Vaue For Money in pubic sector corporate services A joint project by the UK Pubic Sector Audit Agencies
N I A O Northern Ireand Audit Office
vfm in pubic sector corporate services 1 Joint foreword by audit agency heads A key strategic roe of our agencies is to support vaue for money in government. We are therefore deighted to pubish these indicator sets which are the resuts of this joint project. The use of good quaity information for making decisions, managing performance and demonstrating good vaue for money for the taxpayer is a vita part of the work of pubic sector organisations. As auditors of pubic sector organisations, encouraging such use is an important shared aim. The purpose of this project has been to hep organisations right across the pubic sector to understand, compare and demonstrate the vaue for money performance of their corporate services without adding to the information burden paced by reguatory bodies on pubic sector organisations. We are gratefu for the work by KPMG and the contributions made by many organisations, incuding centra government departments, oca service providers across Engand, Scotand, Northern Ireand and Waes, and by their representative associations. These have ensured that the indicator set wi be genuiney vauabe for managing and understanding the performance and vaue for money of their Human Resources, Finance, Information and Communications Technoogy, Procurement and Estates functions. Indeed, a significant number of organisations that have been invoved in the project are aready using the indicators. Our organisations work cosey together on many issues, athough much of this cooperation is not immediatey visibe. It is therefore a particuar peasure to be abe to pubish together the resuts of a project that we have successfuy pursued as a joint venture, which we beieve wi enabe pubic sector organisations to get better vaue for money from their corporate services. Pubishing the indicators is very much a first step. Whie they are entirey vountary we wi encourage the bodies that we audit to make appropriate use of them. We wi aso encourage the estabishment of benchmarking services and further deveop the indicator sets, increasing their vaue to the organisations using them. We hope that you wi find the indicators usefu for assessing how far you have deveoped the performance of your corporate services, compared against best practice and the performance of others. Sir John Bourn, Comptroer and Auditor Genera Jeremy Coman, Auditor Genera for Waes John Dowde, Comptroer and Auditor Genera for Northern Ireand Robert Back, Auditor Genera for Scotand Steve Bundred, Chief Executive, Audit Commission
vfm in pubic sector corporate services Key point summary The UK s pubic sector audit agencies have worked together to deveop indicator sets for measuring the vaue for money performance of five core functions: finance, human resources, information and communication technoogy, estates management and procurement. The indicators have been designed for use by senior managers across the pubic sector to hep them monitor and improve the vaue for money performance in their organisations corporate services. These have been identified by the Government as a priority area for securing efficiency improvements and reeasing resources for use in deivering front-ine services. The wider focus on vaue for money rather than efficiency aone refects the audit agencies concern to see pubic sector organisations improve the effectiveness and professionaism of corporate services functions, as we as their efficiency. This wi aso aid decisions on shared services initiatives. Use of the indicator sets is to be vountary, with individua organisations deciding whether or not they woud add vaue to their own performance management systems, benchmarking activities and improvement pans. This refects a shared commitment by the audit agencies to improve the quaity of performance information used by pubic sector bodies, whie avoiding any additions to their information burden. The scope of the indicator sets is not comprehensive but focuses instead on those aspects that are beieved to be key for vaue for money performance in the five corporate services functions. The indicators have been extensivey road-tested: some 100 organisations across Engand, Scotand and Waes have been invoved in their deveopment, incuding over 30 piot sites drawn from centra government, oca government, the NHS, fire and poice sectors. We wi continue to deveop the indicator sets to increase their vaue to the organisations using them. The indicators have been designed to ensure that a those who choose to gather the data wi be abe not ony to assess their own vaue for money performance but aso compare their resuts against other pubic sector organisations esewhere in the UK. We beieve that this wi be of substantia benefit to many chief executives and senior management teams. One third party provider aready has pans to aunch a benchmarking service using the indicators. More information on this wi be avaiabe shorty. Definitions for the indicators are aso freey avaiabe on the Pubic Audit Forum website (www.pubic-audit-forum.gov.uk) for any organisation that wishes individuay to use them.
vfm in pubic sector corporate services 3 Section 1: Origins of the project 1.1 The Audit Commission, Audit Scotand 1, Nationa Audit Office, Northern Ireand Audit Office and Waes Audit Office the UK s pubic sector audit agencies share the task of assessing the vaue for money secured in the use of taxpayers money to provide pubic services, and the aim of encouraging improvement as a resut. 1.4 Organisations across the UK pubic sector are now seeking to make significant efficiency improvements in their corporate and support functions, for exampe: Engish oca authorities panned to secure efficiency gains of 138 miion in corporate services and a further 75 miion in procurement in 2006-07 1.2 Since 2004, when the governmentcommissioned review of pubic sector efficiency ed by Sir Peter Gershon was pubished, there has been a spotight on the efficiency of corporate services within pubic sector organisations. Simiar exercises have taken pace in Scotand (the Efficient Government initiative), in Waes (where securing efficiency gains is part of the Making the Connections agenda) and in Northern Ireand (where targets have been set for improvements in pubic sector efficiency). Corporate services are set to continue to be a focus of attention in the pubic sector; HM Treasury, for exampe, has said that in the forthcoming Comprehensive Spending Review, centra government departments wi be required to find savings of 5 per cent each year from their administration budgets. 1.3 The UK pubic sector audit agencies share the Government s view that there is potentia for significant efficiency savings in the provision of corporate services across the pubic sector in Engand, Scotand, Northern Ireand and Waes, enabing more resources to be channeed into front ine services. Furthermore, we beieve that corporate services make a critica contribution to the wider vaue for money performance of pubic sector organisations. In Scotand, current projects anticipate efficiencies in corporate services. Better procurement across the Scottish pubic sector is expected to generate recurring savings of 153 miion in 2006/07 and 213 miion in 2007/08. The Wesh Assemby Government has set out in Making the Connections: Deivering Better Services for Waes a target across the whoe pubic sector of achieving 120 miion of vaue for money improvements through better procurement by 2008, with the possibiity of more by 2010 ; and a target of achieving up to 120miion of vaue for money gains by improving and sharing support functions across the whoe pubic sector by 2010. The Northern Ireand Civi Service has embarked on a major reform programme which wi introduce shared services across a wide range of functions such as human resources, accounting, office accommodation, IT and advertising, and the pubic sector has a target to deiver vaue for money procurement gains of 250 miion in the 3 years to 31 March 2008. 1 In Scotand, the Accounts Commission is responsibe for the audit of oca authorities and the Auditor Genera is responsibe for the audit of most other pubic bodies. Audit Scotand s roe is to provide the Accounts Commission and the Auditor Genera with the services they need to carry out their duties.
4 vfm in pubic sector corporate services 1.5 This project arose out of discussions between the audit agencies about a shared concern that better measurement systems are needed for monitoring and demonstrating the efficiency and effectiveness of corporate services in the pubic sector. Pubic service providers are expected to demonstrate to their communities that they are deivering better vaue for money addressing not ony efficiency but aso effectiveness in deivery. However, there is no consistent approach to performance measurement of corporate services across the pubic sector and the use of benchmarking information is patchy. The audit agencies saw the deveopment of these indicator sets as an opportunity to provide a source of high eve information both for the organisations themseves and the audit agencies who woud be abe to anayse data at an aggregated eve to identify trends in corporate service performance and so inform their choice of work programmes and overa direction. Overcoming the ack of robust methods to compare performance, measure improvement and communicate the benefits of investment is a major chaenge facing pubic sector organisations. Robust and consistent benchmark information is an important management too in assessing, for exampe, the benefits of a shared services programme. 1.6 The purpose of this joint project has been to deveop a series of measures for benchmarking the vaue for money performance of pubic service providers in the key corporate services functions of procurement, finance, human resources, estates management, and information and communications technoogy. The audit agencies commissioned KPMG to work with them on deivering the project.
vfm in pubic sector corporate services 5 Section 2: Deveoping the indicators Principes underpinning the deveopment of the indicators 2.1 The audit agencies agreed five principes at the start of the project to direct the deveopment of the indicators: use of the indicators shoud be vountary, with organisations deciding whether and how these can hep drive their own vaue for money improvement programmes; there shoud be a sma number of high eve indicators capturing those aspects of performance that are vita for the effective management of the service by senior managers; managers shoud aso have the abiity to dri down deeper; there shoud be a focus on better outcomes for corporate service users and commissioners; and to aid innovation and effectiveness, the indicators shoud refect best practice. 2.2 As a resut of an initia research and consutation phase, in which discussions were hed with stakehoders from across the pubic sector, the audit agencies aso agreed that: the indicators shoud be kept simpe and easy to measure A framework for deveoping the indicators 2.3 From the inception of the project, the audit agencies were cear that they wanted to deveop an indicator set that captured key aspects of effectiveness as we as efficiency. This has been a major chaenge for the project given current imitations in research and evidence on measuring the effectiveness of corporate services. In order to do so, an amended scorecard mode was deveoped which, in addition to an efficiency dimension, defined three separate facets of effectiveness that coud potentiay be measured: impact, in terms of how the output from each of the corporate services functions contributes to or infuences corporate performance as a whoe; satisfaction of users and senior managers, ooking at how each of the corporate services functions are regarded by staff who use these services and aso by the senior management who commission them; and modernisation, to consider the extent to which an organisation has adopted management practices regarded as being innovative and forward ooking. This is iustrated in Figure 1 overeaf. the indicators shoud not aim to cover a aspects of performance but instead be chosen for their capacity to motivate changes in behaviour and support improvement the indicator set shoud aim to compement any existing performance management frameworks and benchmarking initiatives, and where possibe faciitate future benchmarking with the private sector.
6 vfm in pubic sector corporate services Figure 1 Rating based on the perceptions of those receiving the service Commissioner and user satisfaction Modernising organisation innovation Extent to which organisation has adopted the best management practice Cost and productivity indictators Economy and efficiency of major processes Impact on organisationa performance and outcomes Organisationa metric heaviy infuenced by service e.g. staff turnover Efficiency domain: Effectiveness domains: Criteria for choosing the indicators 2.4 To popuate these dimensions of vaue for money, stakehoders views from the initia consutation phase were used to draw up criteria for seecting and deveoping indicators. For each corporate service function, there shoud be: A sma set of primary indicators each of which must fufi at east one of the foowing criteria. Indicators shoud be critica to the reputation of the function be recognised as a key feature of a modernised organisation reate to processes or activities that account for at east one-third of gross spend of that function have a major impact on the outcomes or performance of the organisation as a whoe An additiona set of secondary indicators that match one of the criteria above, athough not necessariy to the same degree; or hep expain variations between organisations resuts for the primary indicators. The project approach 2.5 After an initia research phase to identify the range of indicators aready in use within the private and pubic sectors, there was an extensive consutation phase. This refected the commitment by the audit agencies to choose ony those indicators that organisations find usefu for improving vaue for money and that are easy to measure. 2.6 Over the course of the project, approximatey 100 organisations across the pubic sector in Engand, Scotand and Waes have been invoved in biatera discussions, workshops or in testing the indicator sets that have been pioted by over 30 organisations from across the three nations. Figure 2 ists the organisations that have been invoved. The audit agencies aso used their own organisations to test the indicators. 2.7 In addition to testing the utiity of the indicators for heping organisations understand and improve their corporate services performance, we aso ooked at factors outside the contro of organisations that coud cause variations in resuts. Suggested externa causes of variations both within and across sectors were discussed and expored during the project. This was regarded as an important part of the project as the audit agencies wanted to be cear about any imitations on benchmarking performance.
vfm in pubic sector corporate services 7 Figure 2: Organisations that have contributed to the project Centra Government bodies Loca authorities Poice and Fire authorities Heath bodies and others HM Treasury Cabinet Office Scottish Executive Nationa Assemby for Waes Office of Government Commerce Department for Communities & Loca Government Ministry of Defence Her Majesty s Revenue & Customs Department of Heath Department for Work & Pensions Department for Education & Skis Department for Environment, Food & Rura Affairs Northern Ireand Office Department for Internationa Deveopment Office of Gas and Eectricity Markets (OFGEM) Higher Education Funding Counci Scottish Environment Protection Agency Gambing Commission Forestry Commission Shropshire County Counci Essex County Counci Camden Borough Counci Gateshead Metropoitan Borough Counci Staffordshire County Counci Warwickshire District Counci Devon County Counci Hampshire County Counci Wandsworth Borough Counci Birmingham City Counci Suffok County Counci Tamworth Borough Counci Wycombe District Counci Reading Borough Counci London Borough of Southwark Leeds City Counci Amber Vaey Borough Counci Baenau Gwent County Borough Counci Enfied Borough Counci Tameside Metropoitan Counci West Lothian Counci Worcestershire County Counci Wychavon District Counci Aberdeenshire Counci East Midands Centre of Exceence London Fire Authority Hereford & Worcester Combined Fire Authority Durham and Darington Fire and Rescue Service Greater Manchester Fire and Rescue Service Lothian & Borders Fire and Rescue Service Mid & West Waes Fire and Rescue Service Metropoitan Poice West Yorkshire Poice Lancashire Constabuary Kent Constabuary Tayside Poice Association of Chief Poice Officers Society of Information Technoogy Management (SOCITM) Procurement Exceence in Poice Institute of Pubic Finance Ltd NHS Confederation Nottinghamshire Heathcare Trust Saford Primary Care Trust Dudey Primary Care Trust Rotherham Foundation Trust Tayside Heath Board Lothian Heath Board North Devon NHS Trust Basidon and Thurrock University Hospitas NHS Foundation Trust Leicester Roya Infirmary Gateshead Heath NHS Foundation Trust Miton Keynes Genera NHS Trust North Hampshire Hospita Trust Wasa Teaching Primary Care Trust Bedfordshire & Luton Partnership Trust Leeds Menta Heath Trust Suffok Support Services The Birmingham Primary Care Shared Services Agency Ise of Wight Primary Care Trust
8 vfm in pubic sector corporate services Section 3: Project resuts The indicator sets deveoped 3.1 Using the framework and criteria deveoped during the initia phases of the project, indicator sets have been drawn up for each of the functiona areas. The primary indicators are aimed more at senior management whist the secondary indicators are those which operationa managers may want to monitor. The combined set of indicators does not aim to cover a spend and a activities; instead the objective has been to devise indicators that refect the key features which drive VFM. 3.2 The indicators have been designed to be assessed and interpreted as a set. Interpreting each indicator in isoation greaty reduces the potentia vaue that the set can offer in understanding the organisation s performance. It is often necessary to interpret the resut from one indicator together with other reated indicators, in particuar to consider how the organisation has achieved both efficiency and effectiveness. 3.3 The primary indicators for each function incude a basic cost indicator, a commissioner and user satisfaction index and a management practices index. The management practices index has been deveoped to enabe organisations to assess whether their corporate services are we-run and modernised. This innovative approach based on best practice across the private sector as we as within the pubic sector, has been we received by organisations who have found it a vauabe way of capturing the softer, difficut to measure, eements of effectiveness. It aso provides usefu, summary guidance on the direction of trave for improving these functions. 3.4 The Annex to this report contains a tabe for each indicator set which ists a of the indicators. It incudes detais of the rationae for each indicator and guidance on the behaviours they are intended to drive. The introductory comments to each tabe emphasise that the indicator sets are intended to measure both effectiveness and efficiency and offer exampes of how organisations can interpret mutipe indicators to obtain a more comprehensive and baanced view of their overa performance. The introductions aso describe the inkages to other reated performance measurement initiatives and indicators. 3.5 Detaied definitions of the indicators (and of the terms used within them) are avaiabe on the Pubic Audit Forum website at www. pubic-audit-forum.gov.uk Responses to the indicators 3.6 There has been uniformy positive feedback from the test sites that the indicators are usefu management toos. This evauation has confirmed that the distinction between primary and secondary indicators is hepfu, with the strategic focus of a sub-set of key measures particuary wecomed. The test sites suggested that the number of indicators was about right, athough some reduction woud be wecome. However, in discussion with test sites about how we might achieve this, a consensus emerged that there were no obvious candidates for deetion and we shoud not reduce the number as their use was going to be vountary organisations individuay shoud decide instead on which were most vauabe for their performance management.
vfm in pubic sector corporate services 3.7 The testing phases considered the scope for comparisons across the pubic sector. Most of the piot sites were more interested initiay in benchmarking their performance within sector, but they recognised that there coud be vaue in the future in comparing performance within areas and down deivery chains. There was one exception to this concusion the estates management function. The variations in the nature and size of estates across the sectors were very significant and found to have a consequent impact on the data resuts. As a resut, we concuded that any comparisons woud need to be within sector. 3.10 As a resut, the indicators have not been adjusted to take account of externa contextua factors but these wi need to be considered when interpreting comparative data. There are a number of additiona factors that are within the contro of organisations but can ony be changed in the medium to ong term, for exampe, ocation, externa infrastructure and partnership modes of deivery. 3.8 Some piot sites have reported that they beieve that they wi benefit more widey from the indicator sets, for exampe by using the information produced to inform decisions about whether and how to adopt shared services modes or by using the indicator sets to drive improvements in professionaism in preparation for an appication for foundation trust status. Contextua factors 3.9 In addition to identifying imitations for benchmarking the performance of the estates management function, neary 20 possibe contextua factors that might be responsibe for differences in performance within and across sectors were suggested during the consutation phases. These were tested and ony two were found to be competey outside the contro of organisations: egisation and reguation, for exampe, the treatment of VAT wages and the oca empoyment market
10 vfm in pubic sector corporate services Section 4: Next steps 4.1 This section sets out the audit agencies view of how these indicator sets reate to our respective audit and inspection programmes. Encouraging the use of the indicators 4.2 Since the inception of the project, the audit agencies have been cear that the use of the indicators shoud be vountary, with pubic sector organisations proactivey choosing to use them as part of their vaue for money improvement programmes. The agencies therefore pan to: pubish the indicators to make them freey avaiabe to a organisations encourage third party organisations to incorporate the indicators in toos for benchmarking corporate services performance and sharing best practice. The audit agencies may seek to encourage third parties to do this by endorsing the products deveoped in exchange for assurances on prices charged and quaity. We woud not seek access to an individua organisation s data directy from the third party provider. 4.3 The audit agencies currenty have no pans to deveop benchmarking databases in-house. This refects a desire to ensure that use of the indicators is not assumed to be mandatory by the bodies that the agencies audit and inspect. One potentia third party provider, the Chartered Institute of Pubic Finance and Accountancy (working together with KPMG), has aready approached the agencies and is aunching a benchmarking service shorty after the pubication of this report. 4.4 A of the audit agencies have confirmed that, whie use of the indicator sets wi be on a vountary basis, they strongy encourage their cient organisations to make appropriate use of them in order to drive improvements in the efficiency and effectiveness of their corporate service functions. The agencies beieve that these indicators (which have been subject to extensive pioting) shoud be vauabe to most pubic sector organisations. Specific comments on how the indicators ink to each of the audit agencies individua work programmes are beow. Audit Commission 4.5 The Audit Commission is keen to see oca service providers use benchmarking information to hep understand, demonstrate and improve their vaue for money performance. These indicators have significant potentia to hep organisations improve the efficiency and effectiveness of their corporate services functions. The importance of benchmarking performance is refected in the key ines of enquiry that we use in our resources assessment programmes, incuding Comprehensive Performance Assessment in oca government and Auditors Loca Evauation in the NHS. We have no pans to mandate the use of these indicators in the future. Instead, we wi continue to encourage oca service providers proactivey to use benchmarking information to improve their vaue for money performance.
vfm in pubic sector corporate services 11 Audit Scotand 4.6 Corporate services are centra to the efficient and effective running of pubic services. Performance management and reporting tends to be underdeveoped in these areas and these indicators provide a usefu too for supporting improvement. Use of the indicators is vountary, but we encourage organisations to use the indicators to demonstrate vaue for money and best vaue, to identify opportunities for improvement, and to inform decisions about service deivery. Audits of best vaue wi recognise the use of the indicator set. We aso see benefits in support of our performance improvement roe with, for exampe, nationa eve output being used to hep inform future work programmes. Nationa Audit Office 4.7 The NAO encourages centra government bodies to coect data against the indicators, where they are not aready doing something simiar themseves, and to seek data on their comparative position. Use of the indicator sets in this way woud be entirey vountary. At the same time, where the NAO is conducting a vaue for money study on aspects of corporate services, we might want to draw on the indicators, where equivaent information does not aready exist. In this case any access to the data woud be through the NAO s usua processes and iaison arrangements with audited bodies. Northern Ireand Audit Office 4.8 The NIAO wecomes the deveopment of these indicators. They offer pubic sector organisations opportunities to undertake vountary benchmarking with their counterparts esewhere. This can faciitate them to identify good practice and demonstrate efficient and effective deivery of corporate services. Waes Audit Office 4.9 The WAO encourages the use of these indicators as a means to comprehensivey and consistenty demonstrate improvement in corporate services and support the annua risk assessment process in oca government. Use of the indicators within Waes wi be on a vountary basis and their use wi be compementary to the existing Performance Measurement Framework. The abiity to compare performance and earn from good practice both across the whoe pubic sector and beyond nationa boundaries wi be an additiona benefit from their use. Further deveopment of the indicators 4.10 The audit agencies pan to further deveop the indicator sets over time. For exampe some piot sites have suggested that further sets coud be drawn up to cover other corporate services such as ega services, communications and marketing. The agencies aso intend to update the indicators themseves to refect emerging good practice (for exampe by updating the management practices indicators).
12 vfm in pubic sector corporate services Annex: Detais of the indicator sets (a) Human Resources (HR) vaue for money indicators Key principes The indicators fa into two broad categories, efficiency and effectiveness. Effectiveness is divided further into three sub-categories; impact, satisfaction and modernisation. Definitions of these terms can be found at paragraph 2.3. The indicators for the HR function map onto this categorisation as foows: Primary indicators Secondary indicators Efficiency 1,2 2,5 Effectiveness: impact 3,4,5 1,3,4,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13 Effectiveness: satisfaction 6 It is important that organisations interpret the resuts from the indicators as a set, taking into account the information they offer on their performance in respect of both efficiency and effectiveness. For exampe, resuts for an efficiency measure such as primary indicator 1 (cost of the HR function) need to be interpreted aongside the resuts for effectiveness measures such as primary indicators 4 (eavers in the ast year as a percentage of the average tota staff ), 5 (average working days ost through sickness) and 7 (the number of good management practices adopted). The tabe of indicators highights some other inkages between specific measures. In addition, organisations wi be abe to identify further reationships between individua indicators that are specific to them, resuting from their particuar circumstances. The indicators do not attempt to cover a aspects of the wider impact of the HR function on the business. For exampe the extent to which HR enabes change in the organisation; the effectiveness of HR in heping to buid organisationa capabiity; the degree of aignment of business and peope strategies; and the degree of infuence of HR on the top team. Assessment of these areas wi be argey quaitative but equay important. Whie it is not possibe to design performance indicators to cover these aspects that woud fit within our indicator set, any wider overa assessments that are made of how the HR function is performing shoud take them into account. Reationship between this indicator set and existing HR performance indicators Primary indicator 5 in the set (measuring sickness absence) is aigned to the Best Vaue Performance Indicators used to measure oca authorities. Benchmark data is avaiabe for this indicator in reation to the oca government sector. The Cabinet Office has mapped our indicator set onto its maturity matrix for HR functions in centra government and considers that the indicators can provide usefu data which can then be suppemented with more quaitative data about HR effectiveness. In particuar, for centra government, using the Cabinet Office maturity matrix wi ensure that the wider impact of the HR function on the business is taken into account. In this way the two approaches to assessing different aspects of performance can compement each other.
annex (a): human resources (HR) vaue for money indicators 13 HR Primary Indicator 1 HR Primary Indicator 2 HR Primary Indicator 3 HR Primary Indicator 4 Indicators Cost of the HR function: a) Cost of the HR function as a percentage of organisationa running costs (expenditure) b) Cost of the HR function per empoyee Ratio of empoyees (fu-time equivaents) to HR staff Average days per fu-time empoyee per year invested in earning and deveopment Leavers in the ast year as a percentage of the average tota staff. Rationae and expected impact on behaviour This is a high-eve indicator of the cost-effectiveness of the HR function. In most circumstances organisations woud aim to reduce their HR costs over time. However organisations that score poory on measures designed to test the effectiveness of the HR function (for exampe primary indicators 4, 5, 6 and 7) and aso spend ess on HR than the benchmark for their peers, wi wish to consider whether extra investment woud secure better vaue for money. Organisations that spend more than their peer organisations may wish to consider whether this is because, for exampe, they have an above average score against effectiveness criteria or whether there is scope for efficiency savings (for exampe evidenced by a disproportionatey high cost of recruitment per vacancy, secondary indicator 5). This is a high-eve indicator of the cost-effectiveness of the HR function which compements primary indicator 1. Organisations shoud compare their resut for this indicator with their peers, investigating the reasons for any significant differences. They shoud aso examine their resut for this indicator in conjunction with their resuts for effectiveness indicators (for exampe primary indicators 4, 5, 6 and 7). (Note: This is a widey recognised indicator and was used in the Government s Efficiency Review). The investment in earning and deveopment indicates the organisation s commitment to enhancing its capacity to deiver and improve. Organisations shoud compare their resut for this indicator with their peers, investigating the reasons for any significant differences, taking into account factors such as any difference in the average degree of experience within the workforce and turnover of staff. This indicator is cosey inked to secondary indicator 1 (the cost of earning and deveopment activity). This indicator aims to ook at the stabiity of the workforce. Some turnover in an organisation is accepted as heathy but a high eve of turnover can indicate probems in organisationa eadership, cuture and management and can impact on organisationa performance (for exampe through oss of capacity, oss of vauabe skis and knowedge etc). Organisations may wish to compare their turnover rates with their peers, examining whether there are robust reasons for any significant differences. In most circumstances organisations woud seek to reduce the percentage of eavers over time.
14 vfm in pubic sector corporate services HR Primary Indicator 5 Indicators Average working days per empoyee (fu time equivaent) per year ost through sickness absence. Rationae and expected impact on behaviour Looks at the effectiveness of the HR function in terms of impact on the overa eves of sickness absence in the organisation through deveopment of processes and procedures, and training for managers. Organisations shoud aim to reduce the number of days ost through sickness absence over time. HR Primary Indicator 6 HR Primary Indicator 7 Commissioner and user satisfaction index a composite indicator compied from the responses to a set of statements by commissioners and users. Management practice indicator the number of practices that have been adopted by the organisation out of a possibe tota of 10. This indicator examines the effectiveness of the HR function by assessing the perceptions of its commissioners and users. The indicators have been identified because they are considered to indicate whether the function communicates effectivey with its commissioners and users, and is responsive to the requirements of the organisation. Over time, organisations shoud seek to increase the proportion of commissioners and users agreeing with the statements. (The ist of commissioner and user statements can be found on the Pubic Audit Forum website at www.pubic-audit-forum.gov.uk Organisations may wish to incorporate these statements into existing surveys of users and commissioners.) The aim of this indicator is to assess the extent to which the HR function achieves a set of key management practices which wi provide an indication of whether it is a we-run, modernised and mature function. It is not anticipated that most organisations wi have adopted a of the practices isted when first measuring themseves against this indicator set. However organisations shoud expect that the number of practices that they have adopted woud increase over time. (The ist of practices can be found on the Pubic Audit Forum website at www.pubic-audit-forum.gov.uk and wi be updated, if appropriate, in future revisions of the indicator set).
annex (a): human resources (HR) vaue for money indicators 15 HR Secondary Indicator 1 HR Secondary Indicator 2 HR Secondary Indicator 3 HR Secondary Indicator 4 HR Secondary Indicator 5 HR Secondary Indicator 6 HR Secondary Indicator 7 Indicators Cost of earning and deveopment activity as percentage of the tota pay-bi. Cost of agency staff as a percentage of the tota pay-bi (excuding those counted in secondary indicator 3) Percentage of posts currenty in the eadership of the organisation which are fied by peope who are not permanent in that position. Average eapsed time (working days) from a vacancy occurring to the acceptance of an offer for the same post. Cost of recruitment per vacancy Reported injuries, diseases and dangerous occurrences per 1,000 empoyees per year Percentage of peope that are sti in post after 12 months service. Rationae and expected impact on behaviour The eve of expenditure on earning and deveopment indicates the organisation s commitment to enhancing its capacity to deiver and improve. This compements primary indicator 3 (average days invested in earning and deveopment per empoyee). In both cases organisations shoud compare their resuts with their peers, investigating the reasons for any significant differences, taking into account factors such as any difference in the average degree of experience within the workforce and turnover of staff. In many cases organisations woud aim to achieve a period-on-period increase in their investment in earning and deveopment activity. Reiance on agency staff can increase costs significanty and not necessariy represent vaue for money. Most organisations woud therefore aim to reduce the proportion of their pay-bi spent on agency staff athough they may (of course) need to use agency staff to good effect to manage variabiity in workoad especiay at short notice. The degree of stabiity of the eadership of an organisation is a critica feature in terms of organisationa performance and cuture. Organisations performing at a sub-optima eve tend to have a significant proportion of non-permanent staff in eadership positions. In most cases organisations woud therefore aim to reduce the percentage of non-permanent staff in eadership positions. This is an indicator of efficiency for a key HR process recruitment to fi vacant posts. Organisations shoud generay aim to reduce the number of working days needed to fi vacant posts. This indicator compements secondary indicator 5. This is compements secondary indicator 4. Whie organisations shoud usuay aim to reduce the unit cost of recruitment they shoud examine the resut of this indicator in conjunction with primary indicator 4 (eavers as a proportion of tota staff ) and secondary indicator 7 (the percentage of staff sti in post after 12 months). Where organisations spend ess on recruitment than their peers but have beow average staff retention they may wish to consider whether extra investment in recruitment is ikey to offer better vaue for money. This measures the effectiveness of the organisation s heath and safety procedures. Organisations woud expect to achieve a period-on-period reduction in the number of incidents athough organisations reporting extremey ow figures compared to their peers may wish to consider whether a reevant occurrences are correcty reported. The eve of turnover in the first year is an indicator of the effectiveness of the organisation s recruitment and induction processes. This is cosey inked to primary indicator 4 (eavers as a proportion of tota staff ). Organisations woud expect to achieve a period-on-period increase in the number of peope sti in post after 12 months. (The ist of practices can be found on the Pubic Audit Forum website at www.pubic-audit-forum.gov.uk and wi be updated, if appropriate, in future revisions of the indicator set).
16 vfm in pubic sector corporate services HR Secondary Indicator 8 HR Secondary Indicator 9 HR Secondary Indicator 10 HR Secondary Indicator 11 HR Secondary Indicator 12 HR Secondary Indicator 13 Indicators Cases of discipinary action per 1,000 empoyees. Percentage of staff who receive (at east) an annua face to face performance appraisa. Percentage of eadership posts occupied by women Percentage of empoyees who consider themseves to have a disabiity Percentage of empoyees aged 50 or over Percentage of Back and Minority Ethnic (BME) empoyees in the workforce. Rationae and expected impact on behaviour To measure the extent to which capabiity/performance and conduct are activey managed. Organisations woud usuay expect to achieve a period-on-period reduction in the number of cases. However where no cases are actioned or where the number is consideraby ess than for peers with no apparent pausibe expanation, organisations may wish to investigate whether managers are correcty appying discipinary procedures. To measure the coverage of individua performance management processes across the organisation. Organisations shoud aim to move towards achieving 100 per cent for this indicator (particuary in respect of their permanent staff ). To monitor progress in the achievement of equaity of opportunity in empoyment for eadership posts. Organisations shoud compare their achievement against this indicator with their peers and, in most cases, shoud seek to secure a period-on-period increase in respect of this indicator. To monitor progress in the achievement of equaity of opportunity in empoyment. Organisations shoud compare their achievement against this indicator with that of their peers and consider how the composition of their workforce might move towards a position that, for exampe, is more representative of the community they serve. To monitor progress in the achievement of equaity of opportunity in empoyment. Organisations shoud compare their achievement against this indicator with that of their peers and consider how the composition of their workforce might move towards a position that, for exampe, is more representative of the community they serve. To monitor progress in the achievement of equaity of opportunity in empoyment. Organisations shoud compare their achievement against this indicator with that of their peers and consider how the composition of their workforce might move towards a position that, for exampe, is more representative of the community they serve.
annex (b): finance vaue for money indicators 17 (b) Finance vaue for money indicators Key principes The indicators fa into two broad categories, efficiency and effectiveness. Effectiveness is divided further into three sub-categories; impact, satisfaction and modernisation. Definitions of these terms can be found at paragraph 2.3. The indicators for the finance function map onto this categorisation as foows: Primary indicators Secondary indicators Efficiency 1 3,4,5,6,7 Effectiveness: impact 2, 3, 4, 5 1,2,8 Effectiveness: satisfaction 6 Effectiveness: modernisation 7 It is important that organisations interpret the resuts from the indicators as a set, taking into account the information they offer on their performance in respect of both effectiveness and efficiency. It is particuary important that undue emphasis is not given to measures of efficiency, but instead that the resuts of the indicator set are interpreted more widey to understand the impact of the finance function on the effectiveness of the organisation in achieving its key service deivery targets. For exampe, resuts for an efficiency measure such as primary indicator 1 (cost of the finance function as a percentage of organisationa running costs) need to be interpreted aongside the resuts for effectiveness measures such as primary indicators 2 (the number of days from period-end to the distribution of financia reports to budget-hoders) and 6 (the commissioner and user satisfaction index). The tabe of indicators highights some other inkages between specific measures. In addition, organisations wi be abe to identify further reationships between individua indicators that are specific to them, resuting from their particuar circumstances. Reationship between this indicator set and existing finance performance indicators The design of this indicator set has been infuenced by, and is consistent with, the Financia Management Review framework deveoped by HM Treasury to measure the effectiveness and efficiency of financia management in centra government departments. For exampe our indicators which examine the promptness of production of in-year financia reports, the reationship between budgets and service outputs and whether the year-end accounts require quaification are a drawn from simiar statements in the Financia Management Review framework.
18 vfm in pubic sector corporate services Finance Primary indicator 1 Finance Primary indicator 2 Finance Primary indicator 3 Finance Primary indicator 4 Indicators Tota cost of the finance function as a percentage of organisationa running costs (expenditure) and within this the proportionate cost of transaction processing and business decision support. Cyce time in working days from period-end cosure to the distribution of routine financia reports to a budget managers and overseeing boards and committees. The percentage of variation between the forecast outturn at month 6 and the actua outturn at month 12. Scoring of the quaity of the organisation s Board/Management/ Executive reports against a good practice framework. Further deveopment is sti underway for this indicator Rationae and expected impact on behaviour A standard and commony used indicator that seeks to estabish whether the costs of running the finance department are in proportion to the resources that are being managed. Measurement of the tota cost of the finance function as a percentage of overa spend aows management to monitor cosey the finance cost of their organisation and coud be used to track trends across any given time-frame. Measurement of the cost of transaction processing and business decision support enabes organisations to understand the resources devoted by finance on vaue added activities as a proportion of finance cost. Over time, organisations shoud expect to reduce expenditure on transaction processing as a percentage of the tota cost of the finance function. Simiary they shoud expect to increase the percentage of the tota cost of the finance function spent on business decision support. This indicator measures the typica number of days it takes the finance department to produce management information and so identifies the extent to which budget managers, and overseeing boards and committees, can take timey financia decisions based on up to date financia information. In most circumstances organisations shoud aim to reduce the number of working days to produce financia reports. Organisations shoud interpret their achievement against this indicator in conjunction with the response to the commissioner statement The financia information provided for financia panning and management is accurate, timey and easy to access (contained in primary indicator 6) and secondary indicator 2b (which asks whether the year-end accounts were quaified by externa audit). This indicator assesses the accuracy of forecasting. Organisations shoud aim to reduce the eve of variation between their month 6 forecast and the yearend outturn by improving forecasting and budgetary contro. Note: This indicator has been initiay devised for centra government bodies and wi require further deveopment and testing before its introduction into other sectors. This indicator assesses an organisation s Board/Executive/Management reports against a generic word cass standard set of characteristics of financia and performance management information that the Board/ Executive/Management shoud be considering on a reguar (preferaby monthy) basis. Organisations shoud aim to improve the standard of the reports produced (for exampe by greater integration of reporting on financia and performance) and so increase their score against the framework over time.
annex (b): finance vaue for money indicators 19 Finance Primary indicator 5 Finance Primary indicator 6 Finance Primary indicator 7 Indicators Percentage of pubic sector organisation spend for which there are fuy costed outputs which are measured by key performance metrics and for which a named individua is accountabe. Commissioner and user satisfaction index a composite indicator compied from the responses to a set of statements by commissioners and users For centra government organisations Management practice indicator CIPFA Financia Management Mode Further deveopment is sti underway for this indicator For a other organisations Management practice indicator the number of practices that have been adopted by the organisation out of a possibe tota of 10. Rationae and expected impact on behaviour High performing organisations are ikey to ensure that the totaity of their spend is aocated against outputs, supported by key metrics which measure performance with cear ines of accountabiity. Over time, organisations shoud aim to increase the percentage of their spend that meets the criteria of this indicator. Note: This indicator has been initiay devised for centra government bodies and wi require further deveopment and testing before its introduction into other sectors. This indicator examines the effectiveness of the finance function by assessing the perceptions of its commissioners and users. The indicators have been identified because they are considered to indicate whether the function communicates effectivey with its commissioners and users, and is responsive to the requirements of the organisation. Over time, organisations shoud seek to increase the proportion of commissioners and users agreeing with the statements. (The ist of commissioner and user statements can be found on the Pubic Audit Forum website at www.pubic-audit-forum.gov.uk Organisations may wish to incorporate these statements into existing surveys of users and commissioners.). CIPFA is currenty revising its Financia Management framework, due to be issued in Juy 2007. This framework offers a robust overa assessment of the organisation s financia management capacity and capabiity, highighting both strengths and areas for improvement. We run organisations woud expect to increase their score against the Mode over time. The aim of this indicator is to assess the extent to which the finance function achieves a set of key management practices which wi provide an indication of whether it is a we-run, modernised and mature function. It is not anticipated that most organisations wi have adopted a of the practices isted when first measuring themseves against this indicator set. However organisations shoud expect that the number of practices that they have adopted woud increase over time. (The ist of practices can be found on the Pubic Audit Forum website at www.pubic-audit-forum.gov.uk and wi be updated, if appropriate, in future) revisions of the indicator set).