Contact your Parish Council

Name of Review: Workforce Planning

What are the objectives and desired outcomes of the review

·         Establish what methods are used for estimating workforce requirements and whether these are fit for purpose;

·         Assess the mechanisms in place across the Council and within specific services to overcome recruitment and retention difficulties and make recommendations as appropriate;

·         Determine the Government drivers, customers’ needs and the local labour market and whether workforce planning is undertaken accordingly;

·         Determine the council’s plan to develop, attract and retain the required workforce;

·         Establish how the work generated from vacancies and long-term absenteeism is addressed; and

·         Make recommendations as appropriate.

What equality issues will need to be considered as part of the review – giving consideration to the 6 strands:

·         Consider what is an appropriate Age, Gender, Race, Sexual orientation, Faith and Disability workforce profile and determine whether appropriate practices are in place as required.

Which witnesses are required?

·         Head of Human Resources

·         Cabinet Member for Corporate Services

·         Local Government Employers

·         External experts

Other ways to seek evidence? E.g. site visits, involving members of the public, consultation.

·         Anonymous survey of staff working in departments with vacancies and long-term absenteeism

What information/training is needed?

·         Review of the Recruitment and Retention Scrutiny Report

·         Desktop research of best practice – IdeA

·         Best Practice Case Studies – Milton Keynes and Enfield

Suggested time for review and report completion date

·         2-3 months

How does the review link to council priorities?

·         A place with efficient and effective public services

How does this item deliver CfPS effective scrutiny principles?

·         Provides ‘critical friend’ challenge to executive policy-makers and decision-makers

·         Drives improvement in public services

Any co-optees or expert witnesses?

Name of Review: Marketing

What are the objectives and desired outcomes of the review

• Consider how the Council’s marketing could be improved;
• Consider the Council’s marketing plan and establish whether it is fit for purpose;
• Identify which Council services should be marketed and the service’s current uptake;
• Establish how different Council services, consultations and events have been effectively marketed;
• Identify hindrances to effective marketing and opportunities to share resources; and
• Identify best practice.

And make recommendations as required.

What equality issues will need to be considered as part of the review – giving consideration to the 6 strands:

Age, Gender, Race, Sexual orientation, Faith and Disability

• Does the Council ensure when marketing its services that they are widely accessible to people regardless of age, gender, race, sexual orientation, faith or disability?
• Has marketing been targeted towards particular groups? If so, is this justified?

Which witnesses are required?

·         Head of Communications

·         Marketing Officer

·         Chorley Council, Head of Communications

·         Canterbury Christchurch University, Principal Lecturer in Marketing, Miss Paulette Holmes

Other ways to seek evidence? E.g. site visits, involving members of the public, consultation.

·         Survey of staff to identify awareness, satisfaction and uptake of marketing service

What information/training is needed?

• The Council’s Communications and Marketing Plan
• Keep Calm and Carry on Marketing, Chartered Institute of Marketing

Suggested time for review and report completion date

·         1-2 months

How does the review link to council priorities?

·         A place with efficient and effective public services

How does this item deliver CfPS effective scrutiny principles?

·         Drives improvement in public services

Any co-optees or expert witnesses?

Name of Review:          Election Counting Procedures

What are the objectives and desired outcomes of the review

To consider and assess the procedures adopted by the Council to count votes cast in elections to ensure that they:

• Comply with legislative requirements;
• Minimise delays; and
• Are cost effective.

This could include consideration of general staffing issues such as recruitment and training, financial information, time taken to transport ballot boxes and how wards/elections are prioritised at the count.

To make recommendations as required.

What equality issues will need to be considered as part of the review – giving consideration to the 6 strands:

Age, Gender, Race, Sexual orientation, Faith and Disability

·         Although procedures are likely to be non-discriminatory, Members will have to be alert to any indication that procedures could directly or indirectly discriminate any group or groups.

Which witnesses are required?

·         Democratic Services manager

·         Registration Services Manager

·         Returning Officer

·         External officers from other Local Authorities

Other ways to seek evidence? E.g. site visits, involving members of the public, consultation.

·         Consult / visit other councils to establish their procedures;

·         Survey of count staff supervisors

·         Survey of candidates and counting agents.

What information/training is needed?

·         Information regarding legal requirements

·         Electoral Commission Guidance

·         Timings of ballot box receipt and declaration of results

·         Declaration times of similar UK parliamentary constituencies and number of staff.

Suggested time for review and report completion date

·         Two months – suggest the work is completed by January 2011 to enable changes to be implemented in time for the May 2011 Council elections.

How does the review link to council priorities?

·         A place with efficient and effective public services.

How does this item deliver CfPS effective scrutiny principles?

·         Drives improvement in public services

Any co-optees or expert witnesses?