SALFORD CITY COUNCIL
Environmental Scrutiny
Committee
SUBJECT:
26th Feb 2003
Part 1 (Open to
the Public)
ITEM No
PERFORMANCE INDICATORS:
RESULTS FOR APR – DEC 2002
PERFORMANCE
REVIEW MATTER
REPORT OF: DIRECTOR OF DEVELOPMENT
SERVICES
FOR
CONSIDERATION
1.0
PURPOSE OF REPORT
1.1
To inform members of the interim progress regarding the nationally set
Best Value Performance Indicators and key Local Performance
Indicators for the period April to December 2002.
2.0
RECOMMENDATION
2.1
That the performance indicators be considered by the Scrutiny
Committee.
3.0
SUMMARY
3.1
This report sets out how well the Directorate has performed against key
performance indicators. Good performance against these indicators is
important as it demonstrates to independent auditors, customers and
stakeholders that the Council is performing well in key areas, for
example:



3.2
It is providing good services in areas having a high interaction
with the community.
It compares well against similar local authorities in nationally set
indicators.
It is driven by the desire for continuous improvement.
The information is presented in the form of a Status Report, listing:


whether indicators are improving or deteriorating, and
which indicators are on target and which are not on target.
3.3
Where performance is not on target, Comparator Action Plans, (CAP’s)
which contain more detailed information and comment, are appended.
3.4
A note of caution should be applied when looking at the results for the
road traffic accident casualties. This simple analysis is based solely on
information for the first nine months, and as such, seasonal variations
and other random elements associated with any accident could
influence the overall year-end performance. In addition it should be
1
noted that these figures are based on January to September
performance and not April to December as is the case with all other
indicators.
3.5
The other point to note in respect of the road accident casualty figures
is the fact that whilst I am able to report current, i.e. this year’s figures,
the government definition of these BVPI’s requires the previous year’s
data to be reported. Accordingly, when the Best Value Performance
Plan for 2003/2004 is published in June 2003, the Council must publish
the figures for 2001 and not the more up to date information.
3.6
With most indicators, the trends are encouraging with improved
performances being recorded. However, the rate of improvement is
such that not all indicators are currently on target.
3.7
The City Council’s “family authorities” are determined by the Audit
Commission and are currently: Bolton, Coventry, Gateshead,
Hartlepool, Kingston-upon-Hull, Middlesbrough, Newcastle-upon-Tyne,
North Tyneside, Oldham, Redcar and Cleveland, Rochdale, St Helens,
Sandwell, Sheffield, South Tyneside, Stockton-on-Tees, Sunderland,
Tameside, Wirral, Wolverhampton.
Graham Oldfield
Quality and Performance Manager
2
DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PERFORMANCE INDICATORS – CURRENT STATUS AFTER 3rd QUARTER: 2002/2003
BVPI
No.
99a (i)
99a (ii)
99b (i)
99b (ii)
99c (i)
99c (ii)
99d (i)
99d (ii)
99e (i)
99e (ii)
Local PI
109a
109b
109c
188
Local PI
Local PI
PERFORMANCE INDICATOR
The number of road accident casualties per 100,000 population for the
following categories: Pedestrians killed / seriously injured.
 Pedestrians slightly injured.
 Pedal cyclists killed / seriously injured.
 Pedal cyclists slightly injured.
 2 – wheeled motor vehicles users killed / seriously injured.
 2 – wheeled motor vehicles users slightly injured.
 Car users killed / seriously injured.
 Car users slightly injured.
 Other vehicle users killed / seriously injured.
 Other vehicle users slightly injured.
 Children killed / seriously injured.
60% of major planning applications determined in 13 weeks.
65% of minor planning applications determined in 8 weeks.
80% of other planning applications determined in 8 weeks.
The number of planning decisions delegated to officers.
The % of streetlights not working.
The number of fatalities or injuries on sites supervised by building control.
IMPROVING/
STATIC/
DETERIORATING
ON TARGET/
NOT ON TARGET
PLEDGE
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
DETERIORATING
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
IMPROVING
DETERIORATING
STATIC
ON TARGET
ON TARGET
ON TARGET
ON TARGET
NOT ON TARGET
NOT ON TARGET
NOT ON TARGET
ON TARGET
ON TARGET
ON TARGET
NOT ON TARGET
NOT ON TARGET
NOT ON TARGET
ON TARGET
NOT ON TARGET
NOT ON TARGET
ON TARGET
4 - A Safer Salford
4 - A Safer Salford
4 - A Safer Salford
4 - A Safer Salford
4 - A Safer Salford
4 - A Safer Salford
4 - A Safer Salford
4 - A Safer Salford
4 - A Safer Salford
4 - A Safer Salford
4 - A Safer Salford
5 - Stronger Communities
5 - Stronger Communities
5 - Stronger Communities
5 - Stronger Communities
4 - A Safer Salford
4 - A Safer Salford
Notes:
1.
The improving / static / deteriorating column compares current performance with performance in 2001/2002.
2.
The on target / not on target column compares projected year-end performance with year-end targets as set out in the BVPP.
3.
All other Development Services indicators which are not included in this table can only be measured at year-end.
3
3rd Quarter 2002/03 Comparator Action Plan
P.I. Ref 115
Road Safety - 2 wheeled motor vehicles killed / seriously
injured per 100,000 population
BVPI No
99c(i)
Benchmarks
Trend
Salford's Targets
10
7.60
8
8.00
8.00
7.00
Count
6.00
6
4.50
4.30
3.80
4
2
0.00
0
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
Met
Average
01/02
Ranking against all GM Councils (out of 10)
Joint 4th
Ranking against family authorities (out of 21)
Joint 6th
Range for all Mets Councils
Family
Average
01/02
PERFORMANCE IS
NOT ON TARGET
3 - 17
Quartile level for Mets
1st
Quartile level for all Authorities
1st
Met Top
Quartile
01/02
LOWER FIGURE IS
PREFERABLE
Performance Indicator Action Plan
Salfords
Target
2002/03
Salfords 5
Year Target
Salfords
Current
Position
2002/03
2001/02
2002/03
Q1
0.4
1.3
Q2
3.6
3.1
Q3
6.2
4.5
Date: 21/01/03
Comments on Current Performance:
Please note that all data in respect of road accident casualties is expressed in terms of casualties per 100,000
population as required by the government’s Best Value guidance, unless otherwise stated.
Trend: Performance is improving but not yet on target.
The current performance of 4.5 casualties per 100,000 population (10 actual) is an improvement on performance
in previous years. At the same point last year, 6.2 casualties were recorded. This translated into a year end figure
of 8 per 100,000 population. If the same trend were to be replicated this year, the year end figure would be 5.7
casualties which, although it would fall short of the target of no more than 4.3 per 100,000 population would still
give Salford a top quartile performance against known data. The last known Metropolitan average figure in this
category was 8 casualties per 100,000 in the year 2001/02.
Barriers to Improvement:
Accident data can be analysed to reveal trends and accident black spots, and appropriate accident reduction
measures can be planned and implemented. In addition, road safety campaigns can be targeted at specific groups
in order to make the biggest impact.
However, any measures that the City Council may deploy in an attempt to reduce road accident casualties can
only influence this indicator. They cannot determine the occurrence of all accidents which are also influenced by
random elements and behaviour. In addition, the City Council is not the highway authority for trunk roads or
motorways even though the accident statistics for these highways are included within Salford’s figures.
Current / Proposed Actions:
Continue to analyse data to prioritise areas of greatest need or areas where largest returns can be made. The main
delivery mechanisms identified to address the issues are: i) education/training, ii) minor improvement works and
iii) highway maintenance.
Top Quartile to be Achieved By (Date):
Salford’s primary aim is firstly to consolidate the
recent encouraging trend.
Lead Officer:
Steven Lee
Ext: 3800
4
3rd Quarter 2002/03 Comparator Action Plan
P.I. Ref 116
Road Safety - 2 wheeled motor vehicles slightly
injured per 100,000 population
BVPI No
99c(i)
Trend
35
31.60
Benchmarks
Salford's Targets
32.10
30
24.00
Count
25
19.00
20
21.00
20.10
20.10
19.60
Met Top
Quartile
01/02
Salfords
Target
2002/03
Salfords 5
Year Target
Salfords
Current
Position
2002/03
15
10
5
0.00
0
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
Met
Average
01/02
Ranking against all GM Councils (out of 10)
Joint 5th
Ranking against family authorities (out of 21)
17th
Range for all Mets Councils
Family
Average
01/02
PERFORMANCE IS
NOT ON TARGET
11 - 36
Quartile level for Mets
3rd
Quartile level for all Authorities
2nd
LOWER FIGURE IS
PREFERABLE
Performance Indicator Action Plan
2001/02
2002/03
Q1
6.7
7.6
Q2
16.0
14.3
Q3
23.2
19.6
Date: 21/01/03
Comments on Current Performance:
Please note that all data in respect of road accident casualties is expressed in terms of casualties per 100,000
population as required by the government’s Best Value guidance, unless otherwise stated.
Trend: Performance is improving but not yet on target.
The current performance of 19.6 casualties per 100,000 population (44 actual)) is an improvement on last year
when 23.3 casualties were recorded at this point in time. This translated into a year-end figure of 32.1 per
100,000 population. If this trend were replicated this year, the year-end figure would be 27.2 casualties, falling
short of the target of no more than casualties 20.1 per 100,000 population. The last known average figure in this
category for the Metropolitan authorities was 24 casualties in the year 2001/2002.
Barriers to Improvement:
Accident data can be analysed to reveal trends and accident black spots, and appropriate accident reduction
measures can be planned and implemented. In addition, road safety campaigns can be targeted at specific groups
in order to make the biggest impact.
However, any measures that the City Council may deploy in an attempt to reduce road accident casualties can
only influence this indicator. They cannot determine the occurrence of all accidents which are also influenced by
random elements and behaviour. In addition, the City Council is not the highway authority for trunk roads or
motorways even though the accident statistics for these highways are included within Salford’s figures.
Current / Proposed Actions:
Continue to analyse data to prioritise areas of greatest need or areas where largest returns can be made. The main
delivery mechanisms identified to address the issues are: i) education/training, ii) minor improvement works and
iii) highway maintenance.
Top Quartile to be Achieved By (Date):
Salford’s primary aim is firstly to reverse the
current trend pattern.
Lead Officer:
Steven Lee
Ext: 3800
5
3rd Quarter 2002/03 Comparator Action Plan
Road Safety - car users killed / seriously injured
per 100,000 population
BVPI No
99d(i)
Benchmarks
Trend
Salford's Targets
19.00
20
16.00
16.90
14.00
15
12.00
Count
P.I. Ref 117
12.80
11.40
10.30
10
5
0.00
0
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
Ranking against all GM Councils (out of 10)
Ranking against all family authorities (out of 21)
Range for all Mets Councils
Met
Average
01/02
Family
Average
01/02
PERFORMANCE IS
NOT ON TARGET
8th
Joint 10th
LOWER FIGURE IS
PREFERABLE
8 - 39
Quartile level for Mets
2nd
Quartile level for all Authorities
1st
Met Top
Quartile
01/02
Performance Indicator Action Plan
Salfords
Target
2002/03
Salfords 5
Year Target
Salfords
Current
Position
2002/03
2001/02
2002/03
Q1
2.2
1.8
Q2
6.2
5.8
Q3
12.5
10.3
Date: 21/01/03
Comments on Current Performance:
Please note that all data in respect of road accident casualties is expressed in terms of casualties per 100,000
population as required by the government’s Best Value guidance, unless otherwise stated.
Trend: Performance is improving but not yet on target.
The current performance of 10.3 casualties per 100,000 population (23 actual) is an improvement compared with
the same time last year when 12.5 casualties were recorded in this category. This translated into a year end figure
of 16.9 casualties per 100,000 population. If the same trend were replicated this year, there would be 13.9
casualties compared with the target of no more than 12.8. The last known Metropolitan average figure in this
category was 19 casualties in the year 2001/2002.
Barriers to Improvement:
Accident data can be analysed to reveal trends and accident black spots, and appropriate accident reduction
measures can be planned and implemented. In addition, road safety campaigns can be targeted at specific groups
in order to make the biggest impact.
However, any measures that the City Council may deploy in an attempt to reduce road accident casualties can
only influence this indicator. They cannot determine the occurrence of all accidents which are also influenced by
random elements and behaviour. In addition, the City Council is not the highway authority for trunk roads or
motorways even though the accident statistics for these highways are included within Salford’s figures.
Current / Proposed Actions:
Continue to analyse data to prioritise areas of greatest need or areas where largest returns can be made. The main
delivery mechanisms identified to address the issues are: i) education/training, ii) minor improvement works and
iii) highway maintenance.
Top Quartile to be Achieved By (Date):
End of 2004
Lead Officer:
Steven Lee
Ext: 3800
6
3rd Quarter 2002/03 Comparator Action Plan
P.I. Ref 121
LPI22 Road Safety - Children killed / seriously injured
per 100,000 population
Benchmarks
Trend
Salford's Targets
14
11.60
12
9.80
Count
10
8.80
8.50
8
7.00
6
4
2
N/A
N/A
N/A
Met
Average
01/02
Family
Average
01/02
Met Top
Quartile
01/02
0
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
Ranking against all GM Councils (out of 10)
N/A
Ranking against family authorities (out of 21)
N/A
Range for all Mets Councils
N/A
Quartile level for Mets
N/A
Quartile level for all Authorities
N/A
Salfords
Target
2002/03
PERFORMANCE IS
NOT ON TARGET
LOWER FIGURE IS
PREFERABLE
Performance Indicator Action Plan
Salfords 5
Year
Target
Salfords
Current
Position
2002/03
2001/02
2002/03
Q1
1.3
0.4
Q2
4.9
4.9
Q3
7.1
8.5
Date: 21/01/03
Comments on Current Performance:
Trend: Performance is deteriorating and not on target.
The current performance of 8.5 casualties per 100,000 population (19 actual) is slightly higher than at the same
time last year when 7.1 (16 actual) were recorded. This translated into a year end figure of 11.6 per 100,000
population (26 actual). If the same trend were replicated this year, there would be 13.8 casualties compared with
the target of no more than 8.8 casualties per 100,000 population.
As this is not a BVPI there is no benchmark data available.
Barriers to Improvement:
Accident data can be analysed to reveal trends and accident black spots, and appropriate accident reduction
measures can be planned and implemented. In addition, road safety campaigns can be targeted at specific groups
in order to make the biggest impact.
However, any measures that the City Council may deploy in an attempt to reduce road accident casualties can
only influence this indicator. They cannot determine the occurrence of all accidents which are also influenced by
random elements and behaviour. There are many factors beyond the control of the Council which have a bearing
on the number of road accident casualties throughout the City. In addition, the City Council is not the highway
authority for trunk roads or motorways even though the accident statistics for these highways are included within
Salford’s figures.
Current / Proposed Actions:
Continue to analyse data to prioritise areas of greatest need or areas where largest returns can be made.
Top Quartile to be Achieved By (Date):
N/A
Lead Officer:
Steven Lee
Ext: 3800
7
3rd Quarter 2002/03 Comparator Action Plan
P.I. Ref 125
Percentage of street lights not working
Benchmarks
Trend
Salford's Targets
2.0%
Percentage
1.66%
1.04%
1.0%
0.79%
1.00%
0.78%
0.78%
N/A
N/A
N/A
Family
Average
01/02
Met Top
Quartile
01/02
0.0%
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
Met
Average
01/02
Ranking against all GM Councils (out of 10)
N/A
Ranking against family authorities (out of 21)
N/A
Range for all Mets Councils
N/A
Quartile level for Mets
N/A
Quartile level for all Authorities
N/A
Salfords
Target
2002/03
PERFORMANCE IS
NOT ON TARGET
LOWER FIGURE IS
PREFERABLE
Performance Indicator Action Plan
Salfords 5
Year
Target
Salfords
Current
Position
2002/03
2001/02
2002/03
Q1
0.89
0.97
Q2
0.87
0.95
Q3
0.92
1.66
Date: 21/01/03
Comments on Current Performance:
Trend: Performance is deteriorating and not on target.
This is now a local PI, having been dropped from the BVPI list by the Audit Commission and as such
benchmark data is no longer collected and published.
After a mid-year improvement on the first quarter, performance has dipped in the third quarter. This is usual in
the annual pattern of streetlight failures as lamps burn longer in the winter months and more failures are
revealed. Other reasons for a downturn in performance could include increases in vandalism, a defective delivery
of lamps, incorrect repairs and deteriorating equipment etc .
The last known benchmark performance puts Salford in the 1st quartile for Metropolitan authorities.
Barriers to Improvement:
None
Current/Proposed Action:
Analyse data to investigate if there are any specific causes or patterns to lamp failures.
Maintain good levels of performance.
Top Quartile to be Achieved By (Date):
N/A
Lead Officer:
Stuart Collins
Ext. 3869
8
3rd Quarter 2002/03 Comparator Action Plan
P.I. Ref 162
BVPI 109a Percentage of major planning applications determined within 13 weeks
Trend
Benchmarks
Salford's Targets
100%
80%
Percentage
63%
60%
54%
60%
60%
54%
47%
40%
44%
33%
20%
N/A
0%
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
Met
Average
01/02
Ranking against all GM Councils (out of 10)
7th
Ranking against family authorities (out of 21)
14th
Range for all Mets Councils
Quartile level for Mets
Quartile level for all Authorities
22% - 79%
3
Family
Average
01/02
Met Top
Quartile
01/02
PERFORMANCE IS
NOT ON TARGET
HIGHER FIGURE IS
PREFERABLE
N/A
Salfords
Target
2002/03
Performance Indicator Action Plan
Salfords 5
Year
Target
Salfords
Current
Position
2002/03
2001/02
2002/03
Q1
-
52%
Q2
-
45%
Q3
-
44%
Date: 21/01/03
Comments on Current Performance:
Trend: Performance is improving but not yet on target.
This is a new indicator introduced by government for 2002/03 and as such benchmark data is not as
comprehensive as with other more established indicators. However, the Audit Commission has calculated the
effect of the new indicator on historic data for the period 2001/2002. The current performance would put
Salford in the third quartile for Metropolitan authorities.
Due to the relatively low numbers of applications in this category (only 4% of all applications are classified
as “major”) performance can be quite volatile. Just a small number of complex applications requiring
amendments or negotiations can easily depress performance levels. In 2000/01, Salford achieved 63% but
this fell to just 33% in 2001/02. A top quartile performance for Metropolitan authorities would be 54% but
even this would fall short of the government’s target of 60%. An analysis of where improvements in the
system can be made is currently (Jan 2003) being undertaken and it is anticipated that these will result in an
improved performance in the latter half of the year. Performance in December alone was 50%.
Barriers to Improvement:
None, providing staffing levels can be maintained.
Current/Proposed Action:
From the beginning of October a revised system of working has been adopted in the administration team to
ensure a more streamlined process. I anticipate that this will improve processing times. Further system
analysis is also being undertaken.
Monitor the quarterly figures closely to see if there are any long-term trends that may need addressing.
Maintain current staffing levels.
Top Quartile to be Achieved By (Date):
By March 2003
Lead Officer:
Dave Jolley.
Ext: 3631
9
3rd Quarter 2002/03 Comparator Action Plan
P.I. Ref 163
BVPI 109b Percentage of minor planning applications determined within 8 weeks
Benchmarks
Trend
Salford's Targets
100%
72%
Percentage
80%
60%
56%
57%
Met
Average
01/02
Family
Average
01/02
60%
65%
65%
65%
62%
Met Top
Quartile
01/02
Salfords
Target
2002/03
Salfords 5
Year Target
Salfords
Current
Position
2002/03
40%
20%
N/A
0%
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
Ranking against all GM Councils (out of 10)
5th
Ranking against family authorities (out of 21)
8th
Range for all Mets Councils
Quartile level for Mets
Quartile level for all Authorities
26% - 81%
2
PERFORMANCE IS
NOT ON TARGET
HIGHER FIGURE IS
PREFERABLE
N/A
Performance Indicator Action Plan
2001/02
2002/03
Q1
-
52%
Q2
-
57%
Q3
-
62%
Date: 21/01/03
Comments on Current Performance:
Trend: Performance is improving but not yet on target.
This is a new indicator introduced by government for 2002/03 and as such benchmark data is not as
comprehensive as with other more established indicators. However, the Audit Commission has calculated
the effect of the new indicator on historic data for the period 2001/2002. The current performance would put
Salford in the second quartile for Metropolitan authorities.
Salford’s performance has improved quarter on quarter throughout the current year and is now just 3% short
of the 65% target. Performance in December alone was 89%.
Barriers to Improvement:
None, providing staffing levels can be maintained.
Current/Proposed Action:
From the beginning of October a revised system of working has been adopted in the administration team to
ensure a more streamlined process. I anticipate that this will improve processing times. Further system
analysis is also being undertaken.
Monitor the quarterly figures closely to see if there are any long-term trends that may need addressing.
Maintain current staffing levels.
Top Quartile to be Achieved By (Date):
By March 2003
Lead Officer:
Dave Jolley.
Ext: 3631
10
3rd Quarter 2002/03 Comparator Action Plan
P.I. Ref 168
BVPI 188 - Planning decisions delegated to officers a % of all decisions
Benchmarks
Trend
Salford's Targets
100
90.00
90.00
83.00
Percentage
80
60
69.00
58.00
74.00
72.00
68.00
62.00
40
20
0
1999/00
2000/01
2001/02
Met Average
00/01
Ranking against all GM Councils (of 10)
8th
Ranking against family authorities (of 21)
15th
Range for all Mets Councils
Family
Average
00/01
56% - 97%
Quartile level for Mets
4th
Quartile level for all Authorities
N/A
Met Top
Quartile
00/01
Salfords
Target
2002/03
PERFORMANCE IS
NOT ON TARGET
HIGHER FIGURE IS
PREFERABLE
Performance Indicator Action Plan
Salfords 5
Year Target
2001/02
Salfords
Current
Position
2002/03
2002/03
Q1
74%
Q2
72%
Q3
72%
Date: 21/01/03
Comments on Current Performance:
Trend: Performance is improving but not yet on target.
This is a new BVPI for 2002/2003. Salford has traditionally performed poorly against this indicator, preferring
to leave a large proportion of direct decision making to elected members. However, in recent years the drive for
modernisation has led to a number of revisions to the scheme of delegation and these have seen performance
increase from 58% in 1999/2000 to the current level of 72%. Nonetheless this still falls considerably short of
the government target to ensure that 90% of decisions on planning applications are taken at officer level.
Despite significant improvements in recent years, the last comparative data puts Salford in the 4th quartile for
Metropolitan authorities. The most recent comparative information relates to the last quarter of 2001which
shows that the majority of similar authorities are achieving a greater degree of delegation than Salford.
Bradford (91%), Dudley (91%), Kirklees (92%), St Helens (93%), Wakefield (90%) and Stockton-on-Tees
(93%) are already exceeding the national target. For 2000/2001 Kirklees reached 97%.
Whilst the year on year trend is improving, the performance in December alone had dipped to 69%.
Another more radical revision to the scheme of delegation is currently being considered.
Barriers to Improvement:
This indicator only measures the level of delegation. The current scheme of delegation is the only reason the
target is not being achieved.
Current / Proposed Actions:
The existing scheme of delegation is currently being reviewed by the City Council to consider a range of
proposals.
Top Quartile to be Achieved By (Date):
2003
Lead Officer:
Dave Jolley.
Ext: 3631
11