report to: cabinet member - performance and governance · chief executive contact officer: samantha...

REPORT TO:

Cabinet Member - Performance and Governance

DATE:

2nd September 2009

SUBJECT:

Sefton's Use of Resources Assessment - Value for Money Profile 2008/09 Report

WARDS AFFECTED:

All

REPORT OF:

Chief Executive

CONTACT OFFICER:

Samantha Tunney: 0151 934 2030 Sue Varga 0151-934 4602

EXEMPT/ CONFIDENTIAL:

No

PURPOSE/SUMMARY: To inform the Cabinet Member, of Sefton's Value for Money Profile 2008/09 REASON WHY DECISION REQUIRED: As part of Sefton's Performance Management Framework, the cabinet member is required to monitor performance

RECOMMENDATION(S): The Cabinet Member Performance and Governance is therefore asked to: 1. note the content of Sefton's Value for Money Profile. 2. refer the report to Overview & Scrutiny Performance & Corporate Services Committee to assist in the preparation of their work programme.

KEY DECISION:

No

FORWARD PLAN:

Not appropriate

IMPLEMENTATION DATE:

Following expiry of the call in of the minutes of this meeting.

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS: Not applicable.

IMPLICATIONS:

Budget/Policy Framework:

.

Financial: There are no direct financial implications arising from this report.

CAPITAL EXPENDITURE

2006/ 2007 £

2007/ 2008 £

2008/ 2009 £

2009/ 2010 £

Gross Increase in Capital Expenditure

Funded by:

Sefton Capital Resources

Specific Capital Resources

REVENUE IMPLICATIONS

Gross Increase in Revenue Expenditure

Funded by:

Sefton funded Resources

Funded from External Resources

Does the External Funding have an expiry date? Y/N When?

How will the service be funded post expiry?

Legal:

None

Risk Assessment:

None.

Asset Management:

None

CONSULTATION UNDERTAKEN/VIEWS: All departments were consulted in the preparation of this report.

CORPORATE OBJECTIVE MONITORING: Corporate Objective

Positive Impact

Neutral Impact

Negative Impact

1 Creating a Learning Community √

2 Creating Safe Communities √

3 Jobs and Prosperity √

4 Improving Health and Well-Being √

5 Environmental Sustainability √

6 Creating Inclusive Communities √

7 Improving the Quality of Council Services and Strengthening local Democracy

√

8 Children and Young People

√

LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS RELIED UPON IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS REPORT Sefton's Value for Money Profile 2008

1. Background 1.1 The assessment of use of resources is part of the new performance assessment

framework for local government, known as Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA). The use of resources framework has been revised to meet the needs of CAA.

1.2 This standard report has been produced to assist councils to review their own

performance as well as to support auditors by acting as an initial filter to help identify the key issues facing a particular council.

1.3 The Value for Money (VFM) profile not only measures the cost of goods and services

but also takes account of the mix of cost with quality, resource use, fitness for purpose and timeliness to judge whether or not, together, they constitute good value.

1.4 This report has been produced through the use of a selection of the information held

on the value for money profile tool (Audit Commission Website) and it summarises the data held for Sefton and for this comparative exercise the data of all Metropolitan Boroughs.

2. Value for Money Profile 2008/09 2.1 This report has been produced with the aid of graphs and charts published by the

Audit Commission. Financial details relate to 2008/09 estimates and performance data relates to the last available audited figures - 2007/08.

2.2 There are a number of comparator groups available in the tool that authorities can

select to compare cost and performance of service areas. In this model Metropolitan Boroughs have been selected as a comparison with Sefton.

2.3 This VFM profile should be used to help understand relative spending patterns and

prompt questions and areas for further investigation or explanation. It does not provide direct answers to the CAA key lines of enquiry questions.

2.4 The charts should raise questions which may be followed up by the council or by

auditors. While working through the charts you should consider the following points: • is the difference in the council's spending associated with differences in the level of

service it provides? • is the council's spending consistent with that of other councils providing services in

a similar way or quality? • has the council's spending changed compared to others in the last three years?

and, • is the scale of the service large enough to justify making distinctions between

councils? 2.5 Annex 1 gives full details of the Use of Resources Assessment, Value for Money

Profile report 2008/09 for Sefton Council. 3. Costs and Quality compared 3.1 Costs and performance are brought together in this profile to enable authorities to

compare whether they provide value for money for services. The report ranks Seftons cost and performance against the 36 Metropolitan boroughs.

3.2 Higher spending refers to spending in the upper quartile and lower spending refers

to spending in the lower quartile. Top Quartile performance relates to the best performance of the comparative group and lower quartile relates to the worst performance.

3.3 The table below shows for each function the costs and performance level, where 1

is low spend or poor performance and 10 is high spend or excellent performance. Function Costs (1-

10) Quality/ Performance (1-10)

Comments

Education 3 8 Spending is below average of other Metropolitan Boroughs 67% of comparable indicators are in the top quartile

Childrens Social Care

3 Not Available Spending is below average of other Metropolitan Boroughs

Adults Social Care 6 10 Spending on Adults Social Care is just above average of other Metropolitan Boroughs - Spending on Physical & Learning Disability and Mental Health is in the top quartile but spending on Older People is in the lower quartile, 100% of comparable indicators are in the top quartile

Environment, Planning & Transport

4 6 9 8

Spending on Environment and Planning is average but spending on Transport is in the top quartile of other Metropolitan Boroughs 42% of comparable indicators are in the top quartile and 16% are in the bottom

Housing 3 Not Available Spending is below average of other Metropolitan Boroughs

Culture 4 4 Spending is average of other Metropolitan Boroughs 67% of comparable indicators are in the bottom quartile

Benefits 7 6.5 Spending is above average of other Metropolitan Boroughs 40% of comparable indicators are in the top quartile

Central Services 7 2.5 5.5

Spending is above average of other Metropolitan Boroughs with spending on Corporate & Democratic Core is in the top quartile 18% of comparable indicators are in the top quartile and 36% are in the bottom

Home Office Services

3 10 Spending is below average of other Metropolitan Boroughs 100% of comparable indicators are in the top quartile

* See Annex 1 for further details

4. Cost of Functions

4.1 Sefton's overall expenditure per head has moved from the first quartile in 2007 (low spend) of Metropolitan authorities to the second quartile (below average) in 2008.

4.2 The cost of Adult Social Care, Benefits Services and Central Services are all in the third quartile (above average) for spending in 2008 which means we spend above average or more on these areas than most of the other Metropolitan Boroughs. For the purposes of their report the Audit Commission are defining Central Services as being the costs of the Corporate and Democratic Core, Local Tax Collection and unapportionable overheads.

4.3 The cost of Education, Childrens Social Care, Housing and Home Office Services are in the second quartile below average spend compared to the other metropolitan boroughs. Childrens Services

4.4 Sefton has been for some years low spenders on Education and Children's Social Care when compared to other Metropolitan Boroughs.

Health and Social Care

4.5 The cost of overall for Adult Social Care is above the metropolitan average but Sefton's expenditure on Older People is below average we spend less on these areas than most of the other Metropolitan Boroughs. The cost for Housing Services is also below average.

4.6 Sefton has been for some years now low spenders on older people when compared to our family group. Two factors to take into account are the successful best value reviews of residential and home care undertaken in the late 1990s which reduced costs significantly and that we are low to medium payers in relation to residential and nursing home and home care fees. The latter whilst providing good quality services as reported by CQC (formerly CSCI).

Chief Executives

4.7 Spending on Benefits and Central Services is above the metropolitan average and expenditure on Home Office Services is below the metropolitan average.

4.8 During 2008/09 the Council transferred the operation of both the Benefits and Local

Tax Collection Service to Arvato Government Services. This transfer has seen the Council achieve a cost reduction in these services not reflected in these statistics. Coupled with this cost reduction, Arvato have a commitment to deliver upper quartile by 2011/12.

Regeneration and Environmental Services

4.9 Spending on Environment and Planning are average whereas spending on Transport is in the top Quartile in 2008 which means we spend more on these areas than nearly all of the other Metropolitan Boroughs.

5. Progress of Performance Indicators for 2007/08 5.1 This section of the report includes the monitoring of performance indicators. The

table below shows the quartile position of the 2007/08 Best Value Performance Indicators used in the profile to help determine Value for Money when used with the expenditure.

Performance Indicators Split over Services Function Total

indicators No Polarity

N/A 4th

Quartile Worst

3rd Quartile

2nd Quartile

1st Quartile Best

Education 20 2 1 3 2 12 Childrens Social Care 5 1 4 Adults Social Care 8 1 5 2 Environment 20 1 1 7 2 3 6 Planning 9 2 1 1 5 Transport 18 4 7 7 Culture 4 1 2 1 Benefits 9 4 2 1 2 Central Service - Finance 6 2 1 1 1 1 Central Services - Chief Executives, Personnel SEP

14 1 3 3 4 1 2

Home Office Services - Community Safety

4 4

117 12 10%

19 16%

14 12%

16 14%

16 14%

40 34%

5.2 The table above shows Sefton’s quartile position for 86 of the 117 performance

indicators detailed above see Annex 2 for further details. Annex 2 is taken from the Performance information profile, this performance information profile draws together information that is relevant to assessing improvement across shared priority and service areas. It has been designed to provide evidence in the Audit Commission's direction of travel assessment (DoT) and corporate assessment (CA). It may also assist local authorities in reviewing their own performance and improvement and completing their own self-assessment for DoT or CA. Annex 2 also shows the level of improvement in 2007/08 against 2006/07 performance.

6. Places Analysis Tool (PAT) 6.1 The Value for Money performance information relates to the last available audited

figures - 2007/08, however PAT has recently published more up to date data for the national indicators.

6.2 PAT is a tool is designed to assist in the analysis of Local Authorities with respect to

the Local Area Agreement (LAA) Performance Monitoring Framework. The tool is used by the Audit Commission to analyse an authority's performance.

6.3 Places Analysis Tool (PAT) is designed to undertake analysis of published National

Indicator data. It enables ongoing and consistent monitoring of trends and performance of Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) against the National Indicator Set, including those indicators, which have been targeted in Local Area Agreements.

6.4 Data is currently available for 150 LSPs. Following reorganisation of a number of

Local Authorities in April 2009, there are now a total of 152 LSPs, and data for these LSPs will be incorporated into PAT as it becomes available for the 2009/10 financial years.

6.5 As part of our performance management framework this exercise has been

designed to assist in the analysis of our performance against the national indicators. PAT uses Sefton's latest published data downloaded from the Data Interchange

Hub and compares our performance with regional and national averages for the same time frame.

6.6 Variances are then calculated to see how Sefton's performance compares. The

attached papers highlight any variances above 10%. The tables also include the latest data available from SPRINT this data helps to calculate the direction of travel.

6.7 This exercise will be repeated every quarter to assist in the identification of excellent

and poor performance and where quarterly monitoring indicates that performance is deteriorating.

6.8 The analysis of the PAT data may be useful during the Strategic Budget Review

progress. 6.9 When comparing Sefton's National Indicator performance with the regional and

national averages, Sefton performs better for 63% and 52% of indicators respectively.

Sefton's performance against Regional and National Averages

Regional No of

NIs National No of

NIs

Sefton's Performance is better than the regional average

97

☺☺☺☺

63% Sefton's Performance is better than the national average

80 ☺☺☺☺ 52%

Sefton's Performance is worse than the regional average

52 LLLL 34% Sefton's Performance is worse than the national average

67 LLLL 43%

Sefton's Performance is the same as the regional average

5

KKKK

3% Sefton's Performance is the same as the national average

7

KKKK

5%

154 154

Sefton's performance against Regional and National Averages - showing above a 10% variance

Regional No of

NIs National No of

NIs Sefton's Performance is better than the regional average by over 10%

52

☺☺☺☺

Sefton's Performance is better than the national average by over 10%

43

☺☺☺☺

Sefton's Performance is worse than the regional average by over 10%

25

LLLL

Sefton's Performance is worse than the national average by over 10%

34

LLLL

6.10 The table below compares Sefton's National Indicator performance split by department with the regional and national averages, Sefton performs better for 66% and 52% of indicators respectively.

Regional Averages National Averages Department Total Comp

arable

NIs Better Worse Same Better Worse Same

Chief Executive 29 13 9 4 0 8 5 0

Fin & Info 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Children's Srvs. 82 64 42 21 1 38 25 1

YOT 9 4 3 1 0 3 1 0

LSC 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

H & SC 16 9 3 6 0 4 5 0

PCT 22 18 17 1 0 6 10 2

Environ. Protection 11 4 2 1 1 2 1 1

Leisure Srvs. 4 4 2 2 0 2 2 0

Planning & Econ.

Regen.

24 14 6 5 3 4 8 2

Regen. & Tech

Srvs.

2 2 2 0 0 0 2 0

Tech. Srvs 8 4 4 0 0 3 0 1

Voluntary Sector 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Place Survey 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

220 136 90 41 5 70 59 7 Total

66% 30% 4% 52% 43% 5%

7. Conclusions

7.1 Value for Money Profile This report outlines the Value for Money Profile for 2008/09 main findings highlight the following: Ø Six functions where in the second quartile for costs (below average) and three

functions where in the third quartile (above average). Ø 34% of comparable indicators are in the top quartile and 12% are in the worst

and 26% cannot be compared - no polarity or not enough data supplied Ø Education - Costs below average & performance top quartile Ø Childrens Social - Care Costs low Ø Adults Social Care Costs above average and performance for the one

comparable indicator is in the top quartile Ø Environment Costs below average & performance above average Ø Planning Costs below average & performance top quartile Ø Transport Costs above average & performance top quartile Ø Culture Costs below average & performance average Ø Benefits costs are above average & performance is above average for the three

comparable indicators Ø Central Services - Finance Local Tax Collection costs above average &

performance average Ø Central Services - Chief Executives, Personnel & SEP - Costs above average &

performance above average Ø Home Office Services - Community Safety - Costs below average &

performance top quartile * Please note that only 86 indicators can be classified into quartile positions

7.2 Please find a summary of the full Value for Money 2008/09 Report at Annex 1, the

full report has been published on the Intranet for information. 8. Recommendations

The Cabinet Member Performance and Governance is therefore asked to: 1. note the content of Sefton's Value for Money Profile. 2. refer the report to Overview & Scrutiny Performance & Corporate Services

Committee to assist in the preparation of their work programme.

Annex 1

D:\moderngov\data\published\Intranet\C00000386\M00004863\AI00008037\2008

09VFMPROFILEaugust0.doc200809VFMPROFILEaugust0.doc

11

Use of Resources Assessment

Value for Money Profile Report - 2008/09

This report has been produced to assist councils to review their own performance as

well as to support auditors by acting as an initial filter to help identify the key issues

facing Sefton.

There are a number of comparator groups available in the tool that you can select to

compare performance. In this model Metropolitan boroughs have been selected.

Information sources

The information about spending is taken from the revenue estimates submitted by

councils, the Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) and the

Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) (referred to as RA forms and

section 52 forms respectively). That means that references in the report to 'spending'

are based on councils' plans for their spending, rather than what they actually spend or

spent. Spending plan information is provided for the 2005/06, 2006/07, 2007/08, and

2008/09 financial years, where available. The planned spending figures have not been

revised to take account of revisions of budgets in year or for inflation between years.

The population information used in this report is taken from the mid year estimates of

population published by Office for National Statistics (ONS). Population information

is applied to information about spending plans as follows:

Spending plan 2008/09

Population estimate 2007

BV performance indicators 2007/08

Ranks

If a council spends more on a service than all the councils in the group it is given a

rank of 100 and if it spends less than all the group it has a rank of 0.

1st Quartile = Rank 0-25 Least money spent on service

2nd quartile = Rank 26-50

3rd quartile = Rank 51-75

4th quartile = Rank 76-100 Most money spent on service

Annex 1



12

Use of Resources Assessment

Value for Money Profile 2008

This report has been produced with the aid of graphs and charts published by the

Audit Commission. Financial details relate to 2008/09 estimates and performance data

relates to the last available audited figures - 2007/08.

General Information

Average Band D in 2008 is £1,202.11, which has increased from £1,156.38 in 2007

Total population used is 276,200 (2007) a reduction of 1,200 from 277,400 (2006)

CPA

2007 2008

Corporate Assessment 3 3

Use of Resources 3 3

Overall Performance Score 4 star 4 star

Direction of Travel Improving Well

Improving Well

2007 Expenditure per head 2008 Expenditure per head

Sefton's overall expenditure per head has moved from the first quartile of

Metropolitan authorities to the second quartile in 2008.

Annex 1



13

Adult Social Care, Benefits Services and Central Services are all in the third quartile

for spending in 2008.

The table and graph below show total expenditure £’s per head of population for each

service area for 2007 and 2008.

2007 2008 Difference % Change

Education 715.57 820.76 +£105.19 14.7%

Childrens Social Care 459.48 496.86 +£37.38 8.14%

Adults Social Care 352.98 363.57 +£10.63 3%

Environment, Planning &

Transport

149.63 153.20 +£3.57 2.39%

Housing 29.14 29.61 +£0.47 1.61%

Culture 60.77 63.60 +£2.83 4.66%

Home Office Services 1.98 2.02 +£0.04 2.02%

Central Services 60.96 75.22 +£14.26 23.39%

Benefits 14.73 18.73 +£4.00 27.16%

Expenditure Total £'s per head

715.57

820.76

459.48 496.86

352.98 363.57

149.63 153.2

29.14 29.6160.77 63.61.98 2.02

60.96 75.2214.73 18.73

0

200

400

600

800

1000

2007 2008

Education Childrens Social Care

Adults Social Care Total Environment, Planning & Transport

Housing Services Culture

Home Office Services Central Services

Benefits

Annex 1



14

Education - Children & Young People CPA Score has remained a 3 (out of 4)

2007 2008

Sefton's total spending on education has increased from the first quartile of

Metropolitan authorities in 2007 to the second quartile in 2008. Spending on LEA

Functions has reduced from third to second quartile in 2008. Overall we are spending

below on services but our performance is in the top quartile (best 25%).

Attainment at Key Stage 2 2007 2008

BV40 KS2 Maths % at Level 4 82% 82%

BV41 KS2 English % at Level 4 84% 85%

BV194a KS2 Maths % at Level 4 35% 38%

BV194b KS2 English % at Level 4 35% 35%

All four BVPIs are in the top quartile

for performance at this level

Attainment at Key Stage 3 and GCSE 2007 2008

BV181a KS3 English % at Level 5 78% 77%

BV181b KS2 Maths % at Level 5 81% 79%

BV181c KS2 Science % at Level 5 77% 77%

BV181d KS2 ICT % at Level 5 79% 78%

BV38 Pupils with 5 or more A*-C GCSE's 61.9% 63.5%

BV39 Pupils with 5 or more A*-G GCSE's 90% 96.4%

All six BVPIs are in the top quartile

for performance at this level

Annex 1



15

PAT Data

NI 82 Inequality gap in the achievement of a Level 2 qualification by the age of 19

PAT

Latest

Value

Time Period PAT

Regional

Average

10%

Variance

PAT

National

Average

10%

Variance

63.3 Academic Year

(07/08)

54.2 ☺☺☺☺ 16.79 55.8 ☺☺☺☺ 13.44%

NI 084 Achievement of 2 or more A*- C grades in Science GCSEs or equivalent

PAT

Latest

Value

Time Period PAT

Regional

Average

10%

Variance

PAT

National

Average

10%

Variance

56.7 Academic Year

(07/08)

50.9 ☺☺☺☺ 11.39% 49.6 ☺☺☺☺ 14.31%

NI 085a,b &c Post-16 participation in physical sciences (A Level Physics Chemistry

and Maths) - A Level Physics

PAT

Latest

Value

Time Period PAT

Regional

Average

10%

Variance

PAT

National

Average

10%

Variance

119 Academic Year

(07/08)

104 ☺☺☺☺ 14.42% 129 LLLL -7.75%

171 Academic Year

(07/08)

187 LLLL -8.56% 193 LLLL -11.4%

267 Academic Year

(07/08)

255 ☺☺☺☺ 4.71% 306 LLLL -12.75%

Annex 1



16

Youth & Community

2007

2008

Spending on Youth and Community services increased in 2007 to the second quartlie

in line with Council priorities, it moved in to the lowest quartile in 2008 this is a

reduction in expenditure per head.

Spending on the Youth Service was in the top 25% in 2007 but spending has reduced

in 2008 to place Sefton in the second quartile.

Children and Families

Children & Young People CPA Score has remained a 3 (out of 4)

The chart compares expenditure on social care for children and families with the

number of children looked after. The cost per looked after child per week is £487.51,

about average. Comparatively Sefton's position has improved since 2005/06.

Annex 1



17

2007 2008

BV49 Stability of placements of looked after

children

14 13.8

BV50 Children leaving Care - 1 or more A*-

G GCSEs

62.9% 55.6%

BV161 Care Leavers in education, training or

employment

0.78% 0.78%

BV 162 % of child protection cases which

were reviewed regularly, out of those cases

which should have been reviewed in the year.

100% 100%

BV163 Adoptions of looked after children 8.9% 7.2%

PAT Data

NI 099 Looked after children reaching level 4 in English at Key Stage 2

NI 100 Looked after children reaching level 4 in mathematics at Key Stage 2

PAT

Latest

Value

Time Period PAT

Regional

Average

10%

Variance

PAT

National

Average

10%

Variance

70 Academic Year (07/08)

53 ☺☺☺☺ 32.08% 47.9 ☺☺☺☺ 46.14%

65 Academic Year (07/08)

50.4 ☺☺☺☺ 28.97% 45.5 ☺☺☺☺ 42.86%

NI 102 Achievement gap between pupils eligible for free school meals and their peers

achieving the expected level at Key Stages 2 and 4 - Key Stage 2 Gap

PAT

Latest

Value

Time Period PAT

Regional

Average

10%

Variance

PAT

National

Average

10%

Variance

15.9 Academic Year

(07/08)

21.4 ☺☺☺☺ -25.70% 23 ☺☺☺☺ -30.87%

Annex 1



18

Social Services for Older People and Adults

Social Care Adults CPA Score has remained a 3 (out of 4)

2007

2008

As indicated in the chart above, Sefton is in the third quartile in overall spending on

Adult Social Care. Spending on older people is well below average (within the lowest

quartile) which reflects the significant measures taken in recent years to improve

efficiency. We are in the fourth quartile for spending on physical disability and mental

health.

2007 £'s

/head

2008 £'s

/head

Difference % change

Adult Social Care 352.98 363.57 +£10.59 3%

Older people 835.51 791.38 -£44.13 -5.28%

Physical Disability 45.52 55.64 +£10.12 +22.23%

Learning Disability 101.99 114.32 +£12.33 +12.09%

Mental Health needs 38.88 44.51 +£5.63 +14.48%

Adults Asylum 0 0

Adults other Social Services 1.40 3.48 +£2.08 +148.57%

Annex 1



19

Domiciliary care service coverage and intensity

2007 2008

BV54 Over 65s helped to live at home per

1,000 aged 65+

90.5 90.5

Number of older People receiving home care at

31/03/07 per 1,000 aged 65+

23.7 24.3

Av. No. of older people supported in

residential/nursing care

1,582.5 1,499.2

PAF B17 Home help/home care contract hours 29,776 30,015

BV53 Intensive home care per 1,000 aged 65+ 12.73 12.79

BV56 Equipment delivered within 7 days 88.2% 90.7%

Annex 1



20

NI 129 End of life care - access to appropriate care enabling people to be able to

choose to die at home

NI 130 Social Care clients receiving Self Directed Support per 100000 population

NI 131 Delayed transfers of care

NI 132 Timeliness of social care assessment (all adults)

NI 133 Timeliness of social care packages following assessment

NI 134 The number of emergency bed days per head of weighted population

NI 135 Carers receiving needs assessment or review and a specific carer's service or

advice and information

PAT

Latest

Value

Time Period PAT

Regional

Average

10%

Variance

PAT

National

Average

10%

Variance

22.2 Calendar Year (2007)

19.3 ☺☺☺☺ 15.03% 19.1 ☺☺☺☺ 16.23%

138.4 Financial Year (07/08)

163.4 LLLL -15.30% 176.4 LLLL -21.54%


12.8 ☺☺☺☺ -7.81% 13.4 ☺☺☺☺ -11.94%


78.3 LLLL -16.60% 79.4 LLLL -17.76%


91.6 LLLL -7.10% 90.9 LLLL -6.38%

0 Financial Year (06/07)

1 ☺☺☺☺ -100.00% 0 KKKK 0.00%


24.1 ☺☺☺☺ 42.32% 21.3 ☺☺☺☺ 61.03%


2862.73 LLLL -3.38% 3233.54 LLLL -14.46%

Annex 1



21

Environment, Planning and Transport

Environment

Environment CPA Score 3 (out of 4)

2007

2008

As indicated in the chart above, Sefton is in the second quartile in overall spending on

environment, planning and transport services in 2008. Spending on planning and

environment is average (within the second quartile) which reflects the significant

measures taken in recent years to improve efficiency. We are in the fourth quartile for

spending on Transport due to higher than average spending on policy & strategy and

highways.

2007 £'s

per head

2008 £'s

per head

Difference % change

Environment, Planning &

Transport

149.63 153.20 +£3.57 +2.39%

Environment 15.85 16.82 +£0.97 +6.12%

Planning 9.75 9.02 -£0.73 -7.49%

Transport 57.75

Annex 1



22

Street cleaning per head has reduced from £18.89 in 2007 to £18.58 in 2008, a 1.64%

reduction in cost

BV199 Relevant land with significant/heavy littering improved from 22% in 2007 to

23% in 2008.

BV89 Residents satisfied with standards of cleanliness 66%

Waste Collection

Sefton's spending on Waste collection £7.99 per head is in the fourth quartile of

Metropolitan authorities

Annex 1



23

BV90a Residents satisfied with waste collection 85%

DEFRA recycling target was 20% for 2005/06

BV82a&b Waste recycled 23.70% (2007) increased to 29.76% in 2008

Waste Disposal was £7.46 per head in 2007 the cost has increased significantly to

£15.04 in 2008 putting us in the fourth Quartile

Volume of Waste collected

The volume of waste collected has reduced each year from 119,456 tonnes (2005/06)

to 74,710.96 tonnes in 2008, a 37.46% reduction between the two years

This reduction in waste collected is reflected in the increased figure for recycling of

29.76% for 2008

Annex 1



24

PAT Data

NI 186 Per capita reduction in CO2 emissions in the LA area

NI 188 Planning to Adapt to Climate Change

NI 189 Flood and coastal erosion risk management Defra DSO

NI 191 Residual household waste per household

NI 192 Percentage of household waste sent for reuse recycling and composting

NI 196 Improved street and environmental cleanliness - fly tipping

PAT

Latest

Value

Time Period PAT

Regional

Average

10%

Variance

PAT

National

Average

10%

Variance


-0.4 ☺☺☺☺ -150.00% -0.4 ☺☺☺☺ -150.00%


1 KKKK 0.00% 1 KKKK 0.00%


98 ☺☺☺☺ 2.04% 97 ☺☺☺☺ 3.09%


776 ☺☺☺☺ -12.11% 763 ☺☺☺☺ -10.62%


24.43 LLLL -2.87% 28.04 LLLL -15.37%


42.6 ☺☺☺☺ 3.99% 45 LLLL -1.56%

Annex 1



25

Planning

Planning is included in the Environment CPA Score 3 (out of 4)

Sefton's total spending on Planning in 2008 is £9.02, which is just below the median

of Metropolitan authorities. Spending in 2008 has decreased from £10.27 per head in

2007.

2007 2008

Applications determined in

target time

87.1% 89.62%

Applications determined 2,377 2,186

Appeals decisions allowed 45% 37%

Appeal decisions 42 49

Annex 1



26

PAT Data

NI 151 Overall Employment rate (working-age)

NI 152 Working age people on out of work benefits

NI 153 Working age people claiming out of work benefits in the worst performing

neighbourhoods

NI 157a Processing of planning applications as measured against targets for 'major'

'minor' and 'other' application types - Major Applications

NI 157b Processing of planning applications as measured against targets for 'major'

'minor' and 'other' application types - Minor Applications

NI 157c Processing of planning applications as measured against targets for 'major'

'minor' and 'other' application types - Other Applications

NI 158 % non-decent council homes

PAT

Latest

Value

Time Period PAT

Regional

Average

10%

Variance

PAT

National

Average

10%

Variance

72.7 Financial Year (Q4 07/08)

70.9 ☺☺☺☺ 2.54% 73.3 LLLL -0.82%

15.2 4 Quarter Average (Q3 2008)

15.6 ☺☺☺☺ -2.56% 12.1 LLLL 25.62%

31.7 4 Quarter Average (Q3 2008)

31.7 KKKK 0.00% 28.8 LLLL 10.07%

66.67 Financial Quarter (Q4 08/09)

74.83 LLLL -10.90% 71.15 LLLL -6.30%


82.03 ☺☺☺☺ 7.23% 78.41 ☺☺☺☺ 12.18%


89.96 ☺☺☺☺ 5.80% 87.81 ☺☺☺☺ 8.39%


30.1 LLLL 7.64% 36.4 ☺☺☺☺ -10.99%

Annex 1



27

Transport

Transport is included in the Environment CPA Score 3 (out of 4)

2007

2008

2008 £'s /head

Transport total 57.75

Policy & Strategy 6.46

Highways 56.01

Public -4.71

Sefton's total spending on Transport is £57.75 per head which is in the fourth quartile

of Metropolitan authorities.

2007 2008

BV224b Condition of unclassified roads 10% 5%

BV165 Pedestrian crossings accessible to

disabled people

80% 61.6%

BV187 Condition of surface footway 16% 8%

Annex 1



28

PAT Data

NI 168 Principal roads where maintenance should be considered

NI 169 Non-principal classified roads where maintenance should be considered

NI 176 Working age people with access to employment by public transport (and other

specified modes)

NI 186 Per capita reduction in CO2 emissions in the LA area

PAT

Latest

Value

Time Period PAT

Regional

Average

10%

Variance

PAT

National

Average

10%

Variance


6 ☺☺☺☺ -16.67% 5 KKKK 0.00%


8 ☺☺☺☺ -37.50% 8 ☺☺☺☺ -37.50%

82 Calendar Year (2008)

83 LLLL -1.20% 82 KKKK 0.00%


-0.4 ☺☺☺☺ -150.00% -0.4 ☺☺☺☺ -150.00%

Annex 1



29

Community Housing

Housing CPA Score 3 (out of 4)

2007

2008

2007 £'s

per head

2008 £'s

/head

Difference % change

Total Community Housing

services

£29.61

Homelessness £1.56 £1.40 -£0.16 -10.27%

Supporting People £25.72 £25.62 -£0.10 -0.39%

Other housing £2.59

Sefton's total spending on Community Housing in 2008 is £29.61 per head which is a

reduction from £34.29 in 2007. Expenditure on Supporting people and Homelessness

is in the second quartile and Other Housing is in the first quartile of Metropolitan

authorities.

Annex 1



30

Avg. number of households in temporary accommodation 14

£'s per head Homelessness £1.4 and Total homelessness & in priority need is 69

PAT Data

NI 158 % non-decent council homes

PAT

Latest

Value

Time Period PAT

Regional

Average

10%

Variance

PAT

National

Average

10%

Variance


30.1 LLLL 7.64% 36.4 ☺☺☺☺ -10.99%

Annex 1



31

Culture

Culture CPA Score 4 (out of 4) has improved from 3 out of 4 in 2007

2007 2008

Sefton's total spending on Culture has increased from £60.77 per head in 2007 to

£63.60 in 2008 which is in the second quartile of Metropolitan authorities. Sefton's

spending on libraries £15.04 is in the firstquartile and spending on tourism is in the

fourth quartile of Metropolitan authorities at £7.99 per head.

2008 £'s per head

Culture total 63.60

Culture & Heritage 7.97

Sport & Recreation 16.82

Parks & Open Spaces 18.58

Tourism 7.99

Libraries 15.04

Licensing, Cemetries & Crematoria -2.80

2007 2008

BV119a Satisfaction with sport and leisure facilities 50% 54%

BV119b Satisfaction with libraries 72% 75%

BV119c Satisfaction with museums and galleries 47% 42%

BV119d Satisfaction with theatres and concert halls 56% 50%

BV119e Satisfaction with parks and open spaces 67% 71%

All five indicators are in the

mid quartiles

Annex 1



32

PAT Data

NI 008 Adult participation in sport and active recreation

NI 009 Use of public libraries

NI 010 Visits to museums and galleries

NI 011 Engagement in the Arts

PAT

Latest

Value

Time Period PAT

Regional

Average

10%

Variance

PAT

National

Average

10%

Variance


20.8 LLLL -10.58% 21.2 LLLL -12.26%


48.8 LLLL -2.46% 48.6 LLLL -2.06%


52.6 ☺☺☺☺ 14.45% 53.2 ☺☺☺☺ 13.16%


41.6 ☺☺☺☺ 9.38% 44.5 ☺☺☺☺ 2.25%

Annex 1



33

Benefits

Benefits CPA Score 3 (out of 4)

2007

2008

Sefton's spending on Administration of benefits and local taxation has increased from

£14.73 per head in 2007 to £18.73 in 2008 and is in the third quartile of all

Metropolitan authorities, with the cost of Council Tax at £9.24 in the fourth quartile

2007 £'s

per head

2008 £'s

per head

Difference % change

Benefits administration total 14.73 18.73 +£4.00 +27.16%

Housing benefit administration 7.49 9.49 +£2.00 +26.7%

Council tax benefit

administration

7.24 9.24 +£2.00 +27.6%

2007 2008

BV78a New HB/CTB claims 37.6 days 24 days improved

BV78b Changes of circumstances to

HB/CTB

24.85 days

N/av

BV80g Claimants satisfied with HB

services

76% 76%

BV9 Council Tax collected 96.4% 96.4%

BV79a Accuracy of HB/CTB claims 96% 97.8% improved

BV10 Non domestic rates collected 97.7% 98.1% improved

Annex 1



34

PAT Data

NI 180 The number of changes of circumstances which affect customers' HB/CTB

benefit entitlement within the year.

PAT

Latest

Value

Time Period PAT

Regional

Average

10%

Variance

PAT

National

Average

10%

Variance


954.1 LLLL -1.65% 740.3 ☺☺☺☺ 26.76%

Annex 2

D:\moderngov\data\published\Intranet\C00000386\M00004863\AI00008037\200809VFMPROFILEaugust0.doc200809VFMPROFILEaugust0.doc

35

Performance information profile

BVPI Ref

BVPI Definition Polarity 2006/07 Outturn

2006/07 Quartile Position

2007/08 Outturn


Direction of Travel

Direction of Travel (Quartile Position)

Chief Executives BV 126 Domestic burglaries per

1000 household Lower 13.5 2 11.0 1 Improved Improved : 1

Quartile Position BV 127a

Violent Crime per 1000 population

Lower 14.5 1 11.8 1 Improved Same Quartile Position

BV 127b

Robberies per 1000 population


BV 128 Vehicle crimes per 1000 population


BV 156 Buildings accessible to people with a disability

Higher 87.72 N/A 97.34 N/A Improved N/A

Personnel BV 011a

Top 5% earners: women Higher 31.90 4 36.88 4 Improved Same Quartile Position

BV 011b

Top 5% earner: minority ethnic communities

Higher 1.48 4 1.87 4 Improved Same Quartile Position

BV 011c

Top 5% earners: with a disability

Higher 0.91 4 2.70 3 Improved Improved : 1 Quartile Position

BV 012 Working days lost due to sickness absence


BV 014 Percentage of early retirements


BV 015 Percentage of ill health retirements


BV 016a

Percentage of employees with a disability

Lower 0.46 4 2.39 3 Deterioration Improved : 1 Quartile Position

BV Percentage of N/A 14.54 N/A 14.54 N/A N/A N/A

Annex 2


36

BVPI Ref



2007/08 Outturn


Direction of Travel


016b economically active disabled community population

BV 017a

Ethnic minority representation in the workforce - employees

Higher 1.7 2 1.4 3 Deterioration Deteriorated : 1 Quartile Position

Sefton's Equalities Partnership

BV 002a

Equality Standard for Local Government

Higher 2 N/A 3 N/A Improved Improved : 1 Quartile Position

BV 002b

Duty to Promote Race Equality

Higher 74 3 79 2 Improved Improved : 1 Quartile Position

BV 174 Racial incidents per 100,000 population

Lower 34.99 N/A 48.67 N/A Deterioration N/A

BV 175 Racial incidents with further action

Higher 100.00 1 99.26 1 Deterioration Same Quartile Position

Children's Services BV 038 GCSE Performance: A*-

C grades Higher 61.9 1 63.5 1 Improved Same Quartile

Position BV 039 GCSE Performance: A*-

G grades, incl. Maths & English


BV 040 KS2 Mathematics Performance

Higher 82.0 1 82.0 1 Same Performance

Same Quartile Position

BV 041 KS2 English Performance


BV 043a

Statements of Special Educational Needs: excluding ‘exceptions’


BV Statements of Special Higher 66.0 4 79.5 4 Improved Same Quartile

Annex 2


37

BVPI Ref



2007/08 Outturn


Direction of Travel


043b Educational Needs: including ‘exceptions’

Position

BV 045 Absence in secondary schools


BV 046 Absence in primary schools


BV 049 Stability of placements of looked after children

N/A 14.00% N/A 13.80% N/A N/A N/A

BV 050 Educational Qualifications of Looked After Children

Higher 62.90% N/A 55.60% N/A Deterioration N/A

BV 161 Care Leavers in Employment, Education and Training

Higher 0.72% N/A 0.78% N/A Improved N/A

BV 162 Reviews of Child Protection Cases

Higher 100.00% N/A 100.00% N/A Same Performance

N/A

BV 163 Adoptions of Looked After Children


BV 181a

KS3 English Performance


BV 181b

KS3 Mathematics Performance


BV 181c

KS3 Science Performance


BV 181d

KS3 ICT Performance Higher 79.00 1 78.00 1 Deterioration Same Quartile Position

BV 194a

KS2 English Performance

Higher 35 1 38 1 Improved Same Quartile Position

BV 194b

KS2 Mathematics Performance


Annex 2


38

BVPI Ref



2007/08 Outturn


Direction of Travel


BV 197 Under 18 Conception Rate

Lower 1.10% N/A -3.30% N/A Improved N/A

BV 221a

Participation in and outcomes from Youth Work


BV 221b

Participation in and outcomes from Youth Work

Higher 22 2 20 3 Deterioration Deteriorated : 1 Quartile Position

BV 222a

Quality of Early Years and Childcare Leadership – Leaders


BV 222b

Quality of Early Years and Childcare Leadership – Postgraduate Input


BV 225 Actions against Domestic Violence

Higher 90.0 N/A 81.8 N/A Deterioration N/A

Environmental Protection

BV 082a(i)

Percentage household waste recycled


BV 082a(ii)

Tonnage of household waste recycled

Higher 16937.50 2 18803.70 3 Improved Deteriorated : 1 Quartile Position

BV 082b(i)

Percentage household waste composted


BV 082b(ii)

Tonnage of household waste composted


BV 084a

Household Waste Collection: kilograms

Lower 394.1 1 383.4 1 Same Performance


BV Household Waste Lower -4.44 1 -2.71 2 Improved Deteriorated : 1

Annex 2


39

BVPI Ref



2007/08 Outturn


Direction of Travel


084b Collection: % change Quartile Position BV 086 Cost of household waste

collection per household Lower 49.91 4 68.46 4 Deterioration Same Quartile

Position BV 091a

Kerbside Collection of Recyclables: one recyclable

Higher 97.1 3 100.0 1 Improved Improved : 2 Quartile Positions

BV 091b

Kerbside Collection of Recyclables: two recyclables

Lower 97.1 2 100.0 1 Deterioration Improved : 1 Quartile Position

BV 166a

Environmental health checklist of best practice



BV 166b

Trading standards checklist of best practice



BV 199a

Local street and environmental cleanliness – Litter

Lower 22.0 4 23.0 4 Deterioration Same Quartile Position

BV 199b

Local street and environmental cleanliness – Graffiti

Lower 6 3 14 4 Deterioration Deteriorated : 1 Quartile Position

BV 199c

Local street and environmental cleanliness - Fly-post

Lower 0 1 3 4 Deterioration Deteriorated : 3 Quartile Positions

BV 199d

Local street and environmental cleanliness - Fly-tipping

Lower 4 3 1 1 Improved Improved : 2 Quartile Positions

BV 216a

Remediation of Contaminated Land

N/A 8630 N/A 8631 N/A N/A N/A

BV 216b

Information on Contaminated Land

Higher 2 3 2 4 Same Performance

Deteriorated : 1 Quartile Position

BV 217 Pollution Control Higher 0% N/A 100% N/A Improved N/A

Annex 2


40

BVPI Ref



2007/08 Outturn


Direction of Travel


Improvements BV 218a

Abandoned Vehicles - Investigation


BV 218b

Abandoned Vehicles – Removal

Higher 81.82 3 86.67 4 Improved Deteriorated : 1 Quartile Position

Finance BV 008 Percentage of invoices

paid on time Higher 83.66 4 82.35 4 Deterioration Same Quartile

Position BV 009 Percentage of Council

Tax collected Higher 96.40 2 96.40 2 Same

Performance Same Quartile Position

BV 010 Percentage of non-domestic rates collected


BV 226a

Advice and Guidance Services: Total Expenditure

N/A 258724.0 N/A 270816 N/A N/A N/A

BV 226b

Advice and Guidance Services: CLS Quality Mark

Higher 100.00 N/A 100.00 N/A Same Performance

N/A

BV 226c

Advice and Guidance Services: Direct Provision

N/A 1685099.00 N/A 1253993 N/A N/A N/A

Benefits BV 076b

Housing Benefit Security - Number of investigators per 1000 caseload

N/A 0.46 N/A 0.23 N/A N/A N/A

BV 076c

Housing Benefit Security - Number of investigations per 1000 caseload

N/A 45.81 N/A 31.57 N/A N/A N/A

Annex 2


41

BVPI Ref



2007/08 Outturn


Direction of Travel


BV 076d

Housing Benefit Security - Number of prosecutions and sanctions per 1000 caseload

N/A 5.13 N/A 7.11 N/A N/A N/A

BV 078a

Speed of processing new claim to HB/CTB

Lower 37.6 4 No data N/A N/A N/A

BV 078b

Speed of processing changes of circumstances to HB/CTB

Lower 24.9 4 No data N/A N/A N/A

BV 079a

Accuracy of HB/CTB claims


BV 079b(i)

Accuracy of recovering overpayments


BV 079b(ii)



BV 079b(iii)


N/A 6.58 N/A 0.78 N/A N/A N/A

Health & Social Care BV 053 Intensive Home Care for

People Aged 65 or Over N/A 12.73 N/A 12.79 N/A N/A N/A

BV 054 Over 65s Helped to live at home

Higher 90.5 N/A 90.5 N/A Same Performance

N/A

BV 056 Items of equipment delivered within 7 working days


BV 195 Acceptable waiting time for an assessment


Annex 2


42

BVPI Ref



2007/08 Outturn


Direction of Travel


BV 196 Acceptable waiting time for care packages


BV 201 Direct payments of benefits

N/A 92 N/A 125 N/A N/A N/A

BV 183b

Length of stay in temporary accommodation (Hostel)



BV 202 Number of Rough Sleepers

Lower 1 1 1 1 Same Performance


Leisure Services BV 170a

Visits to/usage of museums per 1000 population


BV 170b

Visits to museums in person per 1000 population

Higher 207 4 177 4 Deterioration Same Quartile Position

BV 170c

Visits to museums & galleries by pupils in organised groups


BV 220 Public Library Service Standards Checklist

Higher 3 N/A 3 N/A Same Performance

N/A

Planning & Economic Regeneration

BV 106 New homes on previously developed land


BV 109a

Planning applications: Major applications


BV 109b

Planning applications: Minor applications

Higher 82.09 2 79.77 1 Deterioration Improved : 1 Quartile Position

Annex 2


43

BVPI Ref



2007/08 Outturn


Direction of Travel


BV 109c

Planning applications: ‘Other’ applications


BV 200a

Plan Making - Development Plan

N/A Yes N/A Yes N/A N/A N/A

BV 200b

Plan Making - Milestones

N/A No N/A No N/A N/A N/A

BV 204 Planning Appeals Lower 34.1 3 36.5 3 Deterioration Same Quartile Position

BV 205 ‘Quality of Planning Services’ Checklist



BV 219b

Conservation Areas - Character Appraisals


Technical Services BV 099ai

Road accident casualties: KSI all people

Lower 94 2 100 2 Deterioration Same Quartile Position

BV 099aii


Lower -23.0 1 6.4 3 Deterioration Deteriorated : 2 Quartile Positions

BV 099aiii


Lower -20.3 3 -15.3 3 Deterioration Same Quartile Position

BV 099bi

Road accident casualties: KSI children

Lower 17 2 11 1 Improved Improved : 1 Quartile Position

BV 099bii


Lower 15.0 3 -35.3 1 Improved Improved : 2 Quartile Positions

BV 099biii


Lower -29.2 3 -54.2 2 Improved Improved : 1 Quartile Position

BV 099ci

Road accident casualties: Slight injuries

Lower 1112 3 979 2 Improved Improved : 1 Quartile Position

Annex 2


44

BVPI Ref



2007/08 Outturn


Direction of Travel


BV 099cii


Lower -2.3 3 -12.0 1 Improved Improved : 2 Quartile Positions

BV 099ciii


Lower -23.4 2 -32.5 1 Improved Improved : 1 Quartile Position

BV 100 Temporary Road Closure


Improved : 1 Quartile Position

BV 165 Pedestrian Crossings with Facilities for Disabled People


BV 178 Footpaths and Rights of Way Easy to Use by Public


BV 187 Condition of Surface Footway

Lower 16 1 8 1 Improved Same Quartile Position

BV 215a

Rectification of Street Lighting Faults (non-DNO)

Lower 2.86 1 3.09 1 Deterioration Same Quartile Position

BV 215b

Rectification of Street Lighting Faults (DNO)

Lower 10.51 1 19.21 2 Deterioration Deteriorated : 1 Quartile Position

BV 223 Condition of Principal Roads


BV 224a

Condition of Non-Principal Roads


BV 224b

Condition of unclassified roads


report to: cabinet member - performance and governance · chief executive contact officer: samantha...

Documents