Title / Item 3: Regeneration Service Review Work Programme
Lead / Stephen McDonald, Assistant Director, Regeneration – Service Lead
Martin Calleja, Head of Performance – VFM Programme Lead
Contact for further Information /
x7948
Date / 23 September 2010
Introduction:
Neighbourhoods and Regeneration is mid way through the delivery of a one year Value for Money Programme which will ensure that full service reviews for all main services not reviewed in the last 18 months are completed by March 2011.
Just over a half of currently planned savings within N&Rs medium term savings plan are directly associated with completed service reviews in key areas such as planning, markets and parking. As continuing pressure to strategically identify savings comes to bear, it is anticipated that the service review processes will further drive the planned delivery of savings requirements.
Within the current VFM programme ‘stage 1’ reviews are due for completion by the end of September 2010 in the following service areas; community safety/DAT building control and licensing and private sector housing. All reviews offer 25% savings options in line with Corporate requirements and some reviews offer even greater levels of cost reduction. In most cases the 25% options reflect a combination of genuine savings opportunities and what is considered a tolerable level of service reduction. The second stage of the review programme will focus on Regeneration Services and Planning Policy. These review process will be completed by the end of January 2011 with ratification for options to be taken forward shortly afterwards.
Service reviews are taking place in the context of efficiencies already achieved but with the need to secure further savings estimated to be up to £45m across the Council from now until 2013.
The review is governed by the N&R VFM Programme Board. Tom McCourt (Interim Deputy Director, Public Realm and Planning) is the programme sponsor. Martin Calleja (Head of Performance) is the programmes change manager and has the lead quality assurance role for this service review.
This report provides a high level overview of how the service review process will bedelivered for Regeneration Services.
The report ratifies the mutual accountabilities and flexibilities between the lead officers from the service and VFM programme and in particular how reporting and consultation to the ERSG will be undertaken, in line with this agreed role.
Recommendations:
- That the proposed project plan, based on the standard VFM programme service review methodology is noted and approved.
- Feedback and suggestions for moderating the review process proposed are provided.
- Specific additional requirements relating to themonitoring and consultative role of the ERSG are requested if required.
- Confirmation of a lead officer within Regeneration to provide project support for the review including assistance with information management, benchmarking and review report compilation.
Key Highlights:
- The standard review process, including time frames has been flexed to reflect the specific nature of Regeneration Services. This provides a high level overview of the process including lead responsibilities and anticipated time frames.
- The review will consider the business within Strategic Projects and Partnerships and Investment as distinct but related areas of business working closely with the respective Heads of Service through a joint project review team. Management of the project will ensure this review dovetails with the planning policy review, paying particular attention to the common functions between this area of service and area master planning delivery within Strategic Projects. It is envisaged a unified review report project, following the standard template set will be provided but with distinct sections for each substantive area of business and associated sub programmes.
- The depth of involvement and tasks to add value undertaken by the Assistant Director will be agreed at an early stage of the review including attendance levels at fortnightly project team meetings
- Resource requirements will largely be officer time from both the service and VFM Programme Team with the review process needing to be planned for as a top priority. An Officer within Performance and Strategy has been appointed to support the review process, Kam Sandhu Shingershe will project manage the review and contribute to analysis and re-design options working around 2 days per week. In addition the group accountant, Francis Sarsah will also be part of the review team.
- In addition to Heads of Service, Regeneration should appoint an officer to provide co-ordinated support for the review process.
- Reviews are carried out flexibly through close and genuine partnership working with heads of service. Initiation meetings determine precisely how the review process will work. Tensions have not been marked for reviews undertaken to date due to this close working and the need to provide options for savings of at least 25% on general fund contributions.
- Service leads have the option of taking the lead on compiling the review report and re-design options if this is preferred. Whatever slant on roles taken the VFM Programme Team have a responsibility to assure quality regarding all aspects of assessment and analysis and for delivering a product that offers the best options for future service delivery. In particular a standard set of routes to efficiency, including de-prioritisation have been put into place which will be tested against services.
- In particular progress will be reported against the review action plan to all ERSG meetings, including headlines on emerging findings. It is also proposed that the ERSG meeting in January is used to provide feedback on emerging options.
CDM_n2843455_v1_21-09-10_Service_Review_Item_to_ERSG_23-09-10 1
Appendix 1: High Level Review Project Plan [highlighted actions are specific to this review]
Stage / Tasks / Lead / Target Date1) Return on Investment Self Assessment for Major Programmes /
- Headline summary of costs, income and benefits delivered to date and planned for.
Completed-although there are some quality issues.
2) Review Initiation Action Plan /
- Start up assessment detailing the vision and initial hypothesis.
- AD, Heads of Service and Review Team attend and set out more detailed review process plan, including interview schedule and benchmarking methodology and ratify leads.
3) State of Readiness Assessment Phase /
- Collation of available evidence against the review standard; assesses gaps in intelligence and approach and the level of work required for the review.
4) Data Collection & Service Assessment
(to run concurrently with Benchmarking) / Service Assessment to include:
- Strategic relevance of service
- Customer and Stakeholders’ views and expectations: engagement & consultation.
- Service’s investment and development history
- Business critical Performance Indicators monitored and measured.
- Key high cost / high risk business processes identified and costed.
- Key contracts scrutinised.
- Overview of common services outside Council Boundaries e.g. partners, neighbouring authorities.
5) Benchmarking /
- Benchmarking on business critical Performance Indicatorscosts with relevant to comparable Authorities.
- Best practices and structures suitable for importing identified.
- Standard methodology established for comparing future performance and costs.
Stage / Tasks / Lead / Target Date
6) Analysis & Initial Report delivered:
Redesign Principles and baseline assessment of service /
- Report prepared up to (but not including) recommendations section.
- Development of Design principles to inform future organisational model:
-Customer need / relationship
-Partners networks
-Required capabilities / Lead to be determined although service will need to lead on some sections. / Mid December 2010
7) Leading options reported to ESRG for initial feedback. /
- Facilitated presentation and discussion –this will be supplemented through individual meetings where required.
8) Full Report:
Internal Challenge and Savings options /
- Options for delivering design principles including;
-re-prioritisation.
- P&S and Finance internally challenge report and assist in drafting three savings options:
- The service with 15% savings* (with impacts and risks)
- The service with 25% savings (with impacts and risks)
- The service with 30% savings (with impacts and risks)
9) Sign off of Full report /
- Relevant AD sign-off
- P&S / Finance sign-off
10) Challenge Panel /
- The Head of Service will present the findings of the review, with the three savings options, to a specially convened DMT.
- DMT will review the report and recommend one of the three options for implementation – ‘the proposal’.
11) Translation to formally agreed plan /
- Proposal fully specified (structures, business change management and DPR).
- BUORB and member sign-off.
12) Implementation /
- New delivery project or action plan including delegated powers report.
CDM_n2843455_v1_21-09-10_Service_Review_Item_to_ERSG_23-09-10 1