Part 1
REPORT TO SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
15 OCTOBER 2001
BEST VALUE REVIEW OF PROPERTY PHASE I
IMPLEMENTATION PROGRESS REPORT
1.0
RECOMMENDATIONS
Members are recommended to:
1.1
Note the progress made in implementing the Phase One
Review.
1.2
Approve the future progress reporting proposals set out in
Section 9 of this report.
1.3
Note that resource requirements are to be reviewed and the
outcome reported to a future meeting of this Committee.
2.0
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report sets out the progress made during the first year
of implementing the Phase 1 Property Best Value Review
and advises Members of national property performance
indicators introduced by the DTLR.
It concludes that floor space reduction is on target and that
significant progress has been made in establishing the fourth
core site but that in other areas progress has been slower
than set out in the Improvement Plan. This requires a
reappraisal of the resources being applied to the project, the
results of which will be reported to a future meeting of this
Committee.
3.0
BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS
Phase 1 Best Value Review of Property
Report to Environmental Scrutiny Committee 16Th July 2001
G: 219517069
4.0
CONTACT OFFICER
Steven Durbar 793-3755
5.0
WARDS TO WHICH REPORT RELATES – ALL WARDS
6.0
KEY COUNCIL POLICIES : BEST VALUE
PURPOSE:
This report reviews progress being made in
implementing the Action Plan and advises Members of
the National Property performance Indicators produced
by the DTLR.
7.0
BACKGROUND
The Phase 1 Property Best Value Review considered office
support accommodation and strategic management. Its
findings were reported to Cabinet and Council in September
2000.
The recommendations were:



That a strategic property management unit be formed
That space standards of 11 sq.m in existing buildings
and 8 sq.m in new or newly refurbished buildings be
achieved over a 3 year period
That these are achieved through moves to 4 core sites
and up to 9 satellite offices
The Phase 1 Review was subject to inspection and the
findings of the Best Value Inspectorate were that the service
was fair and would probably improve.
The Inspectors made a number of recommendations which
were incorporated in the Council’s Action Plan
(Implementation Plan). These matters were reported to
Scrutiny Committee in July. 2001
G: 219517069
8.0
CURRENT SITUATION
The current situation is being reported under 4 main
headings, as follows:




8.1
Progress on establishing 4 core sites
Progress on establishing satellite offices
Performance Measurement and Monitoring
National Property Performance Indicators
CORE SITES
The four core sites have been identified as:




Civic Centre
Crompton House
Turnpike House
Minerva House (formerly the Amec building)
Minerva House is providing the core accommodation for
Education and Leisure Directorate and is replacing Chapel
Street, Vulcan House and the Education Centre.
Some staff from the portacabins within the Civic Centre are
also moving into this building.
Initial occupancy levels at Minerva House are approximately
300 staff equating to around 9.5 sq.m per person, replacing
an average of 19.79 sq.m per person in the Chapel Street,
Vulcan House and Education Centre accommodation. The
target occupancy rate for newly refurbished buildings is
8 sq.m per person and if this is achieved the building should
have a capacity for approximately 60 additional staff.
There has also been some other staff movement into and
between the core sites. Principally, moves of Housing
Directorate staff to Turnpike House from Area Housing
Offices and moves associated with the centralisation of
financial support staff.
G: 219517069
Occupancy levels at the existing core sites are as follows:
Core Site
Civic Centre
Crompton House
Turnpike House
Sq.m per person
1999/2000
2000/01
13.9
11.2
24.5
14.2
11.6
15.1 *
* Increase probably due to temporarily vacant space –
pending moves of Housing staff into building.
The 4 core sites have a Net Internal Area of approximately
18,370 sq.m which, when the move to Minerva house is
completed, will contain approximately 1,580 people. Without
introducing home working/hot desking initiatives, but when
the space standards of 11 sq.m per person in existing
premises and 8 sq.m/person in Minverva House are
achieved, the core sites will have a capacity of approximately
1,700 people.
The Best Value review identified the need for a core site area
of 21,000 sq.m and capacity for 1,895 people, assuming no
staff reduction and occupancy @ 11 sq.m per person and
maintaining traditional working practices. Whether the
current core sites will be sufficient for the Council’s medium
term needs, or whether the original projections were correct,
will depend to a great extent on how satellite office
introduction is dealt with the number of staff located in these
satellite offices and also any changes in the Council’s overall
office based staff numbers.
8.2
SATELLITE OFFICES
The Phase I Best Value Review concluded that up to
9 satellite offices could be established across the City where
accommodation would be shared by Directorates. It was
also noted that the relationship between satellite office
establishment, the One Stop Shop initiative and the Housing
Directorate’s review of service delivery would need to be
considered.
No real progress has yet been made in establishing satellite
offices. This is the result of available resources within
Development Services being involved in the “core sites” work
as the first priority, no clear picture of Housing’s
G: 219517069
requirements having been established and no decision
having been reached on the introduction of One Stop Shops.
It is also considered that the original assumptions relating to
Social Services’ requirements may not reflect their current
needs and this is currently being investigated further with
them.
It is hoped that the situation regarding One Stop Shops will
become clear by the end of this year. It should be noted that
proposals are being developed for combined accommodation
at Walkden and One Stop Shops at Eccles and Swinton as
potential areas for early implementation. Work is also to be
undertaken with Social Services and Housing to clarify their
requirements. This should enable the requirements for
satellite offices to be reviewed and defined so enabling
appropriate implementation plans to be put in place.
8.3
PERFORMANCE AND MEASUREMENT
The Best Value review proposed ten performance indicators
to measure the performance of office accommodation.
These were derived from the aims and objectives for holding
property that supported the Council’s corporate objectives.
These PI’s, together with current performance and targets,
are shown in Appendix 1.
The following high level indicators should also be noted.
Item
Number of
buildings
Total floor
space
occupied
Total costs
Year
1999-2000
Year
2000/01
% Change
50
44
-12%
58,538 sq.m
43,309 sq.m
-10%
£4,892,568
£4,556,949
-6.8%
As part of the Best Value Implementation Plan a series of
objectives and time scales were also established to measure
progress in adopting a strategic approach to property and
securing the effective operation of the SPMU. These
objectives and progress to date are shown in Appendix 2.
G: 219517069
In addition to the PI’s and objectives set out in Appendices 1
and 2, progress on implementing the Phase 1 Review is
noted against the Improvement Plan shown in Appendix 3.
8.4
NATIONAL PROPERTY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
The DTLR has published what are described as 5 national
property PI’s, but which actually comprise 11 separate
performance indicators. These are to be reported annually
within the Council’s Asset Management Plan which is
submitted to Government Office in July each year. The PI’s
concerned cover 5 areas as follows:
a) To measure the condition of buildings and the cost of the
backlog of maintenance.
b) To measure the rate of return from the investment estate.
c) To measure the cost of the property management
service.
d) To measure building running costs and CO² emissions .
e) To measure the delivery of capital projects against cost
and programme.
Building running costs and the condition of the buildings are
already being measured, as local PI’s, on the same basis as
the national PI’s. However, arrangement will need to be put
in place to collect the necessary data to enable the other PI’s
to be satisfied. Government requires all the PI’s to be
reported in the Asset Management Plan submitted in July
2002 and annually thereafter. Experience has shown that
the initial work to report these PI’s will take a significant
amount of staff time, particularly as existing financial and
other systems do not readily provide the data needed.
The PI’s are attached in full in Appendix 4.
9.0
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKING AND REPORTING
The production and use of both local and national PI’s is still
in its early stages of development and benchmarking groups
are still in their infancy. Consequently, there are likely to be
many changes yet. At the present time the council is
involved in benchmarking through the Sheffield Hallam
G: 219517069
University Benchmarking Group in relation to facilities
management, Core Cities in relation to the investment estate
and what is described as Salford’s “family authorities”, i.e.,
similar authorities in respect of “best value PI’s”.
Members have requested that performance reports on the
implementation of the Property Best Value Review are
submitted quarterly. Bearing in mind that at the strategic
level most financial and statistical data is only updated on an
annual basis, it is suggested that the quarterly reporting is
undertaken as follows:
October
January
April
July
Implementation Plan progress
General Update - Any relevant
matters
Implementation Plan Progress
Local and National PI’s (on data
to 31.3 of each year).
10.0 CONCLUSION
10.1 Whilst over the past year progress has been made, this
progress has not been sufficient to meet all the targets set
out in the Improvement Plan.
10.2 In relation to the key target of reducing the amount of office
space per employee the target set for 2001/2 is being
achieved.
Establishing the fourth Core Site and the imminent moves by
Education and Leisure staff into that site is also a significant
achievement.
10.3 Introduction of satellite offices has slipped behind schedule
and it should be noted that securing further reduction in floor
space will require progress in establishing shared satellite
accommodation.
10.4 With regard to performance indicators it is clear that external
and internal demands to measure performance is increasing.
The early stages of introducing and servicing PI’s is
particularly time and resource consuming as existing
systems do not readily provide data in the form required and
G: 219517069
data requirements are changed and refined as the needs of
benchmarking become clear.
10.5 It must be recognised that in the past the rate of change in
property occupation was slow, that strategic property
management did not take place and PI’s were not used.
Consequently delivering the changes in property occupation
and embedding the process of strategic property
management, asset management planning and PI’s into the
working practices of the Council is resulting in a significant
increase in demand for the time of property staff.
10.6 In order to drive the process forward more positively and
make progress in line with the Implementation Plan,
additional resources will be needed.
The level of need will now be reassessed and the outcome
will be reported to a future meeting.
G: 219517069