To consider the Performance Plan 2010-13, which details the draft out-turn results for 2009/10 and the performance indicators and targets for 2010-13.

1.  That the Performance Plan setting out the annual out-turns and the indicators and targets for 2010-13 as at Appendix A of the report of the Head of Change and Scrutiny be agreed.

2.  That the detailed Quarterly Performance Out-turns (Key Performance Indicators at Appendix B and Local Performance Indicators at Appendix C of the report of the Head of Change and Scrutiny) be noted.

3.  That the changes to the Key Performance Indicator set arising following the agreement of the Strategic Plan 2009-12 update 2010/11 be agreed.

4.  That the action plans attached at Appendix D of the report of the Head of Change and Scrutiny be agreed.

5.  That the responses to the recommendations of the Corporate Services Overview & Scrutiny Committee as set out on the attached Scrutiny Committee Recommendation Action and Implementation Plan (“SCRAIP”) be agreed.

Having a comprehensive and relevant set of performance targets is vital to ensure that the Council delivers on the key objectives that have been set until 2012 in the Strategic Plan.  There are also a range of national indicators that the Council is required to measure on an annual basis. It is important to look at these measures and set targets that reflect the Council’s overall aim of continuous improvement.

In addition to the National Indicator Set measures, a range of targets are also set to assess progress against the objectives that are set out in the Strategic Plan.  The Performance Plan therefore contains all the key performance measures and detailed targets for the medium term.

Performance Plan 2010-13

Previously the Local Authority had a duty to produce a Best Value Performance Plan setting out the annual out-turns for all performance indicators and set targets for the next three years. In 2009 this duty was removed but it is still considered best practice to publish a document reporting annual performance out-turns and to set targets and indicators (as attached at Appendix A to the report of the Head of Change and Scrutiny).

For 2009/10, the Cabinet requested quarterly performance reports to show the quarterly and year to date out-turns. These more detailed reports which include performance comments are at Appendix B to the report of the Head of Change and Scrutiny for Key Performance Indicators and Appendix C to the report of the Head of Change and Scrutiny for Local Performance Indicators.

The Performance Plan also includes the Council’s Data Quality Policy.  The Council has sound processes for ensuring data quality and all managers and officers responsible for data collation are familiar with their responsibilities under this policy.  The Policy and Performance team also do spot checks on indicators throughout the year.  This ensures that data quality issues are minimal and can be picked up early.  Therefore, every effort is made to ensure that data reported is robust, reliable and reported in a timely fashion, which is essential for decision-making.

Overall 75% of all indicators achieved the targets set for 2009/10 and 59% of all indicators have improved.  These levels of performance are comparable to the previous two years.

Key areas where performance is strong

All performance indicators related to Development Management, including the national indicators, achieved the annual target. The Council is performing in the top quartile nationally for NI 157b Processing of minor applications and NI 157c Processing of other applications.

Housing has continued to perform well, exceeding targets for number of homes made decent (L 5) and prevention of homelessness (L 8). In addition, investment by the Council in housing has meant that the Council has been able to deliver more affordable homes (L 2/NI 155) and extra funding has also meant that over 2,000 extra energy efficiency surveys have been undertaken (C 4).

Following the Place Survey in 2008 the Waste and Recycling team introduced local indicators on satisfaction. The local survey is undertaken in two wards each month.  The Place Survey reported an 86% satisfaction rate with the council’s refuse collection, while the local measure is currently performing at 95% (PI 8). Satisfaction with kerbside recycling (PI 9) has also improved compared to the Place Survey result, in 2008 satisfaction with kerbside recycling was 56% and the end of 2009/10 it is now at 91%. 

The National Indicators on Street Cleansing (NI 195a-d) have continued to perform well in 2009/10. Out of the four categories that are measured three (Litter, Graffiti and Fly-posting) are all in the top quartile. The fourth category, detritus (NI 195b), has improved since 2008/09, reducing by 3%. 

Webcasting (S 11) has maintained its popularity with the public in the fourth quarter with a final out-turn showing a 118% increase on last year. During 2010/11 the team plans to make further enhancements to this service to improve navigation and allow easier viewing of meeting documents and agendas online.

All of the Revenues and Benefits indicators have achieved target for 2009/10. The accuracy of calculating benefits claims has increased (PI 11) and overall satisfaction with the service is high at 93% (PI 10). The time taken to process claims (E 4/NI 181) has also improved by 4 days.  Encouragingly, the percentage of Council Tax collected (E 2) has increased slightly in 2009/10, despite fears that the adverse economic climate would have a negative impact on Council Tax collection.

The Cabinet were informed that the baseline figure for NI154 had been updated.

Key areas where there are performance concerns

The take-up of Park and Ride season tickets (PI 6) has decreased by 20% since 2008/09. However, a new 10 trip ticket was introduced during 2009/10 which replaces the weekly ticket and offers the customer more flexibility. Overall Park and Ride transactions (C 13) are down 14% compared to the previous year.

The amount of enforcement work in relation to fly-tipping (NI 196) has  increased but the number of reports of fly-tipping have also increased, which leads to a non-effective score (3) compared to last year when the authority received a score of very effective (1). Training has been undertaken with staff on recording incidents which has lead to the increase in reports but resource constraints limits the number of prosecutions. An action plan has been put in place to improve the performance of this indicator.

Usage figures from the Museum (L 10), Hazlitt (L 9) and Leisure Centre (L 11) suggest that the economic climate has had an impact on cultural and leisure pursuits. There has been a 2% decrease in visitors to the Museum, a 9% decrease in visitors to the Maidstone Leisure Centre and the Hazlitt sold fewer tickets than expected. Works planned/undertaken at the Museum and Leisure Centre will also have had an impact as well as the snow in December and January which saw many people cancelling their visits to the Hazlitt.  However, it should be noted that the Council has been able to manage these services within budget. 

The sickness levels (PI 20) within the authority have increased by just over half a day per employee. Considering the swine flu scares during 2009/10 and the levels of change in the organisation this is very positive as performance has remained in the top quartile. Two members of staff have retired due to ill health (PI 33), both of whom were off sick for over a year. 

The numbers of staff members with a disability (PI 34) has declined this year, with several disabled members of staff leaving the authority. This has impacted on the overall percentage of the workforce with a disability and the percentage of the top 5% of earners with a disability (PI 31). As disability is an area that can change during employment Human Resources will be making this available through iTrent so that staff can update their information if necessary.  The percentage of staff from ethnic minorities (PI 35) also decreased in 2009/10, following the departure of four people from ethnic minorities.  The Council’s recruitment and selection procedures are fair and routinely applied, so the right person for the job is employed.  However, the Council will continue to monitor the situation. 

The wait time for calls into the contact centre (E 8) has fluctuated throughout the year but never achieved the target with the average wait time increasing by 11 seconds since 2008/09. In 2009/10 around 10,000 more calls were made to the contact centre than in 2008/09.  These extra calls have been managed with no permanent extra resources.  There were some technical issues with the call skills based routing system during the year which have now been resolved that impacted on this indicator. The snow in January also increased the number of calls to the contact centre which the team tried to migrate by extending the welcome message to include details on the most requested information; however, this extended the average wait time.

The Adapting to Climate Change (NI 188) did not achieve target for 2009/10.  In November 2009 it was agreed that a corporate project to develop a new Climate Change Adaption and Mitigation Action Plan should go ahead. This work had not been progressed at the end of the financial year but it has been agreed to move through the level 2 and 3 assessments during 2010/11 in order to put this indicator back on track by March 2011.

CO2 emissions from the Council’s buildings (C 9) were much greater than expected, increasing by 19% since last year. However, this is due to change of calculation of the indicator and energy consumption in operational buildings has actually decreased by 5%. The non-availability of the biomass boiler also contributed to an increase in the volume of emissions.

Following the full introduction of the enhanced doorstep recycling service, the percentage of waste reused, recycled or composted (NI 192) increased and the amount of residual waste per household (NI 191) decreased in 2009/10.  However, the improvements were not quite as great as originally predicted, and both indicators narrowly missed target.  It should be noted that the figure for NI 192 is yet to be confirmed and may be higher than the 30.06% currently reported. 

Action plans have been put in place for indicators that did not achieve the 2009/10 target and where it was considered that an action plan would be helpful to improving performance. For example, there is no action plan for increasing users at the Leisure Centre as the improvement works have only recently been completed and a downturn in figures was expected for 2009/10. Action plans also have not been created for indicators that have not been retained for 2010/11. 

Actions have been put in place for the following indicators and are included at Appendix D to the report of the Head of Change and Scrutiny:

·  NI 196 – Improved street and environmental cleanliness – fly-tipping;

·  C12/NI 192 – Percentage of household waste sent for reuse, recycling or composting; 

·  C 13 - Number of onboard Park and Ride transactions;

·  NI 191 – Residual household waste per household;

·  PI 5 – Satisfaction with street cleansing;

·  S 3 Percentage of residents feeling safe walking in the area where they live after dark;

·  L 9 – Percentage of all available tickets sold at the Hazlitt; and

·  L 10 – Visits or usages of the museum per 1,000 population.

Performance by Priority

The key performance indicators and local performance indicators have been set out under the Council’s corporate priorities:

1.  A place to achieve, prosper and thrive

2.  A place that is clean and green

3.  A place that has strong, healthy and safe communities

4.  A place to live and enjoy

5.  A place with efficient and effective public services

A place to achieve, prosper and thrive

There are 10 indicators relating to this priority. Data was unavailable for 3 indicators. Of the that 7 have been given a traffic light rating:

·  6 are green (86%)

·  1 is amber (14%)

Direction of travel can be assessed for 5 of the indicators of which one has improved (20%) and the other 4 have declined (80%).

The indicator where performance did not achieve target was P 2 Number of visitors to TourMaidstone (amber).

A place that is clean and green

There are 25 indicators that are aligned with this priority of which 21 have been given a traffic light rating, of these:

·  11 (52%) are green

·  5 (24%) are amber

·  5 (24%) are red

Direction of travel can be assessed for 21 indicators and indicates that 13 indicators (62%) have improved, 5 (24%) have declined and for 3 (14%) indicators performance was sustained.

Indicators where performance did not achieve target are:

·  C 9 – Carbon dioxide emission from operation buildings (red) – This indicator has been superseded by NI 185 Co2 reductions from local authority operations and will no longer be reported.

·  NI 188 – Planning to adapt to climate change (red)

·  NI 196 – Improved street and environmental cleanliness – fly-tipping (red)

·   PI 6 - Number of season tickets sold for Park and Ride (red)

·  C 10 – Council’s water consumption in operational buildings (amber)

·  C12/NI 192 – Percentage of household waste sent for reuse, recycling or composting (amber)

·  C 13 - Number of onboard Park and Ride transactions (amber)

·  NI 191 – Residual household waste per household (amber)

·  PI 5 – Satisfaction with street cleansing (amber)

·  PI 7 Cost of collection per household (amber)

A place with strong, healthy and safe communities

There are 15 indicators that relate to this priority. One indicator cannot be given a traffic light rating as there were inconsistencies with data collection during the year. This indicator was therefore suspended and will be reported in 2010/11. The remaining 14 indicators have all been given traffic light ratings:

·  13 (93%) are green

·  1 (7%) is amber

Direction of travel can be assessed for 9 of the indicators with 8 (88%) improving and 1 (12%) where performance has declined.

The indicator that did not achieve the 2009/10 target was S 3 Percentage of residents feeling safe walking in the area where they live after dark. This indicator will continue to be reported for 2010/11 and an action plan has been put in place with the aim of improving performance.

A place to live and enjoy

There are 22 indicators that have been aligned with this priority all of which have be traffic light rated:

·  19 (86%) are green

·  3 (14%) are amber

Direction of travel can be assessed for 17 indicators of which 9 (53%) have improved and 8 (47%) have declined.

The indicators that did not achieve the annual target are:

·  L 9 – Percentage of all available tickets sold at the Hazlitt (amber)

·  L 10 – visits or usages of the museum per 1,000 population (amber)

·  L 11- Number of users at the leisure centre (amber)

A place with efficient and effective public services

There are 28 indicators relating to this priority all of which have been given a traffic light rating:

·  20 (71%) are green

·  1 (4%) is amber

·  7 (25%) are red

Direction of travel can be assessed for 21 indicators:

·  13 (62%) have improved

·  8 (38%) have declined

Indicators where the annual target was not achieved:

·  E 8 – Average wait time for calls to the contact centre (red)

·  PI 20 – Proportion of working days lost to sickness absence per employee (red)

·  PI 23 – Value of bids made through the invest to save scheme (red)

·  PI 31 – Percentage of the top 5% of earners who have a disability (red)

·  PI 33 – Ill health retirements as a percentage of the workforce (red)

·  PI 34 - Percentage of disabled staff in the workforce (red)

·  PI 35 – Percentage of staff from ethnic minorities in the workforce (red)

·  PI 19 – Percentage of invoices paid within 30 days (amber)

Performance Indicators & Monitoring 2010-13

In February 2010 the objectives in the Strategic Plan were reviewed and revised. This review allowed us to align all performance indicators with a key objective.  Therefore, there will be no separate set of Local Performance Indicators for 2010/11 onwards.

The Strategic Plan 2009-12 (2010/11 Update) set out the Key Performance Indicator set for 2010/11. Since this was agreed a number of indicators have changed.

The following indicators have had their definitions revised or been replaced with a more appropriate measure:

Ø  Carbon emissions for local authority buildings – this has been superseded by NI 185 which provides an overall picture of Co2 emissions from local authority operations.

Ø  Footfall in the Town Centre – This indicator is very resource intensive the focus has now been shifted to Footfall in the High Street to assess the outcomes from the regeneration project.

Ø  Percentage reduction in all recorded crime – The way of expressing this indicator has been revised to overall crime per 1,000 population.  This will allow clearer comparisons to be made.

A number of NIs have been removed from the NI Set by Government.  Officers have considered these and will continue to report as KPIs those that are useful measures of the work we do.  However, the following will no longer be reported:

·  NI 10 Visits to museums and galleries (covered by KPI 37); and

·  NI 170 Previously developed land that has been vacant or derelict for more than 5 years.

A number of NIs and other KPIs for 2010/11 onwards are taken from questions in the Place Survey, which was carried out in 2008 and is die to be carried out again in the Autumn of 2010.  Following the change of Government, no decision has yet been taken over whether Councils will be required to carry out the Place Survey this year, but the Department of Communities and Local Government (CLG) sent out an email to Councils in early June advising not to continue with any plans to carry out the Place Survey at the present time.  If the Place Survey is not mandatory, the Council may want to consider carrying out a similar survey to gather useful information for the KPIs and other important topics, working with other Kent authorities if possible to ensure value for money. 

On-going performance management

The Performance Plan is the annual report of a set of corporately reported indicators, but much more goes into ensuring that performance is managed effectively at the Council.  For example, performance reports are sent to Cabinet every quarter rather than just once a year.  These are also considered by Corporate Management Team (CMT) and Overview & Scrutiny, and ensure performance issues are picked up and actions taken to improve performance wherever possible before the end of the year.

CMT also receive monthly performance reports for each team through Reach the Summit, which measures the day to day service provided by each team.  Managers responsible for indicators that are at base camp (performing below a minimum level) for three consecutive months have to formulate an action plan to improve performance and present this to CMT.  Excellent performance is also rewarded.

The Council has also invested in new technology to ensure it has a culture of performance management.  The introduction of iTrent has meant that whilst service managers are still responsible for managing sickness at a local level, CMT have been able to receive reports containing much more comprehensive information on sickness and take an overview of this, which has been particularly important as sickness levels have risen in 2009/10.  Covalent, the new performance and management system will also help individual managers, heads of service and CMT to monitor performance at an appropriate level more easily.

The Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee considered the Performance Plan at their meeting on 6 July 2010.  The recommendations were circulated at the meeting and these recommendations and the responses are set out on the attached Scrutiny Committee Recommendation Action and Implementation Plan.

The Council could choose not to produce a Performance Plan.  However, the reporting of performance data and the production of the Plan represents the best way of publishing and tracking performance.  The Plan also sets out the key targets for the council.  Ceasing publication could reduce the effectiveness of the council (as the organisation and individuals would not be clear on the service targets) and also impacts on external assessments.

Alternative targets could be set for indicators.  The targets proposed in the Performance Plan have been agreed by the responsible service managers and are based upon previous performance, comparisons with other authorities, planning and resources and also continuous improvement.