HERTFORDSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL
POLICY AND RESOURCES CABINET PANEL
THURSDAY 17 JULY 2008 AT 2.00PM
LAA 2006 – 2009 PERFORMANCE INFORMATION UPDATE
Report of the Director of Environment
Author: Ben Wood
01992 556228
Executive Members: Richard Roberts and David Lloyd
1. Purpose
To report progress to the County Council’s Cabinet, on the delivery of Hertfordshire’s LAA 2006-2009, and to set out the current expectations on the level of Performance Reward Grant due to the County in 2009/10 and 2010/11. HCC is the accountable body for the LAA, and is ultimately responsible for its delivery.
2. Summary
Data on progress against a set of stretch targets as at 31 March 2008 has been collated and is summarised at Appendix A, and set out in detail at Appendix B, which is in A3 format, and copies of it will be available at the meeting.
This performance information was received by the Core Group of Hertfordshire Forward on 17 June.
This shows that Hertfordshire is on track to receive around of £22.5m Performance Reward Grant spread over 2009/10 and 2010/11, split equally between capital and revenue funds.
3. Recommendation
The Panel is asked to note progress on the delivery of LAA 2006-2009, and to comment on any areas of concern and/or interest.
3. Background
This paper is confined to LAA 2006-2009.
LAA 2008-2011 was signed off by full Council in May and action planning on the delivery of that is underway, and it will be the subject of future reports, including on how the PRG from LAA 1 is reinvested in partnership working.
Essentially LAA is a significant arena for partnership working. The four countywide partnerships, shown below, oversee delivery and performance management, and the County Council provides the supporting processes, handles relationships with government (and GO) and, as the accountable body, ensures that overall the regime works well in the County. It is also responsible for financial arrangements.
- Children’s Trust Partnership
- Chief Officer Group on Crime and Disorder
- Herts Prosperity Limited
- Healthy Communities and Older People Strategic Partnership
Members will wish to note progress on delivery against the stretch targets and seek reassurances from partners that both outcomes and financial reward are maximised.
This is the fourth six monthly update which is taken through the partnership structure and the related LAA blocks.
Appendix A summarises the data and comments on those targets currently underperforming and shown as red.
4. Financial Implications
Maintaining and improving on delivery of LAA 1 to maximise reward is critical.
Of the potential £30m available Hertfordshire we are on track to achieve about £22.5m if current levels of improvement are sustained. This will arrive in two separate grants, equally split over 2009/10 and 2010/11, 50% capital and 50% revenue.
Further reports will follow on the use of reward (PRG) monies, but it is important to note that, in accordance with earlier Cabinet decisions, it will be invested in partnership working, as follows:
- 5% of the total PRG to be allocated to each of the ten district LSPs (50% in total), with no conditions attached
- 50% of the total to be allocated to the countywide blocks/ themes
Many partners are already beginning to think about where spending PRG could add most value and consequently at their meeting on 17 June, the Hertfordshire Forward Core Group commissioned a paper into the principles and criteria for allocating the countywide element, to be considered at their September meeting. This will include supporting LAA 2 (2008-2011) delivery(for which potential reward is substantially less, at just under £7m).
As the Accountable Body for LAA, Cabinet will be asked to endorse any view taken by Hertfordshire Forward.
District LSPs are also beginning to think about PRG and where it can add most value in terms of delivering their community strategies.
Summary of LAA1 PRG estimate for the end of Year 2 APPENDIX A
Period of analysis
This performance assessment covers the first two years of Hertfordshire’s LAA, from 1 April 2006 – 31 March 2008, for reward targets only.
Since the report to Herts Forward Core Group on the 17 June, further data and additional comments have emerged for some targets. These are reflected in the summary breakdown, the new PRG estimate of £22.5m and this revised paper.
Performance Reward Grant (PRG)
Using the data supplied by the partners, if current levels of improvement are sustained for the final year (1 April 2008 – 31 March 2009) our PRG is estimated to be £22.5m.Our previous estimated range,taken at 30 September 2007 (18 months) suggested PRG of between £17 - £22m, so this revised estimate represents performance at the upper end of that range.
Risks
There are a number of stretch targets that are perception based, the final surveys for which have not yet taken place. Interim surveys however have been undertaken which, although not considered by central government in their final audit of Hertfordshire’s performance, have been taken into account here, providing an indication of direction of travel.
Stretch targets relating to levels of physical activity are still awaiting interim reports which are not due to be published until autumn 2008.
Overall performance
Twenty nine of the forty two stretched targets are hitting the ‘green’ indicator. The CYP and HCOP blocks (where there is data) indicate a very strong performance and a very positive outlook based on the current data.
The SSC block has also had a strong performance, with the general direction of travel positive, although some targets maybe subject to change as they are perception based. However, there are 3 stretched targets highlighted as red, where action is being undertaken.
The performances of the targets within the EDE block are mixed. Four targets are green and one amber with a positive direction of travel. There are 2 red stretch targets and since the negotiation of these targets the ‘welfare to work’ environment, in respect of target definitions nationally, and provider arrangements, has changed significantly. For this reason the Hertfordshire focus will be to maximise reward levels on the lone parents target within this cluster (Reward Target E-A2).
Stretch targets in the red
Overall there are 5 targets with a red status. Interventions are being agreed which will attempt to improve performance over the final year of the LAA.
Block / Target / Comment/ActionSSC / B8.1: Increase the number of Green Flag (or equivalent) accredited sites which feature or fringe upon an area of high deprivation / A further 4 applications for awards have been submitted over the past few months; however the results will not be published until 24 July 2008. A further assessment stage is due in January 2009, with results out in June 2009. If the applications are successful the target will met
SSC / C9.1: Increase the percentage of people (aged 16 and over) who volunteer / This is a very challenging target for two reasons. Firstly, the increase in numbers of people volunteering needed to meet it is very large. Secondly, it is measured via a survey which can only ever be a proxy for actual levels of volunteering.
We have plenty of evidence to suggest that overall, levels of volunteering have increased since we signed off the LAA target – and various projects and initiatives have been carried out with that in mind (we hope to continue the good work in future also). Due to the nature of survey measurement however, it is uncertain whether we will meet the target.
An interim survey has been carried out which suggested that the “Valuing Volunteers” campaign has been successful in attracting ‘new’ volunteers (but less soin volunteer retention). In addition volunteer centres continue to report year on year increases in volunteering but this may not be reflected in the survey.
In the run up to the final perception survey, which runs from the week beginning 9 June to week beginning 14 July 2008, Volunteer Centres organised the Big Red Bus Tourto celebrate and raise awareness of volunteering throughout the country. The final report based on the survey will be produced in September 2008 – we will know by then if we have met the targets or not.
SSC / C9.2: Increase the number of people (aged 16 and over) from 'hard to reach' groups who volunteer
EDE / E-A1: Increase the number of people claiming an incapacity benefit gaining work of at least 16 hours per week / The targets for these are very challenging and it is unlikely that without additional resources we will achieve them.
Despite the actual number of people required to gain work being relatively small (compared to the overall population), it is targeted at a very specific client group: those who have been on long term incapacity benefit (in some cases for several years and with specific mental health related illnesses). Finding clients appropriate employment (and retaining them in it) is consequently very challenging.
In addition sinceHCC’s Work Solutions negotiated this target, the main provider of this service has changed – the Shaw Trust now take all referrals from Job Centre Plus for incapacity benefit claimants who are seeking work. The way the Shaw Trust measure their activities is different to that which was originally negotiated with GO-East – consequently we cannot include what they do.
However, the cluster of 3 targets in this area is worth around £2.4m in terms of potential reward grant. The lone parent client group is worth the largest part of that (£1.3m). Consequently Work Solutions has refocused its activities to ensure lone parents are prioritised to maximise reward (that particular target is now shown as amber, moving towards green).
EDE / E-A3: Increase the numbers of people claiming an incapacity benefit gaining permitted work of less than 16 hours per week
Key for summary and appendix:
The following criteria have been used to reach a RAG assessment (based on performance over the past two years) and a direction of travel statement (looking at risks to achieving the target in the future) for each target. The RAG assessment is based upon the likelihood of receiving reward monies at the end of the agreement.
The direction of travel is a self-assessment undertaken by each target lead.
/ Performance is less than 59% of year 2 target (no reward to be received if trend continues) / / Cause for concern that target will not be met. Review/ analysis required/ Performance is between 60% and 79% of year 2 target (reward of 60% - 79% to be received if performance continues) / / Action plan largely in track, but with some areas of concern under review
/ Performance is between 80% - 100% (or more) of year 2 target (reward of 80% - 100% to be received if performance continues) / / Action plan on track. No review/ analysis required
1
080717 Item 6 LAA Performance.doc