Agenda item

Report attached.

Members received a report which set out the proposed Corporate Performance Indicators and the associated targets for 2015/16 for review by the Board prior to the finalisation of the Corporate Plan and individual Service Plans. 

Members of the Board were asked to contribute to the service planning process by reviewing and commenting on the proposed Corporate Performance Indicators and the associated targets in light of previous performance and the benchmarking data.

Members of the Board were also invited to review and comment on the proposed tolerances for RAG (Red,Amber,Green) rating performance going forward. 

Members’ comments would be fed into the wider service planning process and would inform the finalisation of the Corporate Plan and individual Service Plans.

Appendix A of the report set out the proposed Corporate Performance Indicators and associated targets for 2015/16.  The proposed performance indicators were split into four sections, relating to staffing, service users, business processes and finance.  Each indicator had proposed targets for 2015/16 and 2016/17, along with a proposed tolerance for RAG rating performance (e.g. +/-5% or +/-10%). 

Appendix B of the report contained previous performance and benchmarking data related to Corporate Performance Indicators.

During the debate members received clarification on a number of the indicators and in some instances officers undertook to re-evaluate indicators following queries raised by Members.

During a discussion regarding parking income Members queried the higher target that had been set for 2015/16. In reply officers commented that the figures took into account the new charging structure that had recently been agreed at Cabinet. The Council’s Smart cars were now, following guidance by the Department for Communities and Local Government, only used on certain activities mainly to control illegal parking around schools and such like. The Council was looking to appoint more traffic wardens who would patrol the borough on a rota basis ensuring all areas were covered.

Members noted that the MOPAC crime figures were targets agreed with the Mayor’s office that attracted linked funding to deliver specific projects to achieve the Council’s targets.

The Interim Director of Public Health updated Members on several performance targets for healthcare within the borough.

Members agreed that the performance indicators that underperformed only had value if there was an action plan to remedy the situation attached or at least a narrative explaining what action was to be taken to improve the performance. It was also agreed that it would be useful in the future to know which targets were statutory and non-statutory.

In response to a question regarding the TBC figures from Exchequer and Transactional Services, officers advised that the following were the projected targets CS3 20 days, CS4 15 days, CS1 96.7% and CS2 98%.

Members noted that there were lots of reviews taking place on how the Council dealt with cases of child sexual exploitation and that discussions would take place on how targets and in particular narratives were reported on cases.

In reply to a question regarding recycling members were advised that the targets were not to increase as the borough had a high level of recycling already in place.

Members felt it would be useful if the newly created Cabinet role that dealt with performance role was defined to the Board.

Members were advised that there were not Overview & Scrutiny Sub-Committees covering all the services that the Council offered and that some performance figures would be presented to just the Board. If Members wished to see further performance figures from service areas not covered by a Sub-Committee then they could request those figures to be reported direct to the board. Regarding Cabinet and performance figures these had previously been looked at by the value Overview and Scrutiny Committee.

Members advised officers that was little information being collated on the performance of housing Decent Homes contractors. Members also felt it would be useful to see what levels of Decent Homes works had been and were being carried out and which homes had now fallen out of Decent Homes standard due to the time period which had elapsed since the works began.

Officers advised that the service plans were currently in draft form and would be finalised shortly and then sent to each Overview and Scrutiny Sub-Committee for their consideration and agreement.

Members noted the report and both appendices.