Performance Management Follow-up Report

Transcription

1 Cabinet Part 1 12 December 2006 Item No. 03 Subject Auditor s report: Performance Management Follow-up Report Purpose Author Ward Summary To report to Cabinet the recommendations set out in the Auditor s follow-up report on the Council s Performance Management arrangements Director (Performance) All A follow-up report has been prepared by the Council s external auditor further to a review undertaken in November 2005 of the Council s performance management arrangements. This was reported to Cabinet at its February 2006 meeting. The present report presents an assessment of the progress made in relation to the previous recommendations, and how the overall performance management programme is being taken forward in light of national developments such as the performance measurement framework and the revised Wales Programme for Improvement (WPI) guidance. The original report presented a very positive view of the Council s approach to performance reporting and the work that had been undertaken to implement an electronic performance management tool (pbviews) across the whole organisation. The follow up report judges the Authority has made excellent progress during the intervening period. This progress has been made both corporately and at service level as demonstrated in the 2006/7 Improvement Plan and the fact that the Authority has made better progress against its policy agreement targets than any other local authority in Wales. The auditor points out the continuing need for vigilance with regard to the burden of implementation of the national performance measurement framework and makes a number of further suggestions that build on the actions taken. These include, continued development of automated data transfer, common formatting, and development of a refined corporate balanced scorecard that takes account of the wider policy agenda (Beecham, Community Strategy etc). Proposal The Cabinet is requested to: (a) Note the auditor s report detailing the progress made against the recommendations set out in his original report (Auditor s report Appendix 1).

2 (b) Re-confirm that managing performance across the Authority and driving improvements remains a core priority of the Council. Contact Action by Timetable Policy & Performance Manager sarah.hopkins@newport.gov.uk Policy & Performance Manager sarah.hopkins@newport.gov.uk Immediate

3 Background 1 Auditor s Follow-up Report: Performance Management 1.1 As part of the work being jointly undertaken by the Council and its regulators, a review of the organisation s performance management arrangements was undertaken in November 2005 to assess: (a) (b) (c) how data is captured, assessed, and used to inform policy the technical dimensions of the performance management system pbviews the cultural impact of embedding performance management within the organisation, including employee and member training 1.2 Arising from this review the auditor identified a number of recommendations for action relating to technical aspects of implementation, resource/capacity issues, and the critical importance of embedding performance management techniques and disciplines across the organisation at both a strategic and operational level. 1.3 A subsequent follow-up review has now been completed (report at Appendix 1 refers) that reports on the progress made by the Authority in addressing the recommendations of the original review. As mentioned in the summary, the follow-up report presents a very favourable view of the Authority s approach to implementation and practical use of the electronic system, and of the work that has been done to instil a performance culture within the Council. The auditor acknowledges that initial reservations regarding capacity and the ability to maintain a high level of commitment across services have not been realised in practice. Good progress continues to be made with performance issues remaining of the highest priority and inextricably linked with other key corporate programmes. 1.4 The substance of the Auditor s report will also be included within the Relationship Manager s Annual Letter due in the New Year. Options Considered/Available (a) (b) To not accept the auditor s report. To accept the auditor s report. Preferred choice and reasons The preferred choice is (b). In undertaking the review of performance management arrangements, the auditor has worked with the Policy and Performance Team and senior management in order to identify the issues and potential solutions to ensure ongoing implementation and improvement. The report reflects this work. Sustainability and Environmental Issues There are no direct sustainability issues arising from this report Equalities Impact There are no direct equalities issues arising from this report Crime Prevention Impact There are no direct crime prevention issues arising from this report

4 Comments of Monitoring Officer There are no legal implications in the report Comments of Chief Financial Officer There are no financial consequences arising directly from this report. Comments of Head of Human Resources and Policy I welcome the auditor s views expressed in this report, particularly with regard to the fact that the implementation and project management of the performance management system continues to be successful and considered a key programme affecting the wider corporate agenda. SH MyFiles/Cabinet reports 2006/PM Follow-up report Deloitte Dec06

5 Newport City Council Performance Management Follow-up Report 12 th December 2006

6 Contents 1. Executive Summary 1 2. Progress against first Action Plan at end October Responsibility statement 9

7 1. Executive Summary Executive Summary Audit Requirements In autumn 2005, under our powers as appointed auditors to Newport City Council (NCC), we reviewed NCC s performance reporting arrangements. Our report to Council was formally published in February The review presented a very favourable view of the performance reporting arrangements being developed. We concluded that NCC had laid a solid foundation for performance reporting, had commissioned an excellent reporting tool (pbviews) and had made good early progress with its implementation. We had two concerns: 1. We were uncertain about the likely strength and consistency of future commitment across service areas, and, because of this, considered that the probable level of future corporate involvement in checking data quality and chasing progress may have been under-estimated. 2. We were not confident at the time that the numerical strength of the central performance team would be sufficient to handle all the practical implementation problems and development issues that could emerge over the next 12 months. Our first report presented our findings in some detail, and concluded with an Action Plan incorporating seven recommendations. This report reproduces that plan, and documents the progress made against each recommendation. The overall conclusion from this follow-up review is that NCC has continued to make strong and purposeful progress. The pbviews system is being widely used and is proving its worth. Our concern about the potential variation in engagement by services has proved largely unfounded. The impression we now have is one of good service support and acceptance. The appointment of two new staff has enabled pbviews expertise and workload to be shared. Using pbviews, NCC was able to demonstrate that it has made better progress on its 22 policy agreements than any other local authority in Wales. The pbviews reporting system is accessible on the NCC intranet, and there are plans to allow internet access from 2007/08. If pbviews is to continue to function successfully, the corporate team needs to retain its commitment to simplicity. In this respect there is one potential issue which could undermine the good work done so far - the requirement to respond to any further data requirements stipulated by the Local Government Data Unit (LGDU). NCC must be vigilant to ensure that this, and any other complicating factors which emerge over the next year, do not distract the development team from the principal objective of properly embedding pbviews and performance management values so that the authority can better prioritise its own work, motivate its staff and, most importantly of all, achieve its service goals. 1

8 2. Progress against first Action Plan at end October 2006 The contents of this report are based on evidence collected in October 2006 from observing pbviews in operation and through discussions with: three staff in the corporate team with responsibility for policy development and performance reporting - Sarah Hopkins, Lucy Jackson and Huw Williams; the Director with overall responsibility for performance monitoring Graham Bingham; and a data administrator working within the finance service Chris Woods. We are aware that the performance reporting system known as pbviews is in the process of being rebranded, and that in future it will increasingly be known as perform. For reporting simplicity, because our original report referred to the software as pbviews we will continue to use that term in this report. Rec No. Recommendation Priority Management response Responsible Officer Action by (Date) 1 Once pbviews is embedded, the development team should explore any realistic options to extend performance comparisons beyond Wales. Low The Policy & Performance team is engaged in exploratory discussions with other Welsh local authorities to identify a potential suite of BV indicators (England) that could be usefully compared with Welsh NAWPIs. Policy & Perf. Manager/ Lead Officer (Perf. Man)/ Policy Officer December 2006/January 2007 Progress made No progress yet NCC recognises that the value of comparison within Wales is somewhat limited, but has compared performance with Cardiff and Swansea the other two major urban authorities. It has not yet started to explore in detail other options. While some thought has been given to potential comparisons with authorities with similar urban and demographic characteristics in England, we suggest that opportunities to compare with authorities in Scotland should not be ruled out. On a more selective scale, opportunities could also be taken to make performance comparisons where relevant with councils in Ireland and elsewhere in Europe. 2

9 Rec No. Recommendation Priority Management response Responsible Officer Action by (Date) 2 Further formal consideration of the advantages and disadvantages of automated data transfer should be started in spring Low Automated data transfer and system integration to minimise the manual input required to service pbviews is included in the implementation plan. Policy & Perf. Manager/ Lead Officer (Perf. Man) Investigation and scoping to commence April 2006 Progress made Preliminary steps taken. In our first report we urged caution in progressing electronic data transfer. It remains recognised, however, that minimising manual input saves time and in the long run supports increased data accuracy. Preliminary steps have therefore been taken in advance of the readiness of suitable data feeding systems. The need to automate data feeds will be necessary with the introduction of a new national (Welsh) local government data reporting system. It will be a requirement to submit national performance indicators to the Local Government Data Unit on this system from June We understand that NCC is one of just six local authorities in Wales with a performance management reporting system currently capable of providing electronic feed. While we consider the timetable for the introduction and development of the central system to be ambitious, it is important that NCC is capable of feeding its data electronically to the central system when it is asked to do so. In the meantime, NCC should now also start to explore the merits of, and pilot, automated data input to pbviews from other NCC feeder systems. The development team is currently discussing linking pbviews to Trent NCC s new HR/payroll system to gather staff absence data. It is likely that this feed will be in place by the end of 2006/07. If this is achieved it will pave the way for a link to the LGDU's national system in summer

10 Rec No. Recommendation Priority Management response Responsible Officer Action by (Date) 3 The development team should try to ensure, as far as is reasonable, that there is common formatting of performance information in each of the service areas Medium The system build phase of pbviews has included common formatting, as far as possible, to assist comparison. Guidance issued corporately on the format of service plans and balanced scorecards will assist this process. Director (Perf) / Policy & Perf Manager / Policy Officer Guidance March 2006 Common formatting ongoing Progress made Good progress The Team has set clear parameters within which service areas have freedom to operate. Common terminology is emerging: for example, target and previous year have the same meaning across all services areas. The same performance tolerances and colour coding is also used: i.e. amber always means performing in the range 85% of target performance to target performance. Directionality is also fixed green always means good, whether the measure of good is a high score e.g. waste recycling rates, or a low score e.g. staff absence rates. Within these parameters, services have more latitude with labelling, to develop local indicators and to decide who can input and edit data and see the performance outputs. In addition, work is currently underway to pilot within the finance service area devolving some system administration functions, with the objective of allowing greater service discretion within agreed corporate parameters. 4

11 Rec No. Recommendation Priority Management response Responsible Officer Action by (Date) 4 The team should consider how to include local performance indicators within the general performance reporting framework. Medium Local performance indicators and indicators to monitor progress against the Community Strategy have been developed and implemented via each Balanced Scorecard. Further work to be scheduled pending outcome of WAG consultation on new core set indicators and potential impact on workload. Policy & Perf. Manager Heads of Service September 2006 Progress made Good progress Local performance measures have been incorporated into all service areas balanced scorecards. Work is also planned to build a second series of local measures into a second view of pbviews (these are referred to as local, local). Whereas the established set of local indicators form part of service areas balanced scorecards, the second set (the local locals) is aimed at providing day-to-day management information for service managers and is unlikely to be shared more widely. The requirement for NCC to submit large amounts of new data to the Local Government Data Unit has probably distracted attention from focusing on local data primarily for use within NCC. However, NCC has carefully considered each new measure and included those which are considered useful within the balanced scorecards. The remainder will be included within the second view of the system. The magnitude of the new LGDU requirement varies from service to service children and family services has been one of the services most affected. This service is required to monitor and report on 5 statutory indicators and chooses to report on a further 10 core indicators. The LGDU suggested reporting was needed on a further 45 indicators; NCC considers that 25 of these are useful and worthwhile, but is less happy in collecting and monitoring information for the remaining 20. Several of these indicators relate more to inspection requirements (for example checking that records are properly kept) than strictly to performance measurement. This extra requirement was expected at the time of the first review, and NCC has been active in challenging why it should be required to collect data above and beyond that which is needed for statutory reporting. It has been understandably difficult for the corporate information team to justify to service areas why they need to collect, assemble and check some of this additional data. 5

12 Rec No. Recommendation Priority Management response Responsible Officer Action by (Date) 5 The development team should work through the golden web to check and map the links between service performance and each of the corporate priorities. High Since pbviews was procured further work has been undertaken to ensure that service outcomes reflect corporate priorities and those set out in the Community Strategy. Policy & Perf. Manager Heads of Service Commence April 2006 Re: service plans for 2006/07 This has been a medium priority to date and will continue to be developed scheduled for ongoing review via the service planning process and training on target setting and performance review. Progress made Good progress. Senior Management Team is aware and supportive of the importance of pbviews in monitoring service performance. The golden thread (or web) is becoming better understood, as pbviews is being formally used at service planning meetings to inform service plans and to help set service targets. Services are being encouraged to use commentary boxes to explain performance particularly red performance and also to provide a wider general understanding of the service area in question. It is expected, and it will be encouraged, that the use of commentary boxes will become an increasingly standard feature of pbviews. The emerging national policy agenda, including recommendations from Beecham and the revised performance measurement framework, is leading NCC to consider a more strategic balanced scorecard for the whole organisation which includes various community strategy measures. It is particularly notable and impressive that senior officers and members are able to access and act upon continuously updated NCC performance data through wireless-enabled laptop computers although it is also correctly recognised within the corporate team that this could encourage unwanted and inappropriate micro-management! The performance reporting system is already accessible on the intranet, and there are plans to have high level pbviews output accessible on the internet sometime in 2007/08. 6

13 Rec No. Recommendation Priority Management response Responsible Officer Action by (Date) 6 Funding should be found for a relatively junior post (probably at SO1 grade and full time or near full time) to cover the general systems administration function next year when full rollout is expected. High Additional corporate resources have been identified report to CM Resources (January 2006 refers). Policy & Perf. Manager January 2006 Progress made Good progress. Hannah Longford was appointed from Monmouthshire CC in May Hannah has an economics and accountancy background, and is working well with service data co-ordinators on data quality issues and system administration and housekeeping. 7

14 Rec No. Recommendation Priority Management response Responsible Officer Action by (Date) 7 Funding should be found for a more senior post to lead the training effort, to liaise with senior staff in service areas, to maintain a non-technical awareness of the links between computer systems, to support the Performance Board, and to play a prominent part in external liaison High Additional corporate resources have been identified report to CM Resources (January 2006 refers). The task list shown at Part 1 Executive Summary of the Auditor s report indicates the scope of the work programme required to ensure ongoing implementation and development. Policy & Perf. Manager January 2006 Progress made Good progress. Lucy Jackson was appointed internally from within the Policy section in May 2006 and has taken on many of the tasks previously undertaken by Tracy McKim (who has now returned from her secondment). Lucy chairs the pbviews project group which meets every 6 to 8 weeks and is effectively the project management group for pbviews. In addition to the likely functions for this senior role specified in our first report, Lucy is clear that her role includes more than support of pbviews; for example it has extended into engagement with Internal Audit on performance indicators and general statistical analysis, supporting the Performance Board (a new sub-committee of Cabinet), attending Service Management Teams as required and securing ongoing support for the development of the pbviews project. It is important that training efforts are maintained to ensure that encouragement and support is generally fostered amongst elected Members. Above all, Lucy s most important challenge is to make pbviews part of the day-to-day governance and management processes in NCC. 8

15 3. Responsibility statement Our review work has been performed in accordance with the Wales Audit Office s Audit Code of Practice. The limitations of our work and the respective responsibilities of auditors and the Audited Body in respect of the work are set out in the "Statement of Responsibilities of Auditors and of Audited Bodies". The matters raised in this report are those that came to our attention during the review. However, we would emphasise that our review should not be relied on to detect all errors and weaknesses that might exist. You should assess our recommendations for improvement for their full implications before they are implemented. Our comments have been prepared for your private use. Please do not quote or refer to its contents, in whole or in part, to any third party without our prior written consent. We accept no responsibility to any third party, as our report has not been prepared and is not intended for any other purpose. Deloitte & Touche LLP Chartered Accountants Cardiff December

16 Deloitte & Touche LLP is a limited liability partnership registered in England and Wales with registered number OC A list of members names is available for inspection at Stonecutter Court, 1 Stonecutter Street, London EC4A 4TR, United Kingdom, the firm s principal place of business and registered office. Tel: +44 (0) Fax: +44 (0) Deloitte & Touche LLP is a member firm of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu is a Swiss Verein (association), and, as such, neither Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu nor any of its member firms has any liability for each other s acts or omissions. Each member firm is a separate and independent legal entity operating under the names Deloitte, Deloitte & Touche, Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, or other, related names. The services described herein are provided by the member firms and not by the Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu Verein. Deloitte & Touche LLP is authorised and regulated by the Financial Services Authority Member of Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu