Contact your Parish Council

Update

Date

Completed?

Note

1^st

27 November 2007

2^nd

1 April 2008

3^rd

October 2008

Recommendation[1]

Cabinet

Member[2]

Response[3]

Timetable[4]

Lead Officer[5]

Recommendation A

(i) That the definition above of what is and what is not a partnership be used as the Council’s definition of a partnership.

(ii) A central partnership database be complied which will include as a start those identified as priority partnerships by the Review Group.

The Leader

(i) It is very helpful that this work has been completed on defining what is and is not a partnership and I agree that the definition should be adopted by the Council. (accepted)

(ii) I understand that officers in Overview and Scrutiny will establish and maintain a partnership database based on the priority partnerships identified in the review. (accepted)

Recommendation B

That Officers and Councillors time and value of contributions to partnerships and the outcomes of those partnerships be recorded and reported annually to the scrutiny working group on partnerships. The working group will have responsibility for the recommended partnership web pages.

The Leader

Given the feedback at Cabinet further work needs to be undertaken to clarify how officer and Councillor time on various partnerships is counted.  This should be completed as part of updating the information during 2007/08.  This information will then be included on the website. (accepted)

Recommendation G (note appears in later section of report but for clarification of recommendations moved up the order)

That a Partnership webpage be created to include:

Monitoring and recording of estimated time and money given/spent on partnerships

Measure of benefits qualitative and quantitative

Annual reports from partnerships and Members.

Cllr Hooper

This relates to the website and as part of assembling the data partners will be asked to highlight the benefits that have been delivered, any external links to key information will also be established and access to annual reports.

A front page listing all the partners will be developed.  (accepted)

Recommendation C

That a four member (one from each political group) scrutiny group is set-up to work with the Director for Change and Support Services to review the performance of partnerships on a regular basis drawn down from and reporting to the Corporate Service Overview and Scrutiny Committee. That group leaders when nominating for this scrutiny group consider a mix of those from the original review group for continuity and new members.

Whether Scrutiny Committee wish to set up a sub-group to work with the Director of Change and Support Services would need to be considered.  However, I suggest it might be better for the Director to report directly to Overview and Scrutiny on performance of the partnerships, possibly every six months (linked to Recommendation D). (rejected)

Recommendation D

(i) That the action plans and agreed outcomes of partnerships be added to the partnerships web page.

(ii) That the Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee review the action plans and agreed outcomes to identify partnerships for review at six monthly intervals. That this be prioritised according to the list identified by the review group.

Cllr Hooper

The action plans and agreed outcomes from each of the partnerships will be included in the package of work, a timetable for implementation will need to be agreed with officers in the Overview and Scrutiny Section.  (accepted)

Recommendation E

The Review Group recommends that all partnerships are risk assessed and exit strategies identified by Lead Officers. These should be included on the partnership web page and corporate risk register where appropriate as well as action plans for partnerships

Cllr Hooper

A range of information will need to be obtained on each of the partnerships, this will include risk assessments and exit strategies.  These will be added to the website in due course and where issues need to be included in the corporate risk register an entry will be made. (accepted)

Recommendation F

That in light of the Local Government and Public Engagement in Health Bill:

(i)  the Corporate Services Overview and Scrutiny Committee carry out a review of the Local Area Agreement and how scrutiny should be involved in its development  in the future; and

(ii) The Cabinet be asked to give its assurance that the Council is being proactive in its involvement with the Kent Local Area Agreement and Strategic Partnership and is seeking greater Member involvement and devolved powers to the Maidstone Local Strategic Partnership.

The Leader

I understand that the issue of reviewing the LAA was included as part of the discussion on the 2007/08 work programme. (rejected)

In terms of the Council’s involvement on the Kent Local Agreement this falls into two main areas.  The first of which is the delivery of the current LAA and targets that have been assigned to Maidstone Borough Council for which the Council is on track to achieve.

The second is the development of the next LAA (from April 2008) for which the Council is taking an active part in the debate, although formal consultation on the content and approach has yet to be circulated by KCC who are the nominated lead authority.  Issues of governance and accountability have still to be addressed. (accepted)

Recommendation H

(i) The Model Protocol Agreement for Partnership Working be used for all future partnerships and rolled out across current partnerships where appropriate and possible.

(ii) The checklist in the protocol agreement should be used to monitor the Council’s partnerships.

The model protocol provides a framework for partnership working and a useful toolkit for external partners to consider.  This will be rolled out across current partnerships and considered for the future although some of the detail will need to be adapted, dependant on the size and objectives of the partnership.  The checklist will be used and also included on the website. (accepted)

Recommendation I

The following Terms of Reference for the new Partnerships Review Group be agreed:

To monitor and review the partnerships web page

To carry out a brief review of each partnership, beginning with those ‘above the line’ in section 6.

Progress on this recommendation will be dependent on how the Overview and Scrutiny Committee wishes to progress the options on reporting and whether a sub-group is established. (rejected)