New Forest District Council

Service planning surgery – PPRN 19/1/07

The basics

Integrated within the expenditure and strategic planning processes (see Performance Management Framework)

Fundamental and annual review options– Annual review light touch adjustment and update of service plan;– Fundamental review - major challenge of procurement, efficiency,

process, objectives, customer/ partners perspective etc Review of performance links in with existing quarterly exception

reporting of indicators and targets Medium term improvement plans – at least 3 to 4 year period

Involvement of others

Lead scrutiny member involved in development of plans Portfolio holders prioritise improvement plans and resources

– Annual review – more lead scrutiny involvement who report by exception to their panel; portfolio holder’s key decision

– Fundamental review – portfolio holder more heavily involved process, cabinet approval

Customer assessments on a continual basis for annual; residents (citizen’s panel or as appropriate) for fundamental review

Services encouraged to include staff and customers in development of plans

Support to services

Service planning guidelines available online Key headings for service to follow – provided these are included format flexible

– Outline of service– Contribution to Corporate Plan – Medium term issues and opportunities– Resources– Consultation– Performance results and overall assessment of performance– Corporate Issues– Service Improvement Plan

Optional pro-formas to complete Corporate issues covered through planning such as ICT, HR, equalities, risk

assessment – individual officers drive initiatives Individual meetings with each service and Performance officer to improve

aspects of their service planning skills Services drive their own assessments and plans

What Next?

Improved monitoring of service improvement plans Implementation of performance management system More outcome focussed performance management Monthly reporting on measures Include risk assessment and resources allocation

against SIP

Issues ….

Are we trying to include too much? Is the flexible approach really working – does it matter if all

plans are different? Will we get better results with a more corporate led process?

Limited drive/ input from senior management - No impetus to undertake fundamental service reviews

Want to change from paper exercise to adding value Do you monitor the plans and/or service improvement plans? Getting the challenge right – fundamental review every 4 years

enough? How are resources (financial and staff) considered against

service improvement plans in other authorities Are corporate plans/ priorities really driving the service plans?