To consider progress on the development of Key Performance Indicators and the 2020/21 Q1 Performance Monitoring Report.

The Committee considered a report, set out at Agenda pages 55 to 78, which gave details of progress on the development of the Council’s Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for 2020/21. The report also gave details of performance during Quarter 1 of the 2020/21 Municipal Year (April to June).

Laura Callan introduced the report and answered Member questions.

Laura began by referring Members to the Overview and Scrutiny Committees’ review of the Council’s response to the pandemic. Laura confirmed that a report on the impact of then pandemic on poverty in the Borough would be submitted to the October meeting of the Committee. Laura outlined the range of evidence that would be used to inform the report, including deprivation and poverty data, unemployment statistics, intervention points across the Council and a summary of contact with the Citizen’s Advice Bureau. Laura confirmed that Simon Price (Housing) and Jake Morrison (CAB) would be invited to attend the meeting of the Committee on 21 October 2020.

The Q1 Performance Report indicated that, despite the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic, the Council had continued to play a significant role in supporting individuals and businesses by providing help and support, whilst continuing to maintain essential services.

The report stated that the KPIs for Q1 demonstrated improvements in a number of areas with seven KPIs moving from Amber to Green, one KPI moving from Red to Amber and one KPI moving from Red to Green. A number of KPIs had deteriorated but this was largely due to the impact of the pandemic, for example through the closure of premises such as libraries.

In order to align performance management with the new Community Vision, the report stated that 60 KPIs were intended to be monitored during 2020/21. 36 of these KPIs (monitored during 2019/20) were already well aligned with the Vision. In addition, 24 new KPIs were proposed in order to ensure that all the strategic themes in the Vision were covered. The Committee would receive an update once the new KPIs were finalised.

The Committee considered the individual indicators set out in the report and made the following comments:

Appendix A – Key Performance Indicators 2020/21 Summary and Detail (Page 65 of the Agenda) contained a great deal of information and, as a result, used a small font size. Could this Appendix be presented in a different format using a more suitable font size? Laura Callan agreed to look into this issue.

The previous list of indicators include KPIs looking at customer satisfaction and officer feedback relating to WBC processes. Were these indicators being retained? Laura confirmed that consideration was being given to customer satisfaction KPIs and the linkages to staff/resource impacts in relation to on-line services.

In relation to the eight Adult Social care KPIs that were being removed (Page 57 of the Agenda) when would replacement KPIs be in place to ensure that there were no gaps in performance monitoring? Laura confirmed that the service would be contacted to provide an update on the development of new KPIs.

The target for KPI CS2 (child protection visits) had been changed from 90% to 80%. What was the reason for this change? Laura reported that the target had been changed in order to make it SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound). The service still had an internal target of 90% but felt that 80% was a more realistic SMART target for public reporting.

Some KPIs had clearly been impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic, e.g. physical visits to libraries. Was consideration being given to changes arising out of the pandemic such as lower physical visits offset by more virtual visits? Laura confirmed that indicators impacted by the pandemic were being reviewed in order to understand how services were changing and what appropriate measures could be considered.

Were there plans to introduce a KPI relating to air pollution? Laura confirmed that this was being considered, although it may be an annual indicator.

In relation to KPI PG 17 (satisfaction with highways in the Borough), the RAG rating was “Green if more than the previous year”. Could the criteria underpinning the RAG rating be reviewed to enable more assessment of areas of concern? Laura confirmed that this would be discussed with the service.

KPI RA2 (occupancy rate for WBC owned regeneration units) – the RAG rating indicated that this should be reported as Amber not Green.

KPI PG6 (affordable housing completions) – could the indicator show affordable housing as a % of all housing built? Laura stated that this suggestion would be discussed with the service.

Which KPIs were likely to be impacted by the pandemic and the potential second wave? Laura commented that this issue would feed into the discussions about the Council’s recovery plans, to be discussed with the Chief Executive at the meeting on 21 October.

KPIs 22, 24 and 25 (carbon footprint, emissions and off-setting) – could these PIs be clarified? The PIs would be more useful if they indicated the amount of carbon emissions reduced/prevented as a result of the implementation of the Climate Emergency Action Plan. The KPIs needed to be durable to ensure consistent monitoring of progress towards Net Zero by 2030. Laura confirmed that these points would be discussed with the relevant Officers.

RESOLVED That:

1)     Laura Callan be thanked for attending the meeting to present the report and answer Member questions;

2)     progress on the development of new KPIs to reflect the new Community Vision be noted;

3)     the Performance Monitoring Report for Q1 2020/21 be noted;

4)     further information be circulated to Members in response to the specific points raised at the meeting;

5)     specific issues relating to the impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on Council performance be considered at the next meeting of the Committee in discussion with the Chief Executive.