA)(CAA)

……. and Environment Services

Susan Bennett

Local Strategic Partnership

Sustainable Communities Strategy

Background

(SCS)

Three year LAA based on objectives in SCS

Targets for improvement

• Children & Young People

• Safer & Stronger Communities

• Healthier Communities and Older People

Four themes

• Economic Development and the Environment

Funding is no longer restricted to themes

- can be used across themes…..

New flexibility!

Will include up to 35 improvement targets drawn

from the national set of 200 PIs

Plus 17 Education and Early Years targets

New LAA’s …

Plus 17 Education and Early Years targets

And will be negotiated by LA’s & Partners

They will replace BVPIs

But…

Some ARE BVPIs……

What are they?

Provisional list in May 07 for environment included existing:BV99a –Traffic accidents

BVPI 102 – Bus patronage

BVPI 223 –Condition of principal roads

BVPI 224a – Condition of Classified RoadsBVPI 224a – Condition of Classified Roads

BVPI 100 – Overruns of works in the highway

BVPI 217 - % of pollution

BV 199 – Street cleanliness

BV 82d – Household waste per head

BV82a&b – Household waste recycled

Consultation of final list and definitions –

Nov 07

What are they?

And new ones:

Congestion

Prevention against animal disease

Progress towards a climate resilient local area

Flood managementFlood management

Air quality

Improved bio-diversity

Efficiency of use of water resource

CO2 reduction – carbon footprint of LA and reduction in community CO2

Customer satisfaction with regulatory services

Number of workplace health and safety incidents

Will be announced mid-late October 2007…..

With the Comprehensive Spending Review

New

200 PIs

Purpose?

“To deliver national priorities in a way which

ensures they meet the particular needs and concerns of local people”

Discretion

For LA’s and partners to:

Set additional targets for LAA

No reporting requirements

– other than local requirements

Good news? Or not?

Challenge

How to evidence improvement

and value for money with so few and value for money with so few

indicators?

By CAA and MAA –

Multi Area Agreements

7 work streams ongoing in Audit Commission

Regulation

7 work streams ongoing in Audit Commission

Consultation on new CAA framework -Nov 07

Consultation on definitions of 200 PIs - Nov 07

Final guidance on technical definitions - Jan 08

• From the consultation

document …

We know…

CAA will replace: And target inspection on CAA will replace:

CPA, JARs

Area Performance Assessments for Social Care

(APA’s)

And target inspection on an LSP basis on areas

most at risk

Changes….

• CAA begins in:

• Transitional year and final

• April 2009

• 2008/09

From

council assessment

to area

assessment

Changes….

• Transitional year and final

year of CPA is:• 2008/09 assessment

Minimal changes planned between 2007 and 2009

• Relevant to the quality of life of local people

• Relate to the area where people live and be about what matters for people to have a

CAA will be:

matters for people to have a decent quality of life

• Be forward looking and based on risk assessments

• Be delivered jointly by all regulators

Use of resources

Presentation

New CPA : the harder test

Corporate Assessment

• Ambition

• Prioritisation

• Capacity

• Performance Management

• Achievement

CPA Category

Use of

Resources

Financial

reporting,

Financial

management and

standing, internal • Achievement

Children

& Young

People

Social

Care

(adults)

Environment CultureHousing Benefits

standing, internal

control and VfM

Level 1 Level 2

Colour Coding Key

LA’s and their partners will have to

supply the evidence

Which will lead to risk assessment

This means…

Which will lead to risk assessment

And maybe…

Inspection

We need to plan for this now!

Risk based on… :

Resident & customer intelligence

Individual self assessments

LSP evaluation of the local area

Local scrutiny and other evidence

Inspections

Audit/Use of Resources

Including VFM

Performance information

Direction of travel

• How do we make sure the

information to do this is

available and usable?

• How do we ensure VFM is

• Across the LSP partners?

• Role of EPIP?

Challenges….

• How do we ensure VFM is

demonstrated given fewer

nationally comparable

PIs?

• Role of EPIP?

Do we…..

Keep

statutory data where

relevant?

Concentrate on

developing PIs with LSP’s?

But if every SCS has

different targets, how are we to compare?

Role of EPIP?

Your views

Role of EPIP?

Making better use of data to

deliver VfMdeliver VfM

Susan Bennett

VFM is…

• An important part of CPA

• Integral to making the best use of the Efficiency

agenda

• A key driver of service quality and choice

• Brings together finance, service delivery and

customer interface

• And will need to be demonstrated on a whole LSP

basis under CAA

What it costs

What you get for it

VFM

VFM

is a

comparative

relationship

Quality

Economy

Efficiency

Effectiveness

How do we know we are providing VFM?

• By knowing:

• What services cost

• What we get for the money

• Economy

• Efficiency

We judge VFM…

• And

• Finding out what our customers

• think of the quality

• Effectiveness (including Equity)

And comparing this with others

Nationally – All England - BVPIs, CIPFA

Regionally – Nearest Neighbours

Across Unitaries/ Locally – EPIP

So what have we got?

Data on the three E’s for many aspects

of Environment.

Waste example……

Economy

National:BV 86 – Cost of waste

collection 05-06

EPIP:None

CIPFA (Waste Collection

Efficiency

National:BV 84 – Kgs. of household

collection

BV88 – No of collections

missedVFM

Statistics): 04-05

Total net expenditure (Sheet

1a, Cell 24)APSE - PI01a (Cost of refuse

collection service per

household)APSE - PI01b (Cost of refuse

collection per head of

population)

missedBV91 - Percentage of

households resident in the

authority’s area served by a kerbside collection of

recyclables

EPIP: NoneLocal:% collection reliability

(Winchester)

Effectiveness

National:BV90(a) - Satisfaction with

waste collection

EPIP: None

APSE - PI17 Customer satisfaction surveys

Waste Collection

• Waste Disposal

• Street Cleaning

• Street Lighting

• Public Conveniences

Also for…

We could

populate VFM triangles data

• Public Conveniences

• Abandoned Vehicles

• Road Safety

• Footway Maintenance

• Highway Maintenance

• Grounds Maintenance

triangles data

on these topics

as part of our

routine reporting

EPIP example…

Economy

P45(a) – STREET

CLEANING - Net

spending per head of population

EPIP Bottom quartile

Efficiency

BV 199(a) to (c) –The

percentage of relevant land

and highways from which unacceptable levels of litter

(a), graffiti (b), fly-posting ( VFM?


P45(b) – STREET CLEANING - Net

spending per Kilometre

of highway

EPIP 3rd from Bottom

(a), graffiti (b), fly-posting (

c) are visible –

EPIP – Top quartile

Nationally, Unitaries – Top

quartile

Effectiveness – EPIP 2nd from Bottom. Unitaries, Nationally - Middle

BV89 - satisfaction with cleanliness.

VFM?

Street Cleaning

Ask questions about this data

Next step

What does it mean, in your context?

Is there a reasonable explanation for the VFM position?

If not, what are you going to do about it?

EPIP only

Economy

P45(a) – STREET

CLEANING - Net

spending per head of population


Efficiency




(a), graffiti (b), fly-posting ( EPIPEPIP Bottom quartile

P45(b) – STREET CLEANING - Net

spending per Kilometre

of highway

EPIP 3rd from Bottom


c) are visible –

EPIP – Top quartile

Effectiveness – EPIP 2nd from Bottom


VFM?Street

Cleaning

Nationally

Economy

No nationally

Efficiency





VFM?

comparable costs(a), graffiti (b), fly-posting (

c) are visible –

Unitaries, Nationally – Top

quartile

Effectiveness – Nationally, Unitaries - Middle


Nationally

Street

Cleaning ?

Waste Collection

EconomyBV 86 – Cost of waste

collection

EfficiencyBV 84(a) - EPIP, Unitaries –

Top quartile

Nationally - Middle

BV 84(b) - EPIP, Unitaries,

Nationally – Top quartileEPIP Middle quartile

Unitaries, Nationally -

Bottom

Nationally – Top quartile

BV91(a) –EPIP Bottom, Middle- Unitaries, Nationally

BV91(b) – EPIP 3rd Bottom

Middle – Unitaries, Nationally

Effectiveness – EPIP, Unitaries, Nationally - Middle

BV90(a) - Satisfaction with waste collection.

VFM?

Waste

EPIP only


collection

EfficiencyBV 84(a) - EPIP, Unitaries –

Top quartile

BV 84(b) - EPIP, Top quartile

BV91(a) –EPIP Bottom,

EPIP Middle quartile BV91(b) – EPIP 3rd Bottom

Effectiveness – EPIP Middle


VFM?

EPIP

Waste

Nationally


collection

EfficiencyBV 84(a) Unitaries – Top

quartile

Nationally - Middle

BV 84(b) Unitaries, Nationally

– Top quartileUnitaries, Nationally -

Bottom

– Top quartile

BV91(a) Middle - Unitaries, Nationally

BV91(b) Middle – Unitaries,

Nationally

Effectiveness – Unitaries, Nationally - Middle


VFM?

Waste

Audit Commission VFM

Data sets narrower

Value For Money tools for councils

http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/

Results in…

High costIs this VFM? Is this a

priority?

Street Cleaning

High performance

Low cost

Low performance

An efficient

service?Is this an agreed

non priority?

Cleaning

Waste

Evidence for your Annual VFM Assessment, Inspections, Peer Reviews and CAA

Information by which to baseline services and identify areas for major reviews

Use of VFM

major reviews

A basis for integrated financial and service planning

To draw up SLA’s, their targets and monitor effectiveness of service

Routine performance management with partners

• We need to develop VFM data in response to the

CAA framework

• We have much finance and output data

Future

• We have much finance and output data

• But few measures of effectiveness

• Agreeing ‘soft’ indicators will be crucial to

demonstrating impact and outcomes for the

community

Making better use of data to meet

customer needscustomer needs

Dominic Campbell

Outline

• The case for improving the data

• Two possible products/opportunities

– Local Futures

– Experian

• A proposal• A proposal

The case for improving the data [1]

• Current national and local policy direction:

– Choice and personalisation

– User focus

– Meeting diverse needs

– Value for money, targeted services

– Customer service

– Intelligence-led service provision– Intelligence-led service provision

• Policy led by reviews all highlighting the importance of data:

– Lyons (place shaping)

– Singh (integration and cohesion)

– Local area agreements (LAAs)

– Comprehensive Area Assessments (CAA) and risk-led intervention

– Review of sub-national economic development

The case for improving the data [2]

• Data recognised in EPIP review as the basis of everything

the partnership does but is currently not readily

accessible/useable for members (through the website)

• Effective and meaningful assessment of Value for Money

relies on high quality, relevant data

• Public services (EPIP included) need to improve their • Public services (EPIP included) need to improve their

measurement of impact, most notoriously bad at doing so

• BUT then key is translating analysis into action on the

ground. Data is useless on its own

Local Futures’ Local Knowledge

• Local Knowledge is a powerful web-based service for local

performance management and area-based strategy-making

• Drawing on over 1000 nationally available indicators, LK is web-

based service is available on annual subscription, for use across an

organisation. It provides an easy-to-use and shared evidence base,

for a range of research and policy applications.for a range of research and policy applications.

Current Local Futures subscribers

• Bracknell Forest

• Reading

• Slough

• Warrington

• West Berkshire

• Wokingham

Possibilities to work with other users (as well as EPIP non-users):

• Bath and NE Somerset

• Cherwell

• North Somerset

• Oxford City

• Oxfordshire County

• Windsor

SMART Observatory

Benefits:

- A platform for shared intelligence: allows partners to pool and share

information and knowledge

- A comprehensive evidence base: provides a resource for evidence-

led decision making and informed policy and strategy development

- A powerful performance management tool: provides a state-of-the-

art tool for managing and monitoring performance both within art tool for managing and monitoring performance both within

individual agencies and across partnerships, using locally defined

performance indicators

- Savings on research time and costs: provides access to a powerful

research capability, quickly and easily accessed from any PC allowing

immediate use in research and strategy development

SMART Observatories

Thames Gateway Knowledge Platform

Developed for the Thames Gateway London Partnership and sponsored by the

Department for Communities and Local Government, the Thames Gateway

Knowledge Platform is an on-line information service for the Thames Gateway and

its communities.

http://tglp.localknowledge.co.uk

DAWN

Dawn (Data About West Norfolk) developed by Kings Lynn and West Norfolk

Borough Council to support a range of partner-related activities. It supports the

work of the Local Strategic Partnership and is designed both to inform and monitor

local policies and to aid in the targeting of services.

http://dawn.localknowledge.co.uk

Experian Data Solutions

What is it?

• Experian’s data products enable detailed analysis of residents based

on census and consumer data

• Mosaic Public Sector covers the whole of the United Kingdom,

classifying every individual, household and postcode into one of 61

types and 11 groups

• Profiled by lifestyle not just demographic

• Different products: most prevalent – Mosaic Public Sector (on

resident population), but also daytime mosaic, benchmarking – LCS

negotiating to trial

• Can hang off other data systems/GIS such as Local Knowledge

Uses

• Targeting deprivation and tackling

inequality

• Benchmarking and performance

measurement - only by understanding

the socio-demographic composition of

a local area can performance be

measured fairly and realistic targets setmeasured fairly and realistic targets set

• Resource planning – target services by

need/predicted demand

• Communications strategies – target by

message and appropriate means e.g.

recycling campaign in LB Barnet

A proposal

• LCS to fully work up proposal for SMART Observatory

• As part of this, LCS to work with EPIP members to review current

set of PIs to ensure the local information (LPIs etc) potentially fed

into an observatory met needs around inputs, outputs and

outcomes/impact

• Will require corporate input and support – we need your help!• Will require corporate input and support – we need your help!

• No commitment until fully costed

EPIP Review:

Feedback and Next StepsFeedback and Next Steps

Dominic Campbell

Principal Consultant

Outline

• EPIP: the review

• EPIP: some history

• EPIP: terms of reference

• EPIP: consultation and the findings

– strengths– strengths

– issues

• EPIP: options appraisal

• EPIP: action planning

• EPIP: discussion

EPIP: the review

• Review of partnership to:

– Ensure it provides value for money

– Ensure it continues to perform a useful role

– Assess what has added most value in the past

– Survey the views of existing and past members of the partnership

– Assess whether there is an appetite for new members

• Review involved:

– Surveying members

– Looking at alternative practice in other improvement partnerships

– Assessing national policy developments to ensure relevance into the

future (e.g. CAA)

EPIP: some history

• LCS-led EPIP running now for 9 years

• Started as highways engineering benchmarking group

• Membership has fluctuated, starting with 5, peaking at 11 and now

9 member authorities

With aim to develop…With aim to develop…

“a partnership of up to 15 Local Authorities with similar

characteristics, such as the make up of the local population,

deprivation indices, type of authority etc… which will offer the

opportunity to learn, share and develop systems, practices and

processes to assist and enable service managers to offer customer

focused continuous improvement”

EPIP: terms of reference

• 4 meet ups per year

• 2-3 service reviews per year (over 15 now completed)

• Areas covered by EPIP include:

– Transport

– Highways

– Waste

– Streetscene

– Planning

– Environmental Health

– Trading Standards

• Benchmarking key in assessing and addressing issues relating to

value for money

EPIP: consultation and findings

• Survey sent to 13 officers in 9 local authorities, 8 responses

received

Headline findings

• Overall EPIP viewed as beneficial to organisations (all but one rating

it as 2 or 3 out of 6 with 1 as ‘very useful’)

• Strong appetite for more members of a similar type (i.e. unitaries)

with no upper limit on numbers

• Mixed review of widening remit to all environment block

• Idea of involving non-local authority organisations not popular

• EPIP could provide better value for money

• Fee increase viewed as acceptable only if members get more for

more (e.g. better website)

EPIP: strengths

• Service review are popular in the main and have led to examples of

positive outcomes, be it additional funding, driving improvement

work in street lighting and feeding business planning activity

• Meetings extremely popular as chance to share and learn (mostly

scoring 2 out of 6)

• Value for money – survey view mixed, but comparisons to other

environment/non-environment partnerships (although few directly environment/non-environment partnerships (although few directly

comparable, as either learning sets e.g. Shared Intelligence or mere

data collection on the whole e.g. APSE) price of EPIP is favourable

given the partnership receives a combination of all these services to

a degree

EPIP: issues [1]

• Reviews are too long and too in-depth leading to a lack of follow up

action in local authorities as a result. Most members would prefer

short snappy documents with pointers to best practice to follow up

on themselves (LCS as facilitator rather than trying to be expert in

the field)

• Website – rarely used (annually for BVPI data alone) and not hugely

useful, however perception of value for money would improve useful, however perception of value for money would improve

greatly if the website were improved through:

– User friendly data repository of up to date information

– Single source of all key national policy documentation

– Member discussion forum

– Regular update e-mail from LCS to outline what is new/has changed

EPIP: issues [2]

• Measurement and tracking of benefits and outcomes on the ground

attributable to EPIP is not captured in a systematic and consistent

way leaving it vulnerable

• Communications between LCS and members – lukewarm response

to effectiveness of communications outside of meetings with little

done to enable a sense of togetherness between EPIP members

• Awareness raising within local authorities – managers in • Awareness raising within local authorities – managers in

environment block very aware, related themes (e.g. housing) and

corporate centre far less so, local partner organisations not at all

• Not all members cooperate with EPIP (reviews/data collection),

often keen to support EPIP reviews directly relevant to them but

not supporting others

EPIP: options appraisal

1. Do nothing – remain as is

2. Look to expand EPIP model/way of working ‘as is’ to

include additional local authorities

3. Expand EPIP scope to cover entire Environment theme

with existing EPIP customer basewith existing EPIP customer base

4. Expand scope within Environment theme and seek to

expand number of authorities to those currently in EPIP

5. Wrap Up EPIP

EPIP: recommended approach

3. Expand scope to cover entire Environment theme with existing

EPIP members

– Broaden partnership to encompass all environment themed

services

– Consolidate current membership

– Rework meetings to cover cross-cutting themes at plenary – Rework meetings to cover cross-cutting themes at plenary

(annual/six monthly) supported by service-based sub-group

meetings as action learning (six monthly/quarterly)

– Resolve key underlying issues relating to exiting set up in

advance of EPIP marketing campaign to additional unitary

authorities (including website/technology support to

partnership – see last presentation)

EPIP: action planning

Immediate

• Improve the website as key document repository and as a

user/member community discussion forum

• Format and nature of service reviews to be revised (inc

move to VfM approach), after current car parking review

• Review performance indicators collected to ensure right • Review performance indicators collected to ensure right

mix of inputs, outputs and outcomes (including customer

satisfaction and impact measures)

• Improve LCS communications – quality and frequency

(newsletter/monthly update email)

EPIP: action planning

Longer term

• Improve the website as a data repository/analytical tool

(see next session)

• Marketing campaign to other unitary authorities (2008)

• Members to work with LCS to raise profile and cross-• Members to work with LCS to raise profile and cross-

working re EPIP at local level

• Move to one off annual payment in April to simplify

billing

EPIP: discussion

• Do you agree with this picture of EPIP?

• Is there anything that has been missed?

• What are your views on the option appraisal and • What are your views on the option appraisal and

recommended approach for EPIP as outlined above?

• Do you agree with the headline actions to improve the

partnership?

The Bigger Agenda to Dwell on!

• Comprehensive Spending Review

• Supplementary Business Rates

• More Affordable Housing• More Affordable Housing

– 240,000 new homes per annum in England

– Brownfield sites, eco-towns and villages

– Local Authority Building houses

– New Housing Agency focusing on surplus public land

– Planning Policy Statement Four – to speed up process

– Planning Gain Bill to change the current arrangements

– Threat to the current ‘Merton’ concept

The Bigger Agenda to Dwell on!

• Multi Area and Local Area Agreements

• Participatory Budgeting

• Local Transport Bill• Local Transport Bill

– Regulate Buses (but what about the commissioners!)

– Regeneration Powers

– Liveability Policies

• Concessionary Fares and the cost implications

• Local Government Reorganisation

• Choice and Personalisation

Master Slides For EPIP Session

Technology

Transcript of Master Slides For EPIP Session