Sheffield City Council,
Children and Young People's Directorate
External Evaluation of Service District Proposals
and Partnerships
Version: Final
December 2005
Children and Young People's Directorate
External Evaluation of Service District Proposals and Partnerships
KPMG LLP
Version: Final
Contents
1
Executive Summary
3
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
Introduction
Key findings
Conclusions
Recommendations
Next Steps
Acknowledgement
3
3
6
7
8
8
2
Introduction and Background
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
Purpose of this report
Background
Health Check review objectives
Approach
Limitations of use
Acknowledgements
3
Key findings
3.1
3.2
3.3
3.4
3.5
3.6
3.7
3.8
3.9
Overview
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Vision
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Finance
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Programme and Project Management
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Governance
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Risk Management
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Planning, Commissioning and Performance ManagementError! Bookmark not defined.
Communications
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Service District Management ArrangementsError! Bookmark not defined.
4
Conclusions
4.1
4.2
4.3
Conclusions
Recommendations
Next Steps
5
Appendix 1 Initial Risk Matrix Error! Bookmark not defined.
6
Appendix 2 Consultation Log
7
Appendix 3 – Desk Research on Best PracticeError! Bookmark not defined.
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Error! Bookmark not defined.
Error! Bookmark not defined.
ABCD
Children and Young People's Directorate
External Evaluation of Service District Proposals and Partnerships
KPMG LLP
Version: Final
1
Executive Summary
1.1
Introduction
This document reports to Sheffield City Council, Children and Young People’s
Directorate (the Council) on the key findings of a high level diagnostic evaluation of the
arrangements proposed for the Service District Proposals and Partnerships. This report
sets out the key areas reviewed, the key findings and the next steps for the
implementation of the Service Districts
The key areas our evaluation focused on are: finance, programme and project
management, governance, risk management, commissioning, performance management,
service redesign, communication and service district management arrangements.
The key recommendations are set out at the end of this section.
1.2
Key findings
The conclusion is that the implementation of the Service Districts is at an early stage.
There is a robust vision and sense of direction underpinned by strong stakeholder support
to have in place a Service District approach that will improve the five outcomes for
children, young people and their families. There are challenges with regard to the
timescales, finance, capacity and risks and only by adopting a robust programme and
project management approach will the implementation of the Service Districts be
achieved. We have set out a series of recommendations in Section 4 to take forward in the
short term to deliver the Service Districts within the required timescales.
Our approach and the key findings we report on are set out in graphic below.
3
ABCD
Children and Young People's Directorate
External Evaluation of Service District Proposals and Partnerships
KPMG LLP
Version: Final
The key findings from each of the areas evaluated are set out below:
1.2.1
Vision
We found a strong sense of vision and commitment to the concept and benefits perceived
of moving towards a structure of Service Districts. It is clear from our interviews and
discussions that all partnerships have endorsed and are supportive of the process of close
partnership working through an area approach and there was general acknowledgement
that the Council had invested very significant effort in achieving buy-in with all key
stakeholders.
Given the general enthusiasm that still exists for this initiative it will remain vitally
important that strong communication continues with key players. This is especially
important with regard to potential changes in Primary Care Trust (PCT) structures over
the next 12-18 months.
1.2.2
Finance
There was insufficient information or progress made by the Council to asses the capital
and revenue costs of the proposed arrangements. The approach to Service Districts and
partnerships is not yet based on the firm foundations of a clear understanding of the costs
of a Service District, pay and non pay, or on the establishment of agreed processes and
protocols. However, it is accepted by the Council that the identification of financial
resources and reaching formal agreements are a priority and there is a clear expectation
that these issues will be clarified and agreed. There is not a formal partnership agreement
setting out dispute resolution or contingency protocols for financial matters. In our
experience this underpins a strong partnership.
The financial work is required urgently and needs to be prioritised and progressed to
understand the key elements of health’s contribution on pay and non pay costs, the
establishment of pooled budgets and devolved budgets. A financial risk management
protocol for contingency arrangements for overspends and pooled budgets need to be
developed. There is a lack of capacity, expertise and knowledge to deliver the financial
element and further discussions are required with the Health community.
1.2.3
Programme and Project Management
Sheffield City Council as a whole is in the early stages of implementing a programme
management approach following the PRINCE 2 methodology. There was a stong delivery
programme for the consultation and first phase development of Service Districts which
was very well received by stakeholders.
Within the current Change Management project approach there is a Project Initiation
Document (PID) and task/work groups. However, the PID is not detailed enough to fully
document the key areas of resources, risks and the physical management of the project.
The task/work groups are not sufficiently robust in terms of outputs. There is a deficit in
the capacity and expertise to deliver a reconfiguration of the magnitude and significance
of the Service Districts.
4
ABCD
Children and Young People's Directorate
External Evaluation of Service District Proposals and Partnerships
KPMG LLP
Version: Final
It is essential to manage the risks going forward and to put in place a robust programme
and project management system and culture based on the PRINCE 2 methodology that
strengthens the programme and project management and subsequent delivery and has in
place the capacity, expertise and project culture to deliver the Service Districts through a
programme board, a programme director and key project groups that have clear required
outputs.
1.2.4
Governance
There is a governance structure headed by the 0-19 Partnership Board. There are strong
relationships at the 0-19 Partnership Board, the Executive Sponsors group and the Change
Management Group.
The current governance structure is insufficiently robust to deliver the required clear
decision making, scrutiny and accountability. There is an absence of a partnership
agreement that sets out and formalises the relationship of the Council with the PCT and
other key stakeholders.
A programme and project management structure will deliver the appropriate governance.
A programme director is required to lead the implementation. The Council has effectively
responded to this matter by the appointment of a senior Localities Director. The task/work
groups should be reconfigured into four project groups with clear terms of reference and
output focused objectives. A partnership agreement needs to be prepared to codify the
relationships between stakeholders and to create a clear and shared focus on the vision
and direction.
1.2.5
Risk Management
The risks for the implementation of the Service Districts have not been formally
considered and there is an absence of a risk management system. A risk management
system is required to log risk awareness, ascertain the impact and likelihood, detail the
reporting arrangements and assign the accountability for risk management.
A risk management system is required urgently and there is currently a lack of capacity,
expertise and knowledge to deliver this. An initial risk matrix is set out in Appendix 1 of
this report.
1.2.6
Planning, Commissioning and Performance Management
There is no overarching approach being developed to deliver a joint planning,
commissioning and performance management framework.
There is a lack of
understanding of commissioning and planning for children and young people and no
shared definition or approach across the key stakeholders. Commissioning services is
managed in discrete silos within each organisation.
There is a draft Children’s Plan, which emerged during our review, which gives the
context for Service District planning. There is a robust citywide performance
management framework and a comprehensive needs analysis for the Service Districts.
5
ABCD
Children and Young People's Directorate
External Evaluation of Service District Proposals and Partnerships
KPMG LLP
Version: Final
The challenge is to disaggregate and cascade the citywide performance management
framework to the Service Districts and to acknowledge commissioning as fundamental to
service redesign. .
This area is high risk for the Council. Joint planning, commissioning and performance
management is fundamental to achieve success of the Service Districts. Achievement of a
joint framework is urgently required particularly capturing commissioning activity of
what is commissioned where and by whom. There is insufficient capacity and
commissioning expertise and knowledge to deliver this within the Council.
1.2.7
Communications
The consultation and communication in the summer of 2005 was very well received by
stakeholders. Consultants have been appointed by the Council to develop a
communication strategy and the final report is due imminently. Work to oversee the
implementation of the strategy is progressing with an identified senior manager and a
task/work group to deliver.
1.2.8
Service District Management Arrangements
There is clear agreement amongst stakeholders that the Service District proposals require
a management structure consisting of a District Manager and support/administrative staff.
There is a job description and specification for the recruitment of the District Manager in
draft form.
The recruitment of District Managers and their teams is a key risk area for the Council.
There is no clarity on the funding route for these posts or on the recruiting process
between the key stakeholders. It is not evident whether accommodation for the teams is
available or whether they will be managing virtual or actual operational teams in the
Service Districts.
Agreement is required urgently on the funding and recruitment to these posts.
1.3
Conclusions
Our overall conclusion is that the Service District Proposals and Partnerships are at an
early stage of implementation and some good progress has been made. The concept is
sound and there is a strong vision and direction underpinned by high levels of enthusiasm
and commitment from stakeholders.
The implementation of Service Districts is a high risk area for the Council. There are
significant challenges to achieving the timescales particularly in capacity, risk
management and programme and project management. In order to deliver an integrated
Service Districts a robust programme and project management approach is urgently
required.
6
ABCD
Children and Young People's Directorate
External Evaluation of Service District Proposals and Partnerships
KPMG LLP
Version: Final
It is acknowledged by the Council that there is expertise within the officer group but that
they do face challenges with regard to the necessary level of expertise and capacity
required to take the Service Districts forward in all of the areas referenced above. A
particular area requiring further support is that of working with health colleagues.
Our recommendations accordingly set out the key priorities that we believe need to be
addressed to ensure a successful outcome
1.4
Recommendations
The recommendations set out a series of actions that need to be achieved over the short
term to take forward the implementation of the Service Districts within the timescales.
The Council needs to consider its actions to implement the recommendations and to
manage the significant risks detailed within this report.
A summary of key recommendations is set out in the table below.
Recommendations
1
The Council should identify a lead individual with the knowledge and
expertise to agree the financial contribution of the health community, agree
the funding of the District Management team, to ascertain the capital and
revenue costs of the proposed arrangements, develop the financial risk
management protocols, do an option appraisal of the appropriate legal
framework for pooled budgets, map the budgetary planning cycle of the
Council and the health community.
2
The Director of Children’s Services should open discussions with the
Strategic Health Authority to agree the financial contribution from the health
community for the funding of the District Management team and the
overheads for the strategic and operational delivery of the Service Districts.
3
The Council should consider putting in place a robust Programme and Project
Management approach based on the PRINCE 2 methodology to deliver the
implementation phase, governance and risk management of the Service
District Proposals and Partnerships. There should be more formalised
arrangements, a sharper focus on outcomes and tighter membership of project
groups with exception reporting to the programme board.
4
The Council’s recently appointed Localities Director should be the
programme director and lead project management team. The project
management team must be dedicated project management posts.
5
The Council should reconfigure the Executive Sponsors group as the
Programme Management Board, Chaired by the Programme Manager and the
Change Management Group should become the Engine Room of the
programme and project management as part of a move towards a formalised
programme management approach
6
The Council should prepare and agree a partnership agreement that details the
relationships between the Council and health. Given the changes in PCTs this
should be discussed with the Strategic Health Authority in order to maximise
health commitment.
7
ABCD
Children and Young People's Directorate
External Evaluation of Service District Proposals and Partnerships
KPMG LLP
Version: Final
7
8
9
10
11
12
1.5
The Council should develop as a priority a risk management system and
undertake a full risk assessment regarding the Service Districts. The risk
management approach should look to assess all key risks highlight mitigating
actions and establish risk registers with clear accountabilities that can be
overseen by the programme/project office.
The Council should identify the capacity, expertise and knowledge to develop
a joint planning, commissioning and performance management framework for
the Council and key stakeholders in order to achieve the service redesign and
improvement in the five outcomes in Service Districts
The Council should progress the good work on the citywide performance
management framework and the needs analysis for Service Districts and
disaggregate and cascade the citywide performance management framework
to the Service Districts.
The Council should progress the work on the implementation of the
communication strategy as a priority.
The Council should agree the funding from health and the recruitment process
for the District Managers and their support/admin team and commence the
recruitment process and identify the accommodation requirements and
availability for the District teams
That the Council urgently identify the appropriate expertise, capacity and
support to assist them to move forward in all of the identified areas and in
particular in working with health colleagues.
Next Steps
This report now needs to be discussed and considered in terms of the recommendations
made. We anticipate that the Council will want to consider:
1.6

Acceptance/priority of recommendations;

Implementation plan to take agreed recommendations forward;

Internal capacity needs and constraints

Skills and knowledge available; and

Additional support that maybe needed, external or otherwise.
Acknowledgement
We would like to thank staff at the Council for their time and commitment to working
with us on this review.
8