Subject:

Progress update against Corporate Key Performance Indicators Q4 2020/21

Date of Meeting:

1 July 2021

Report of:

Executive Lead Officer, Strategy, Governance & Law

Contact Officer:

Name:

Rima Desai

Tel:

29-1268

 

Email:

Rima.desai@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Ward(s) affected:

All

 

 

FOR GENERAL RELEASE

 

                                                                                                                          

1.         PURPOSE OF REPORT AND POLICY CONTEXT

 

1.1       To report to Policy & Resources Committee for the period 1 April 2020 to 31st March 2021 in relation to Corporate Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).

 

2.         RECOMMENDATIONS:    

 

2.1         That Policy & Resources Committee note the progress made in relation to Corporate KPIs in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic, particularly the corrective measures outlined for ‘red’ and ‘amber’ indicators, and provide support and challenge to lead officers to bring performance back on track.

 

3.            CONTEXT/ BACKGROUND INFORMATION

 

3.1         The overarching document which sets out the outcomes which the council aims to deliver is Brighton & Hove City Council’s Corporate Plan, “Our Plan 2020 to 2023”.

Progress towards delivery of the Corporate Plan outcomes is evidenced by delivery of the Corporate KPI set and is supported through the successful delivery of the council’s Directorate Plans.

 

3.2         This report is a key part of Business Planning and Management, one of the components of the council’s Performance Management Framework (PMF). Full details of the PMF are set out in Appendix 3. This report is concerned with component 1 – Business planning and management.

 

3.3      Key Performance Indicators are developed to evidence delivery of the Corporate Plan. The PDP process is intended to clarify individual staff contribution towards the achievement of the relevant outcomes and actions within the Corporate Plan.

 

 

4.0Performance Indicator Set

 

4.1         The list of Corporate KPIs and their targets for 2020/21 were set in October 2020 by Policy & Resources Committee (P&R). A consistent approach has been adopted across the organisation in relation to target setting taking account of comparative information. P&R Committee considered the impact of Covid-19 when agreeing the amber thresholds for the targets.

 

4.2         The overall performance achieved during the year against target is assigned a rating of Red, Amber or Green depending how far from target the performance is.

 

4.3         Targets were set using the following criteria:

 

·         To set the target, use the latest available benchmarking data (e.g. statistical neighbour data, national data or any other comparable data) or any statutory/contractual target, whichever is more challenging. If performance is better than benchmarking data, current performance may be used as a target.

·         Where no benchmarking or statutory/contractual data is available, a sound rationale needs to be explained for a target figure e.g. improvement or maintenance from the current performance.

·         Where resources are reducing or being reallocated, or there are significant external factors which will impact on performance, a reduction target can be set. This will need to be clearly evidenced and agreed by Policy & Resources Committee.

·         Consider the financial impact of delivering the outcome of the KPI when setting the target.

 

4.4         A rigorous target setting approach was used to give a clear appraisal of how the council is performing compared to previous years and other local authorities. Because of this approach it was predicted that achieving all the targets by the year end would be challenging.

 

4.5         The Corporate KPI set for 2020/21 is made up of 72 indicators overall.

 

 

4.6         Overall the results show 73% of the targeted indicators meeting or being within the agreed tolerance level at the end of March 2021. At Q4 2019/20 71% of that year’s Corporate KPI set met this level; please note it is not possible to make an exact comparison between years as the previous indicator set included some different measures. Of those KPIs that were reported and targeted in both 2019/20 and 2020/21, 62% have improved and 34% have declined. 6 are trend indicators which do not have a RAG rating applied.

 

 

4.7         Below are some highlights from directorates where there has been significant improvement and/or good performance against target for 2020/21. These are achieved through the combined effort of all staff throughout the organisation and from relevant partner organisations. Appendix 1 provides more information and context; the relevant page number in the Appendix is shown after each indicator.

 

üRent collected as a proportion of rent due: Housing Tenants (page 2)

üThe speed of determining applications for major and non-major development (page 14)

üChildren in Care (page 29)

ü% of social care clients receiving Direct Payments (page 46)

ü% of people with a learning disability in employment (page 48)

ü% of people aged 18+ who smoke (page 53)

üAverage number of working days / shifts lost per Full Time Equivalent (FTE) due to sickness absence (page 57)

 

4.8         Below are some highlights from directorates where performance improvement is required and where performance is particularly affected by Covid-19. The pandemic affected the ways of working e.g. home visits, face-to-face meetings could not be conducted, and impact on staffing levels. Appendix 1 provides more information on these including a summary of performance so far, the context for that service and a short summary of proposed actions to improve performance. Effective performance management ensures the right actions are taken at the right time so that the council can achieve its purpose through delivering the principles and priorities

                      

-        Missed refuse and recycling collections (page 35 & 36)

-        Rate of deaths from drug use per 100,000 population (page 50)

-        Staff at management level who declare themselves as BME as a % of the total staff at management level who declare their ethnicity (page 65)

 

4.9         Direction of travel for each KPI is included in Appendix 1. Each KPI is marked with ‘improving’, ‘declining’, or ‘no change’. The method for determining each Direction of travel is as follows:

·         Where the indicator was reported last year the assessment is based on whether performance has improved or worsened from 2019/20 to 2020/21.

·         Where the indicator is new in 2020/21 comparison is made with 2019/20 if possible

·         If not possible it is noted as ‘new in 2020/21’ or ‘not comparable with 2019/20’

·         Trend indicators are shown as increasing or decreasing trend   

 

4.10      The following KPIs show that we are targeting to be performing better than our comparators. Appendix 1 provide more information and context; the relevant page number in the Appendix is shown after each indicator.

·         Strengthening Family Assessments - % completed in 45 days

·         Number of children in care

·         % of invoices for commercial goods and services that were paid for within 30 days

·         % of social care clients receiving Direct Payments

·         Number of alcohol-related hospital admissions per 100,000 population

·         % Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGSCO) complaints upheld or partially upheld (late annual)

 

4.11      Results are not available for the following KPIs at time of reporting as Government data requirements and provision were revised during 2020/21 due to Covid-19:

·         The average Progress 8 score of all pupils attending state funded schools at the end of Key Stage 4

·         % of all pupils attending state funded schools achieving the ‘expected standard’ in reading, writing and maths at the end of key stage 2

·         Number of Delayed Transfers of Care (DToC) attributable to social care per 100,000 population

·         Percentage of bus services running on time

 

 

5.            ANALYSIS & CONSIDERATION OF ANY ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

 

5.1       Through consultation with ELT the Performance Management Framework currently in operation was deemed to be the most suitable model.

 

6.            COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT & CONSULTATION

 

6.1         This is an internal performance reporting mechanism and as such no engagement or consultation has been undertaken in this regard.

 

7.         CONCLUSION

 

7.1      The council must ensure that it uses a robust Performance Management Framework to meet the challenges of delivering services in the financial context that local authorities are now working in.

 

8.         FINANCIAL & OTHER IMPLICATIONS:

 

Financial Implications:

 

8.1       As reported, the pandemic has directly affected performance in a number of areas. Addressing performance issues, where possible, may have a financial consequence for the relevant service area which will be considered by the relevant directorate in managing its overall budget position. However, in some cases the costs will be treated as Covid-19 emergency response costs where unavoidable action has had to be taken to address performance concerns. This is reflected in regular Targeted Budget Management forecasts and reports.

Where performance is sub-optimal despite planned actions having been implemented, the financial implications for services to further improve performance may need to be considered as part of the budget setting process going forward.

 

            Finance Officer Consulted:     Jeff Coates                                    Date: 11 June 2021

 

Legal Implications:

 

8.2       The framework described here and the actions reported on are a key part of the arrangements put in place by the council to ensure that it meets its general duty (pursuant to section 3 of the Local Government Act 1999) to ensure continuous improvement in the exercise of its functions. No other direct legal implications have been identified.

                                                                   

            Lawyer Consulted:                   Victoria Simpson                          Date: 11 June 2021

 

            Equalities Implications:

 

8.3       Working with the Equalities Team, relevant corporate KPIs have been identified for the initial phase where officers will be expected to articulate equalities implications within the performance report, and will be required to evidence how they are using this data to inform service improvements in relation to reducing inequalities.      

 

            Sustainability Implications

 

8.4       Sustainability will be improved through working to meet the relevant quarterly KPI measures detailed within this report. These include:

·         Reduction in Greenhouse Gas emissions

·         % of household waste sent for reuse, recycling and composting

·         % of municipal waste landfilled

·         Nitrogen Dioxide levels in Brighton and Hove (μg/m3 - micrograms per cubic meter): Lewes Road

·         Nitrogen Dioxide levels in Brighton and Hove (μg/m3 - micrograms per cubic meter): North Street

·         The number of private sector vacant dwellings returned into occupation or demolished

 

Any Other Significant Implications:

 

8.5       No further significant implications arising from this report.

 

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION

Appendices:

 

1.            Summary KPI report for Q4 2020/21 – Corporate KPIs linked to Corporate Plan outcomes

2.            Detailed KPI report for Q4 2020/21 – Corporate KPIs linked to Corporate Plan outcomes

3.            Context: Performance Management Framework and Golden Thread