Agenda item

7.1

James Henderson, Director of Policy, Performance and Communications, gave a presentation, a copy of which had been circulated with the agenda pack, which provided an overview of Council performance measured by outcome area for 2014/15.  Also in attendance for this item was Andi Walshaw, Performance and Research Manager. 

7.2

James Henderson explained that Council performance was measured by 157 performance indicators and that performance was holding up well in the face of financial reductions, with the majority of the indicators being on an upward trend.  There were, however, areas of concern, with particular attention being given to those indicators categorised as red and getting worse, of which there were 25.  He went on to refer to some of these, which related to Adult Social Care (Assessment and Review), Adult Social Care (NHS Policies and Pathways), School Attainment, Fixed-Term School Exclusions, Permanent School Exclusions, Housing Delivery, City Centre Vibrancy and Sickness Absence.  In relation to each of these, Members made various comments and asked a number of questions, to which responses were provided as follows:-

7.2.1

Adult Social Care – Assessment and Review

·                There should be an annual review of people receiving Adult Social Care and Members would be provided with written information on the number and timing of these.

·                The purpose of the annual review was to ensure that the individual was receiving an appropriate care package and Members would be provided with written information on the financial impact of these reviews.

·                The reviews were regarded as a routine process and further information would be provided to Members in this regard. 

·                On a general point, the 25 indicators, which had been designated as red and getting worse, had been identified at a quarterly meeting of the Executive Management Team.  Details of these 25 would be circulated to Members.

7.2.2

Adult Social Care – NHS Policies and Pathways

·                Those who were back in hospital, in residential homes or had died were included in the definition of those not being at home 91 days after discharge from hospital.  There were issues with this definition, but it was nationally set to assist benchmarking.  Members would be provided with further information in relation to this 91 day limit.

·                Investigations would be undertaken into the inclusion of those deceased in the definition of those not at home 91 days after discharge from hospital and the results would be circulated to Members.

·                It should be noted that this presentation was part of a three hour presentation so could not cover the issues in the same depth.  Members should be aware that each quarterly presentation to the Executive Management Team was available on the Council’s website and that a link to this information had been circulated to all Council Members.

7.2.3

School Attainment

·                The overall pattern as presented was slightly generous but performance was not nearly as good as could be hoped for, particularly at Key Stage 2 and GCSE level, with any improved performance not matching national performance.

·                The validity of the comparative data would be discussed with colleagues in the Children, Young People and Families Portfolio and further information circulated to Members, along with details of the 2015 targets.

·                Whilst specific questions on school attainment could be answered, it might be more appropriate for the Children, Young People and Family Support Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee to look at attainment issues in more depth.

·                In general terms, the national picture was improving faster than that in Sheffield.

·                A 40 slide presentation had been produced on attainment and further information could be provided on the pupil premium.

·                The Work Programme of the Children, Young People and Family Support Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee included School Attainment.

·                The coasting middle was a challenge in relation to the Key Stage 4 indicator and this could be broken down into schools.

7.2.4

Fixed-Term and Permanent School Exclusions

·                Twenty-one pupils had been permanently excluded from school during 2014/15.

7.2.5

Housing Delivery

·                The Safer and Stronger Communities Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee would be looking at this issue in more detail, with particular reference to any barriers which were preventing development and ensuring that appropriate development occurred in the differing areas of the City. 

·                A possible consequence of missing the statutory target of 1,425 net housing completions was that the Council’s planning policies could be considered to be out of date.

7.2.6

City Centre Vibrancy

·                In the light of lower footfall and reduced letting levels in the Moor Markets, an action plan had been put in place in an attempt to improve the situation.

·                There was a correlation between footfall on the Moor and the Moor Market, with 90% of those visiting the Moor also going to the Market.

·                It was hoped that the new development on the Moor would provide a significant boost to the Market.

·                Comparative information between the Moor Market and Crystal Peaks and information on market rents and service charges would be obtained and circulated to Members.

7.2.7

Sickness Absence

·                There were different pathways for dealing with long-term and short-term sickness absence and information would be circulated to Members.

·                The sickness absence figures relating to Q3 2014/15 would be examined to see if there were any particular reasons why that figure should be so high.

·                On a more general note, it was possible to incorporate Council contractors into these performance indicators.

7.3

RESOLVED: That the Committee:-

(a)       notes the information reported and responses to questions;

(b)       notes that the performance issues reported in relation to Adult Social Care, School Attainment, School Exclusions, Housing Delivery and City Centre Vibrancy will each be considered by the appropriate Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee; and

(c)        requests that:

(i)         the Director of Policy, Performance and Communications sends the further written responses to Members’ questions to the Policy and Improvement Officer for circulation to Committee Members;

(ii)        Corporate Performance Indicators, including Sickness Absence, be included in the Committee’s Work Programme; and

(iii)      The Children, Young People and Family Support Scrutiny and Policy Development Committee gives particular consideration to attainment in schools which have pupils from areas of the City with high levels of deprivation.

7.4

James Henderson continued his presentation by introducing the Committee to the new Performance Management Framework, which he emphasised was presently in draft form.  This new approach had resulted from the new Corporate Plan, which had provided the opportunity to review and refresh the Council’s performance framework.  The framework focused on what it was important for the Council to achieve and used Key Performance Questions (KPQs) to structure the proposal for a refreshed Corporate Performance Framework.  The five Council priorities related to being an in-touch organisation, having a strong economy, having thriving neighbourhoods and communities, promoting better health and wellbeing, and tackling inequalities.  There were KPQs relating to each of these priorities.  He also emphasised the importance of setting realistic but stretching targets.

7.5

Members made various comments and asked a number of questions, to which responses were provided as follows:-

·                Feedback on the KPQs would be welcomed. 

·                It was considered that the right number of KPQs had been set to cover each priority, but more could be included if it was felt appropriate.

·                The Performance Framework had been signed off by the Executive Management Team in conjunction with the Cabinet Member for Finance and Resources.  It was hoped that the Framework would stay in place for the 3 years of the Corporate Plan.

·                Reporting on the new Performance Framework would be by means of a quarterly report and an annual report, both of which would be available to the public.

·                The new Performance Framework would be introduced during the year 2015/16.

·                It was possible that indicators might contribute to answering more than one KPQ.

·                Performance areas had equal status in the Corporate Plan, but some may be regarded as core indicators.

·                The objective of the Performance Framework was to assure the Council and the public that the Council’s ambitions were being met.

7.6

RESOLVED: That the Committee:-

(a)       thanks James Henderson and Andi Walshaw for their contribution to the meeting;

(b)       notes the information reported and responses to questions; and

(c)        requests that:

(i)         Members send any further comments on the new Performance Management Framework to the Director of Policy, Performance and Communications;

(ii)        the Director of Policy, Performance and Communications circulates Committee Members with a list of draft indicators and targets; and

(iii)      officers reflect on key issues for the Authority.