Annual Performance Report 2014/15

Policy and Resources			24 June 2015
Is the final decision on the recommendations in this report to be made at this meeting?				Yes~~/No~~

ANNUAL pERformance report 2014/15

Final Decision-Maker	Policy and Resources Committee
Lead Director or Head of Service	Head of Policy and Communications
Lead Officer and Report Author	Clare Wood
Classification	Non-exempt
Wards affected	None

This report makes the following recommendations to the final decision-maker:
1. Note the performance against the 2014/15 Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and the end of year Strategic Plan action updates at Appendix A (Indicator Definitions are included for reference at Appendix B), considering : � Performance against target � Direction of performance � Reasons for missing data. 2. Agree the new Key Performance Indicator set and targets for the Strategic Plan 2015-20 at Appendix C.

This report relates to the following corporate priorities:
� Great People � Great Place � Great Opportunity The Key Performance Indicators are part of the Council�s overarching Strategic Plan 2011-15 and play an important role in the achievement of corporate objectives, which in turn reflect what matters most to the Maidstone community. Other Performance Indicators cover a wide range of service and priority areas for example waste and recycling, customer contact, planning and costs.

Timetable
*Meeting*		*Date*
Policy and Resources Committee		24/06/15
Council		N/A
Other Committee		N/A

Annual Performance Plan

1. PURPOSE OF REPORT AND EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.1 To note the end of year Strategic Plan action updates and Key Performance Indicator results for 2014/15, and to agree the Key Performance Indicators and targets.

2. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND

2.1 Having a comprehensive and relevant set of performance indicators and targets is vital to ensure that the Council delivers its priorities and outcomes. It is important to look at these measures and set targets that reflect the Council�s overall aim of continuous improvement. Definitions of performance indicators are included at Appendix B for reference.

2.2 Performance indicators are judged in two ways; firstly on whether performance has improved, been sustained or declined, compared to the same period in the previous year.� This is known as Direction. Where there is no previous data, no assessment of Direction can be made.

2.3 The second way is to look at whether an indicator has achieved the target set and is known as PI status. If an indicator has achieved or exceeded the annual target they are rated green. If the target has been missed but is within 10% of the target it will be rated amber and if the target has been missed by more than 10% it will be rated red. Some indicators will show an asterix (*) after the figure, these are provisional values that are awaiting confirmation.

2.4 Contextual indicators are not targeted but are given a Direction. Indicators that are not due for reporting or where there is delay in data collection are not rated against targets or given a Direction.

3. PERFORMANCE SUMMARY

3.1 There are 57 key performance indicators (KPIs) which were agreed in the Strategic Plan 2011-15 for 2014/15, relating to seven strategic outcomes.� Overall, 56% (28) of KPIs achieved the annual target set and for 56% of indicators performance improved. At the year-end in 2013/14 51% (31) of the targets were met and 44% (24) of indicators had improved. Full details of KPI results are at Appendix A.

3.2 In terms of the Strategic Plan outcomes, performance has been strong for the outcome �services are customer focused and residents are satisfied with them�. Despite the economic situation during this Strategic Plan period the Council has maintained performance and continued to ensure outcomes are achieved particularly in the area of reducing disadvantage and deprivation.

Performance against Target	On target	Missed target[1]	Target not achieved	N/A	Total
A Growing Economy	3 (60%)	2 (40%)	0	4	9
A Decent Place	12 (50%)	7 (30%)	5 (20%)	3	27
Corporate & Customer excellence	13 (62%)	4 (19%)	4 (19%)	0	21
Total	28 (56%)	13 (26%)	9 (18%)	7	57

Direction of Performance	Improved	Sustained	Declined	N/A	Total
A Growing Economy	5 (63%)		3 (37%)	1	9
A Decent Place	9 (38%)	1 (4%)	14 (58%)	3	27
Corporate & Customer excellence	15 (75%)		5 (25%)	1	21
Total	28 (56%)	1 (2%)	21 (42%)	7	57

Good Performance

3.3 The level of people claiming job seekers allowance has reduced over the course of the year and currently stands at 1.3% or 1,327 people, 475 fewer people are claiming this benefit compared to the same period last year. Maidstone�s figure is 0.7% lower than the figure for Great Britain as a whole. This is the fifth lowest figure out of the Kent districts. In addition the proportion of people aged 16-18 that are not currently in Education, Employment or Training (NEETs) has also reduced slightly compared to last year, there are currently 249, 16 to 18 year olds who fall into this category. The latest data available for England (February 2015) shows the current proportion of NEETs to be 4.8% higher than the figure for Maidstone (4.07%).

3.4 The proportion of vacant retail units in the town centre has reduced compared to last year. At this point last year there were 44 vacant units, this now stands at 39 vacant units, equating to 7.83% vacant units.

3.5 Also in reference to the town centre economy, the overall number of parking transactions in 2014/15 increased.� This is due to King St car park reopening and flooding experienced in the previous year not being an issue in 2014/15. In 2014/15 there was a high turnover at the King St car park with �49.15 generated per bay per week whereas previously a MSCP average income per bay per week was �15.68. Income from pay and display spaces has increased by more than �200 per space since this period last year, exceeding the annual target.� This is not surprising as the overall number of bays is much-reduced (223 to 60); however the income per bay is also much higher than the average income per bay, due to the close proximity to the shops, car park condition, and the short stay tariff.

3.6 In relation to housing and the housing register, the team improved 217 private sector homes, exceeding the annual target of 180. In addition, the average length of stay in temporary accommodation (those leaving TA) has achieved the annual target. The average stay is currently 56 days.

3.7 Although performance fluctuated during the year, the processing of Major planning applications within statutory time frames achieved its annual target and improved on last year�s performance. This is particularly positive considering that the service received 13 more major applications than in 2013/14 and there was a change in IT systems in June 2014.

3.8 The cost of collecting household waste per household has reduced by �8.77 following the roll out of the new waste contract in 2013. 2014/15 was the first full year under the new arrangements. Prior to the new contract, the cost of collecting waste had been around �55 per household, per year, for 2014/15 the cost of waste collection was �34.71.

3.9 In terms of delivering customer services the average wait time for calls into the contact centre has reduced by just over one minute compared 2013/14. The average wait time is currently just under two minutes. Performance on face-to-face contact in the Gateway has also improved, with 80% of visitors to the Gateway seen within 20 minutes. This is the first time the annual target has been achieved since 2011/12. Correspondingly, the channel shift indicators are all moving in the right direction with contacts by phone and in person reducing and those made online increasing; all have achieved the annual target and improved compared to 2013/14.

Poor Performance

3.10 While performance has improved, for the processing of Major and residential planning applications, it has declined for Minor and Other applications. The annual target for Minors was not achieved and the target for Other applications was missed (within 10% of target). The annual performance for both indicators is the lowest in over five years. When volumes of applications are compared to 2013/14 there has been an 8% reduction in the number of Minor applications and a 12% reduction in Other applications determined compared to this time last year. As outlined at 1.6.5 the service had a change in IT systems in June 2014, which created a backlog of applications affecting the performance for quarters 2 and 3. Performance is now returning to the levels seen prior to the implementation of the new system and the results for quarter 4 for both minor and other applications is greater than that for 2013/14 overall.

3.11 The annual target for number of affordable homes has not been achieved and performance has declined compared to the same period last year. Performance in the last quarter of 2014/15 was lower than anticipated due to delays in construction such as delivery of materials. One scheme of 36 units was delivered mid April 2015 and if it had been handed over in 2014/15, the annual target would have been marginally missed (rated amber) and performance compared to the previous year would be showing an improvement.

3.12 The average time taken to process and notify applicants on the housing register has not achieved the annual target. Currently it takes an average of 35.5 days an increase of 16.5 days from 2013/14. The team reviewed and amended their process and policies, which in turn have extended the average time taken. Following the completion of an online application applicants now have 28 days to supply supporting evidence before an assessment is made and they are given a decision. While this has made the processes longer, it is more supportive of applicants as they are applying for the register.

3.13 There was no consultation work undertaken this year in relation to neighbourhood action plans as this stage of the plan has now finished and the team is concentrating on delivering the improvements set out in the plans. Between 2011 and 2015 over 2,600 people from Shepway North and South and Park Wood wards participated in the programme. The Shepway Neighbourhood Action Plan launched in May 2013, this was then rolled-out as a 'community based neighbourhood action planning' model in the Shepway area. During 2014/15 the focus has been on delivering environmental improvements including a dedicated CCTV camera for Shepway North and South wards that can be deployed as needed and education around dog fouling. The Community Development team have also been working on other initiatives in the borough including the Maidstone Health Inequalities Action Plan that was agreed in May 2014

3.14 Satisfaction with complaint handling improved compared to this time last year however, the annual target has not been achieved. A low response rate for quarter 2 coupled with no satisfied responses for this period influenced this. In 2015/16 the Policy & Information team is reviewing how we handle complaints; this review will cover the policy and look at ways in which we can gain feedback from complainants. Overall, there has been a 28% increase in the number of complaints received for 2014/15 compared to 2013/14.

3.15 The number of working days lost to sickness has increased compared to the same period last year and has not achieved the annual target. This is due to an increase in long-term sickness, which currently stands at 6.88 days per employee. A majority of staff have returned to work and those that remain off work are being managed through occupational health.

Strategic Plan 2015-20 Key Performance Indicators and targets 2015-18

3.16 Details of proposed KPIs and targets are attached at Appendix C. Targets have been proposed by Service Managers and Heads of Service and where possible have been set for the next three years.�� Performance will be reported to the Corporate Leadership Team and Policy and Resources Committee through the Quarterly Monitoring Reports, so that early action can be taken to mitigate any issues where necessary.

4. REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS

4.1 Having a comprehensive and relevant set of performance indicators and targets is vital to ensure that the Council delivers its priorities and outcomes. It is important to look at these measures and set targets that reflect the Council�s overall aim of continuous improvement. Definitions of performance indicators are included at Appendix B for reference.

4.2 Previously the Local Authority had a duty to produce a Best Value Performance Plan setting out the annual results for all performance indicators and targets for the next three years. In 2009, this duty was removed however it is still considered best practice to produce an annual performance report as well as set and publish targets for the next three years.

4.3 The Council could choose not to produce an annual performance report and/or could choose alternative performance management arrangements.

5. CONSULTATION RESULTS AND PREVIOUS COMMITTEE FEEDBACK

5.1 The performance indicator set at Appendix C evolved from discussions with Cabinet and Senior Manager about the Strategic plan 2015-20 and is the measurement mechanism for assessing progress on the Strategic Plan 2015-20.

5.2 The proposed targets for the Key Performance Indicator set for 2015-20 have been set following discussions with Service Managers and Heads of Service and where possible have been set for the next three years

6. CROSS-CUTTING ISSUES AND IMPLICATIONS

Issue	Implications	Sign-off
Impact on Corporate Priorities	The Key Performance Indicators are part of the Council�s overarching Strategic Plan 2011-15 and play an important role in the achievement of corporate objectives which in turn reflect what matters most to the Maidstone community. Other Performance Indicators cover a wide range of service and priority areas for example waste and recycling, customer contact, planning and costs.	Anna Collier
Risk Management	The setting and monitoring of performance targets linked to our strategic outcomes forms a key part of our risk management framework by enabling the organisation to measure progress towards achieving its objectives, identify areas of strong performance and where there is under-performance in comparison with the targets set and consequently where remedial action needs to be focused.	Anna Collier
Financial	The financial implications of any proposed changes are also identified and taken into account in the Council�s budget setting process with issues highlighted as part of the budget monitoring reporting process.	Zena Cooke & Paul Holland
Staffing	Having a clear set of measures enables staff outcomes/objectives to be set and effective action plans to be put in place.	Anna Collier
Legal	None identified.
Equality Impact Needs Assessment	None identified.	Anna Collier
Environmental/Sustainable Development	The performance indicators cover and are used to monitor a number of priority areas. No implications identified.
Community Safety
Human Rights Act
Procurement		Zena Cooke
Asset Management	None identified.

7. REPORT APPENDICES

The following documents are to be published with this report and form part of the report:

� Appendix A � 2014/15 Performance out-turns

� Appendix B � 2014/15 Indicator Definitions

� Appendix C � 2015-18 KPI Targets

8. BACKGROUND PAPERS

8.1 None

[1] By less than 10%.