Comprehensive Area Assessment
Southend Together 27 April 2009
Laurie FentimenPerformance Specialist, Audit Commission
Comprehensive Area Assessment - what will it do?
CAA is about places and people.
CAA will give people a snapshot of life in their local area each year.
CAA will help local services improve quality of life in their area.
CAA will provide an independent view of whether people are getting value for money from their local services.
Comprehensive Area Assessment - what and who?
• Six inspectorates working together
• Organisational and area assessments
• Focussed on local priorities and issues
• Focussed on outcomes
• Annual reporting, continuous process
Years of Potential Life Lost
Years of Potential Life Lost - Southend
Comparison within Southend
Compared to all Essex
Comprehensive Area Assessment
– How well do local priorities express community needs and aspirations?
– How well are the outcomes and improvements needed being delivered?
• 10 areas for exploration• To include local issues
– What are the prospects for future improvements?
Area Assessment – Question1
How well do local priorities express community needs and aspirations?
– Understanding diverse communities
– Engagement and empowerment, including those harder to hear
– Understanding local inequality
– Are LAA and SCS appropriate and ambitious enough?
Area Assessment – Question 2How well are the outcomes and improvements
needed being delivered?– Progress against LAA and SCS and key national priorities– Focus on people in vulnerable circumstances and where
inequality is greatest– Outcomes might cover, according to local priorities:
• How safe is this area?• How healthy and well supported are people?• How well kept is the area?• How environmentally sustainable is the area?• How strong is the local economy?• How strong and cohesive are local communities? • How well is inequality being addressed?• How well is housing need met?• How well are families supported?• How good is the wellbeing of children and young
people?
Area Assessment – Question 3What are the prospects for future improvement?
– Drawing on questions 1 and 2 – this is the key question on which we make judgements
– Where necessary, look at capacity and capability to inform judgement on sustainable improvement
– Red flag – current arrangements are inadequate to deliver necessary improvement. More or different action needed – with recommendations
– Significant impact if not addressed
– Green flag – promising innovation or successful practice – promote learning (NOT a formal judgement)
Northly District Council
See a more detailed report or find out about Northly
Summary
Northly District Council performs adequately.
Northly uses public money adequately to deliver its priorities. The cost of some services is higher than for similar services at other councils. More action is needed to improve value for money. This year Northly has made savings on energy use and staff costs. Its council tax increase is the lowest in ten years. Priorities in Northly include increasing recycling, improving housing and having a community that get on well together. On these issues they are not improving as quickly as similar councils. The council is starting to work with local people to set priorities and develop services. But people are not kept informed about progress or what happens as a result of their input.
The council is reducing anti-social behaviour. It looks after public places well
Overall Northly District Council performs adequately
Managing performance
2 out of 4
Value for money2 out of 4
About CAA Methodology News Search Contact us / provide feedbackNational reports
Search for another area
Barshire
Barshire “at a glance”
Inspections and performance of other local services
Quality of life in Barshire - the area assessment in detail
Download the full report
Compare with similar areas
Performance data
How are your local services performing?
Contact your local public services
Southend – Identified issues
• Health Inequalities– Including mental health and suicides
• Educational attainment and skills • Economic regeneration and recession• Cohesive community (including safer and
stronger)
Hospital Admissions for Mental Health problems
Hospital admissions: mental health problems
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
South
end
Basild
on
Harlo
w
Castle
Poi
nt
Thurro
ck
Rochf
ord
Eppin
g For
est
Chelm
sfor
d
Uttles
ford
Brain
tree
Colch
este
r
Tend
ring
Mal
don
Brent
wood
pe
r 1
00
,00
0 p
op
ula
tio
n
Essex average
Source: Dr Foster MHAT, 2005-06
Obesity estimates - Adults
Modelled estimates of health and lifestlye 2003-5
18
20
22
24
26
28
Harlow
Tendrin
g
Thurro
ck
Castle
Point
Basild
on
Braint
ree
Colcheste
r
Mald
on
Rochfo
rd
South
end
Epping
For
est
Chelmsfo
rd
Uttles
ford
Brentw
ood
ob
esit
y es
tim
ate
(% a
du
lts
16+
)
England average
ONS: NeSS2007
Percentage of children living in poverty, 2007
0.0
5.0
10.0
15.0
20.0
25.0
30.0
Uttl
esfo
rd
Bre
ntw
ood
Roc
hfor
d
Che
lmsf
ord
Mal
don
Bra
intr
ee
Cas
tle P
oint
Epp
ing
For
est
Col
ches
ter
Thu
rroc
k
Ten
drin
g
Bas
ildon
Sou
then
d
Har
low
%
ENGLAND PAN- ESSEX
Source: IDACI scores
Qualification level of working aged adults (16 – 74)
Qualification Level of Working Aged Adults (Age 16-74)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Uttlesford
Chelmsford
Brentwood
Colchester
Maldon
Braintree
Rochford
Epping Forest
Southend-on-Sea
Harlow
Basildon
Castle Point
Thurrock
Tendring
England
East of England
Are
as
Percent
No qualifications Level 1 qualifications Level 2 qualifications
Level 3 qualifications Level 4 / 5 qualifications Other qualifications: Level unknown
Number of accepted homeless
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
Harlow
Colch
este
r
Brain
tree
Thur
rock
Maldo
n
Eppi
ng For
est
Basild
on
Brent
wood
Tend
ring
Chelm
sfor
d
Sout
hend
Uttles
ford
Roch
ford
Castle
Point
Nu
mb
er
acc
ep
ted
h
om
ele
ss
Source: DCLG 2005-06
Regional average
Alcohol related crimes in 2007
Alcohol-related crime rates 2007
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Harlo
w
Thurro
ck
South
end
Basild
on
Eppin
g For
est
Colch
este
r
Brent
wood
Tend
ring
Chelm
sfor
d
Brain
tree
Castle
Poi
nt
Mal
don
Uttlesf
ord
Rochf
ord
rec
ord
ed
cri
me
/ 1
,00
0 p
op
ula
tio
n
Regional average
Source: www.nwph.net
Timeline
• April / May – information gathering– Meet with partner regulators– Early tagging
• June – interviews / fieldwork– Ongoing discussion with partners
• July – fieldwork / drafting– Sharing tags
• August – finalising information• September – finalise reports
– Mid September – information cut off
• 26th November - Publication
Top Related