Tim Willis, Deputy Chief Executive and S151
Officer introduced the item and said that the aim was to monitor
performance on areas that mattered most to residents, businesses
and councillors. Past performance monitoring had always been
retrospective and reported quarterly. However in future the plan
was to produce as much information as was possible in real time and
make such information always available on the council’s
website. This would increase transparency and accountability of the
council and hopefully help reduce the burden of responding to
freedom of information requests. These proposed changes would also
improve the scrutiny of the council’s performance.
Hannah Thorpe, Director of Communications then
introduced the main issues of the report and made the following
- The new performance reporting format
would produce as much information as is possible in real time and
this would be shared with residents on the council website;
- The objective of the new approach
was to improve the way the council managed the corporate
performance as well as improving information sharing with
- The approach would follow a set of
principles that included the following:
Focus on things that matter;
Move away from (just a focus on) numbers;
Demonstrate that the council was effective (in delivering services
Demonstrate that council’s activities were having an impact
on the lives of local residents.
The proposed changes included the follows:
Reduce the number of measures;
Align measures to corporate objectives (environment, communities
Include measures which demonstrate efficiency;
Publish live data on the website – shift the focus of the
reports and enhance the role of Scrutiny;
Create interactive data;
Remove targets – move to acceptable/good baseline;
Put more emphasis on customer satisfaction;
Reduce the frequency of reporting.
- The number of measures of
performance would be reduced and they would be aligned to corporate
- Performance Targets would be
removed. Good baseline information would be established to inform
the performance monitoring;
- The measures would include those
that demonstrated efficiency;
- Live performance data would be
published on the website;
- More emphasis would be put on
- Members would be able to call on
Service Directors to attend Panel meetings to respond to service
specific performance issues arising from the performance
- Panel members were invited to take
part in a dry run of the proposed web page before it went
- The new reporting framework would be
in place in April 2021-2024.
The detail of the proposed performance
reporting framework is in the slides presentation attached as an
annex to this minute item.
Members asked questions and made comments as
- The timescales for the houses being
empty was reflected in the annex as six months. How was this
solution arrived at?
- Publishing live data on the council
website was a good idea;
- Would enforcement action and fines
be published on the website as part of that live data as well?
- How often would the live data be
- Would recycle rates be published as
part of the live data?
- Would greenhouse gas emission from
council housing stock be part of the performance data?
- Some Members were concerned about
the removal of targets;
- Since targets would be removed, who
would decide on the quality and make value judgments about the
- How would the council let residents
know about the web page?
- There would be a need to carry out a
critical review of the new format after 12 months of
- Under the proposed Growth indicator,
the council would like ‘residents to have thriving
towns.’ However this indicator is not reflected in the detail
as to how it would be measured;
- Were annual residents’ surveys
adequate or should we have rolling surveys to assess
residents’ satisfaction perception about the services
provided by the council?
- Would complaints be captured in the
new reporting format?
Hannah Thorpe, Nathaniel Fisher, Business
Analyst and Tim Willis responded to Member questions and comments
- The six months rule was an industry
standard. Baselining would be informed by benchmarking. It was
hoped that this would allay any concerns about the limited number
of stats that would be used in the new approach;
- Enforcement data could be reflected
in the live data on the council website;
- With regards to incineration and
recycling; KCC was the disposal authority. This meant that any data
produced by KCC would not necessarily reflect the performance by
- The issue regarding measuring
emissions produced by council housing stock would be referred to
the appropriate Service for a response;
- With regards to value judgments, a
number of organisations were now moving more towards a qualitative
understanding of issues affecting communities;
- Conducting a 12 month review of the
new approach would be a good idea;
- The indicators for growth would be
reconsidered by officers to add more detail on these would be
measured. This could entail a look at how this indicator could be
linked to community;
- In addition to snap surveys, the
council would also like to conduct customer satisfaction
- The survey that was used to inform
the new framework was conducted on 6,000 residents with a one in
six response rate. This was a random survey based on postcodes to
get a fair reflection of the district;
- Officers would go back to consider
the issue regarding how best to reflect the number of complaints
received by the council.
The Chair summed up the discussion by saying
that the Panel was supportive of the new approach and requested
officers to take away the comments and suggestions that came from
Members during the course of the discussion.
Thereafter members noted the report.