Agenda item

(CSP: BEC, SLE, P&S, HQL, MEC, BEC1, BEC2, SLE1, SLE2, P&S1, HQL1, MEC1)

Purpose: to report quarter four outturns for the Key Accountable Measures which monitor performance against the 2017/18 Council Performance Framework; to provide assurance that the objectives set out in the Council Strategy and other areas of significant activity are being managed effectively; to present, by exception, those measures that are RAG rated ‘red’ (targets not achieved) and provide information on any remedial action taken and the impact of that action; and to recommend changes to measures/targets as requested by services.

Resolved that:

·         Progress against the Key Accountable Measures (KAMs) and the key achievements in all services be noted. In comparison to last year, it was noted that the same proportion of measures are RAG rated Green (against similar or more challenging targets than in 2016/17). In absolute terms, it was noted that the results for the majority of the KAMs have further improved this year.

·         Those areas reported as ‘red’ had been reviewed to ensure that appropriate action was in place. Consideration was particularly given to the results and improvement actions for:

·         Educational attainment of the Free School Meals and for disadvantaged pupils cohorts.

·         Older people and vulnerable adults’ wellbeing.

·         Progress towards adopting the Local Plan and Minerals & Waste Local Plan.

·         A change in target from ‘December 2019’ to ‘April 2020’ be agreed for both ‘the submission of a New Local Plan for examination’ and ‘the submission of a Minerals and Waste Local Plan for examination’.

This decision is eligible to be ‘called-in’.  However, if the decision has not been ‘called-in’ by 5.00pm on 21 June 2018, then it will be implemented.

(Councillor Lee Dillon returned to the meeting at 5.45pm).

The Executive considered a report (Agenda Item 9) which outlined quarter four outturns for the Key Accountable Measures which monitored performance against the 2017/18 Council Performance Framework; which sought to provide assurance that the objectives set out in the Council Strategy and other areas of significant activity were being managed effectively; which presented, by exception, those measures that were RAG rated ‘red’ (targets not achieved) and which provided information on any remedial action being taken and its impact; and which recommended changes to measures/targets as requested by services.

Councillor Graham Jones in introducing the report stated that the Council set itself stretching and ambitious targets. The targets would have been set at too low a level if they had all been achieved. He highlighted the point made in the report that following an analysis of the absolute results achieved in 2017/18 compared to 2016/17, 65% of the key accountable measures had improved.

Councillor Jones went on to report that in terms of priorities for improvement, good performance had been maintained for areas such as protecting children and vulnerable adults, and in most of the key infrastructure projects.

Good performance also continued in quarter four in relation to children’s social care, waste recycling and timeliness in determining planning applications.

Councillor Jones commended the report to the Executive and asked his colleagues to comment on the exception reports.

Councillor Lynne Doherty echoed the points made about positive performance levels in children’s social care. She also reiterated the point made earlier in the meeting that 95% of West Berkshire’s schools were rated either Good or Outstanding by Ofsted. This was a massive achievement and one that schools should be commended for.

Educational attainment in West Berkshire was improving in most areas, but the ambitious target of being in the top quartile nationally had not been achieved for Key Stages 2 and 4 as similar improvements to those achieved in West Berkshire had been achieved in other local authorities. Efforts would continue.

The Council remained ‘red’ in terms of closing the attainment gap. Councillor Doherty reassured Members that the educational attainment of disadvantaged pupils remained a priority and she acknowledged that performance was not where it needed to be. She did however make the point that this Council Strategy priority concerned a very low cohort of pupils and therefore percentages could be significantly altered by any changes to the attainment of this small number of pupils. There was unfortunately no magic answer to this national issue, but work would continue in taking this forward.

Councillor Doherty highlighted ambition as being key, in particular for disadvantaged pupils. She gave an assurance that the Council would aim to achieve in line with or above peer local authorities for this cohort of pupils. This included the need to work closely with children and their families to encourage them to share this level of ambition and aim to achieve in line with their peers.

Councillor Graham Bridgman referred to the red indicators in Adult Social Care (ASC). The efforts being made to improve performance were outlined in the exception reports and he encouraged Members to consider this detail to better understand the difficulties being faced. He explained that the implementation of the Care Director recording system brought with it the expectation that the target would be achieved for responding to ASC safeguarding concerns within 24 hours other than in exceptional circumstances.

Turning to the exception report for ‘% of clients with Long Term Service receiving a review in the past 12 months’, Councillor Bridgman explained that turbulence within the team had led to a delay with undertaking some reviews within this timescale. However, this situation was settling. A difficulty remained with the timeliness of undertaking reviews for clients with complex needs and this would continue to be a point of focus for himself and the Head of Service.

Councillor Bridgman was encouraged by the improvements made to decrease the number of bed days due to Delayed Transfers of Care (DToC) from hospital. While this was ‘red’ at year end, this had improved from the numbers reported for 2016/17. An improvement from 808 to 573 had been achieved since that time. While this was moving in the right direction, efforts would continue to be made. It was felt that performance levels would be assisted by the increased level of resource available at Prospect Park Hospital.

Councillor Bridgman explained that the statistics relating to the red indicator to increase the number of older people who were still at home 91 days after discharge from hospital into reablement/rehabilitation services would be investigated. In particular, to assess how data could be affected by those residents who had sadly passed away. However, the aim would remain of helping people to continue to live in their own home.

Councillor Hilary Cole reiterated the point already highlighted in relation to the target to enable the completion of 1,000 affordable homes by 2020, i.e. that had permitted developments been built out by developers then the annual target for this measure would have been achieved. She explained that remedial actions were being taken forward. This included liaising with Homes England to ascertain if they would intervene in helping to progress the build out of approved sites to help move the housing market. Funding had also been received from the Ministry of Housing to help progress the Sterling Cables site and resolve contamination issues.

Councillor Lee Dillon commented that the point was often made about having ambitious targets. However, only two thirds of the targets had been achieved. This did not align with the 80/20 (green/red) split that had been referred to in previous years. He accepted that targets were ambitious but in a third of cases they had not been achieved and the targets were there to improve services for residents.

Councillor Dillon then raised a number of queries arising from the exception reports:

·         ‘At KS4, the average attainment 8 score is in the top 25% of English Local Authorities’.

Councillor Dillon felt that the exception report provided a commentary on the statistics, but needed to provide the reasons for the ‘red’ performance. He therefore queried that.

Councillor Doherty explained that the ability to compare and contrast performance with that of recent years was made difficult by a change that had been made to the GCSE grading for Maths and English. However, she gave an assurance that while West Berkshire was not in the top 25% nationally, the picture was an improving one.

·         ‘% of pupils eligible for Free School Meals (FSM) achieving Good Level of Development at Foundation Stage’.

Councillor Dillon noted the data on school engagement in network meetings which helped to improve outcomes. He queried what more could be done to compel schools to attend these meetings where they were not already doing so.

Councillor Doherty explained that she had explored this very point in discussion with a school and an important factor in encouraging attendance at network meetings was the need to consider the most appropriate timings for the meetings. These ideally needed to take place outside of school hours to enable a greater level of attendance from teachers and she would take this forward with the Head of Education. The location for the meetings was already being varied. Councillor Doherty felt that as much as possible should be done to encourage schools to attend network meetings rather than being compelled to do so.

Councillor Dillon referred to the point highlighted in this exception report as a real concern, i.e. the increase in the gap between the development of FSM pupils and non-FSM pupils. The number of good schools in West Berkshire was noted, but the report was clear that more needed to be done to help less advantaged pupils to make progress.

Councillor Doherty acknowledged that performance levels were not good enough and the gap was not acceptable. As already explained, work would continue with teachers, pupils and their families. Different initiatives would be progressed, as successful initiatives in one year did not necessarily find success in another year.

The report highlighted that there was no indication that the data received on this indicator for the Winchcombe School would be so low. Councillor Dillon queried how this was the case when considering that monitoring took place with the school throughout the year. Councillor Doherty advised that School Improvement Advisors would be progressing this matter with the school, this would include how this performance had been assessed through the year.

·         ‘To improve on 2015/16 academic year rankings for reading, writing and maths combined expected standard for disadvantaged pupils in KS2 in 2016/17 academic year’.

A concern was noted in the exception report that the expenditure of Pupil Premium funding was not being sufficiently evaluated by school leaders. Councillor Dillon explained that the introduction of Pupil Premium was a Liberal Democrat policy and needed to be used effectively and innovatively to help achieve the best outcomes for pupils. Councillor Doherty advised that use of the Pupil Premium Grant was being evaluated by the Pupil Premium Network. There were variances in the way that the grant was used in different schools and a standard form had been provided to improve this practice and make it more consistent. Schools needed to be thorough in determining the best use of the grant.

·         ‘% of Adult Social Care safeguarding concerns responded to within 24 hours’.

Councillor Dillon highlighted a factual inaccuracy in this exception report where the number of concerns for the year was given as both 489 and 483. The former figure would put the year end percentage at 87.7% rather than 88%. Councillor Bridgman agreed to investigate this point before providing feedback.

·         ‘Number of weeks taken to conclude care proceedings (Children Social Care)’.

The exception report made reference to discussions in relation to reducing delays caused by court capacity, but this text was unaltered from the quarter three report. These discussions needed to take place and Councillor Dillon queried why this had been delayed.

·         ‘% of clients with Long Term Service receiving a review in the past 12 months’.

Councillor Dillon highlighted the point made in the exception report that performance had improved when additional resource had been put in place. However, this resource had been removed in year to help offset pressures in the service which resulted in less timely reviews for residents since then. Councillor Bridgman noted this comment, this was directly related to the point he made earlier on issues with resource. However, he repeated that this issue was settling down with the expectation that performance would again improve.

·         ‘% of older people (65+) who were still at home 91 days after discharge from hospital into reablement/rehabilitation services’.

Councillor Dillon shared the view expressed by Councillor Bridgman that the data for this indicator should be investigated to ensure the most accurate representation. He noted that performance for this target could be impacted by DToC performance.

Councillor Mollie Lock also referred to DToC. She raised the importance of ensuring that the necessary services were in place upon discharge from hospital. Councillor Lock stated that she would be disappointed if it was the case that a vulnerable person was discharged too soon without services first being confirmed. This was an area on which to concentrate efforts.

Councillor Bridgman acknowledged the need to ensure that improvements to DToC performance did not negatively impact on the target to keep people at home 91 days after discharge from hospital. It was important to manage both indicators carefully to ensure the right outcomes for residents.

Councillor Jeff Brooks noted that the number of empty business properties was 66% higher than in Q4 of 2016/17. He queried the actions being put in place to manage this and ensure there was an appropriate mix of premises for business purposes. Would this feature in the new Economic Development Plan?

In response, Councillor James Fredrickson referred Members to the Measures of Volume (Appendix D) which reported both the number of empty business premises which had increased and the number of properties which were subject to business rates which had also increased. It was useful to consider these two trend graphs collectively as the data in one graph went some way to balancing the data in the other. It was also important to reflect in the data those cases where businesses had vacated their premises temporarily in order to invest in the property/site.

Councillor Fredrickson added that the Economic Development Strategy would be refreshed and presented in due course.

Councillor Alan Macro asked if there was an understanding as to why the number of planning applications received during Q3 (confirmed) and Q4 (provisional) was the lowest they had been for the last three financial years.

Councillor Hilary Cole explained that this indicator covered both minor and major planning applications. The lower number of planning applications received could be for major developments. Councillor Dillon suggested that the graph could be split into minor and major applications to help to understand performance more clearly. Councillor Cole agreed to explore this point.

Councillor Macro noted that the submission of the new Local Plan for examination was behind schedule against the target of December 2019. He was concerned at the impact this could have on home building targets. Councillor Macro considered the involvement of Planning Policy Officers in appeal hearings to be a contributing issue and felt this was therefore an area in need of additional resource. Councillor Cole clarified that attendance at appeal hearings was mostly in the remit of Development Control rather than Planning Policy Officers.

Councillor Macro referred to the exception report for the indicator ‘to enable the completion of 1,000 affordable homes in the 2015-2020 period’. This had missed the 2017/18 target but it was rated ‘amber’. He questioned how the target would be achieved by 2020 when performance was less than half way from the target after a three year period. Councillor Macro felt this should be rated ‘red’. Councillor Cole did not accept that the indicator should be rated ‘red’ rather than ‘amber’.

Councillor Lock highlighted the need to consider a range of factors to help understand why some children were not achieving within schools. This needed to include children with mental health problems and the importance of accessing suitable and stable housing. Housing and the home environment often linked with mental illness. The suitability and stability of housing was very important in helping a child’s wellbeing and in helping them to achieve. It was also an important factor for the wellbeing of adults.

Councillor Doherty noted these points in relation to mental health which had many factors and complexities to consider. However, the Council had successfully implemented the Emotional Health Academy. This enabled earlier intervention and prevented issues escalating in many cases.

Councillor Jones closed the debate by commenting on the proportion of indicators reported ‘green’ as opposed to ‘red’. He highlighted that the majority of targets continued to move in an upward trajectory. The targets were deliberately ambitious and designed as stretch targets. Councillor Jones referred to the affordable housing target as an example of where the Council was being ambitious in seeking to make improvements for residents.

RESOLVED that

·         Progress against the Key Accountable Measures (KAMs) and the key achievements in all services be noted. In comparison to last year, it was noted that the same proportion of measures are RAG rated Green (against similar or more challenging targets than in 2016/17). In absolute terms, it was noted that the results for the majority of the KAMs have further improved this year.

·         Those areas reported as ‘red’ had been reviewed to ensure that appropriate action was in place. Consideration was particularly given to the results and improvement actions for:

·         Educational attainment of the Free School Meals and for disadvantaged pupils’ cohorts.

·         Older people and vulnerable adults’ wellbeing.

·         Progress towards adopting the Local Plan and Minerals & Waste Local Plan.

·         A change in target from ‘December 2019’ to ‘April 2020’ be agreed for both ‘the submission of a New Local Plan for examination’ and ‘the submission of a Minerals and Waste Local Plan for examination’.

Other options considered: None.