|
Title |
Revised Corporate Key Performance Indicators |
|
Purpose of the report |
To make a decision |
|
Report Author |
Sacha Bailey – Projects Officer Sandy Muirhead Group Head Commissioning and Transformation |
|
Ward(s) Affected |
All Wards |
|
Exempt |
No |
|
Exemption Reason |
Not Applicable |
|
Corporate Priority |
Service delivery Resilience |
|
Recommendations
|
Committee is asked to: Approve the proposed revisions to the Corporate Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). |
|
Reason for Recommendation |
These revisions are part of the Council’s performance monitoring framework, which will include quarterly reporting of KPI outcomes to Corporate Policy and Resources Committee (CPRC), as well as publishing the Corporate KPI data on the Council’s website. The revisions aim to improve the Council’s performance management framework, ensuring that KPI’s are more aligned with the corporate plan and priorities. By reporting KPI outcomes to the CPRC on a quarterly basis and publishing this data on the Council’s website, the Council promotes transparency and accountability to the public, and aides decision making. Additionally, these revisions aim to facilitate benchmarking against statistically near neighbours.
|
1. Summary of the report
|
What is the situation |
Why we want to do something |
|
Following a recent internal and external review of the Council’s current KPIs and Performance Indicators (PIs), it was identified that there was a lack of clarity in the definition of the KPIs. In some cases, service plan objectives were included as a KPI, which meant that the targets set were not always measurable or relevant. Surrey District and Borough Councils carry out a KPI benchmarking exercise quarterly. Corporate KPIs are currently reported to CPRC annually. |
Following on from the Grant Thornton audit report, one of the key recommendations in the action plan was to strengthen our performance management framework. The revision of our Corporate KPIs enables us to further embed our performance management framework across the Council including closer linkage to the Council’s strategic priorities and service plans. Producing a set of Corporate KPIs will provide stakeholders and residents with a broad picture of how Spelthorne Borough Council is performing. Regular reporting of KPI outcomes to the Committee and publishing them on our website promotes transparency and accountability. By updating the Council’s KPIs, we ensure that the most relevant and accurate data is used to inform strategic decisions. Revising the KPIs allows the Council’s performance metrics to be aligned with the Corporate Plan and priorities. By monitoring and analysing the KPI data more frequently, areas for improvement can be identified and changes implemented to enhance the Council’s performance. |
|
This is what we want to do about it |
These are the next steps |
|
Successfully introduce 32 revised Corporate KPIs from 1st April 2025. These KPIs combine Spelthorne Borough Council Corporate Priorities and Surrey District and Borough Councils (Surrey chief executives) benchmarking Performance Indicators. Implement quarterly reporting to CPRC. Publish KPI data to the Council’s website. Continuously monitor the effectiveness of the revised KPIs and review them annually to ensure they remain relevant and effective in measuring the Council’s performance. Develop a new ICT form that allows Service Leads to enter Service Plan and KPI information, as well as being able to extract data for reporting purposes. |
Gain approval from CPRC and proceed with the implementation of the revised Corporate KPIs. Establish the process and schedule for quarterly reporting of KPIs to MAT and CPRC, ensuring the necessary systems and tools are in place to facilitate accurate and timely reporting. Develop the format of the KPI report, including working with the Comms team to update the relevant website page with KPI data. Provide training and support to staff who will be involved in completing service plans and KPI reporting on the new ICT form. |
1.1 This report seeks to obtain approval from the Corporate Policy and Resources Committee to adopt the proposed revisions to the Corporate Key Performance Indicators (Appendix A). If approved, the Corporate KPIs and performance monitoring framework will be implemented in accordance with the timescale specified in section 11 of this report.
2. Key issues
2.1 An extensive review was undertaken, to establish each service area’s KPI definitions, data sources and how the KPIs data was being used. Approximately 22 meetings were held with Service Lead Officers across the Council’s services to gain an overall picture of each service areas KPI’s. In preparation for the meetings, attendees were supplied with a spreadsheet containing their existing KPIs, additional columns for other data specific information and a list of suggested KPI’s. The suggested KPIs were provided to encourage conversation between Service Leads around what would be a meaningful performance metric for their service area.
2.2 Following the meetings, Service Leads were asked to reflect on their current KPIs and update as appropriate. Services had the option to either add, remove, or keep their existing KPIs. It was also suggested to Service Leads that the average number should be between 5 and 8, however there is flexibility to adjust this number if necessary.
2.3 This approach resulted in an extensive list of KPIs being developed, which were a combination of service specific performance monitoring and corporate KPIs.
2.4 A further review of KPI practices in other councils was undertaken. The Projects Team carried out a benchmarking exercise against the Council’s nearest geographical neighbours and its statistically nearest neighbours (Appendix C). The results showed that most councils had a list of between 30-40 Corporate KPIs, presented their data with clear explanations and published KPI data on their Council websites. It was also noted that most Councils have the resource of a dedicated performance officer, but the proposed revised monitoring process will be incorporated into an existing project officer role in Spelthorne.
2.5 After careful evaluation of what other Councils are doing, and following the review of all provided KPI’s, a refined set of 32 Corporate KPIs has now been developed. These KPIs link to the Corporate Plan and include Performance Indicators that are reported to Surrey chief executives.
2.6 The proposed Corporate KPIs list focuses on strategic areas, rather than finance and assets, as these areas are already thoroughly monitored and reported through other channels. The current monitoring methods ensure detailed and accurate reporting, allowing for scrutiny by committees such as the Audit Committee, Commercial Assets Sub-Committee, and the Business, Infrastructure and Growth Committee. This approach enhances oversight and ensures that finance and assets receive the attention they require.
2.7 Work is currently well underway with ICT to develop a new platform that will enable colleagues to create service plans, enter KPI data, and produce performance monitoring reports from April 2025.
3. Options analysis and proposal
3.1 Option 1 – Approve the proposed revisions to the Corporate Key Performance Indicators. These revisions are part of the Council’s performance management framework and will include quarterly reporting of KPI outcomes to the CPRC, as well as publishing the Corporate KPI data on the Council’s website. Option 1 is recommended.
3.2 Option 2 – Committee could propose further amendments to the proposed Corporate KPIs.
3.3 Option 3 – “Do nothing” – maintain the current Corporate Key Performance indicators without implementing any of the proposed revisions, quarterly reporting to CPRC, or publishing KPI data on the Council’s website. By choosing the do-nothing approach, the Council risks falling behind in performance monitoring and failing to meet the expectations of stakeholders, recommendations in the Grant Thornton audit report and residents. Option 3 is not recommended.
4. Financial management comments
4.1 There are no direct financial implications resulting from matters considered in this report as the revised procedures will be undertaken by adjusting a project officer role.
5. Risk management comments
5.1 There are potential risks to reputation if the Council cannot clearly demonstrate its performance to stakeholders.
5.2 Ineffective performance management can be a potential risk to service delivery. Without clear performance metrics and regular evaluations, service quality can decline, leading to customer dissatisfaction.
5.3 The revised monitoring system will be automated with reminders to minimise the need to chase services and inputs of information into the system. This will ensure the monitoring system runs effectively and produces quarterly/annual data to meet targets.
6. Procurement comments
6.1 There are no procurement considerations resulting from matters considered in this report.
7. Legal comments
7.1 There are no legal implications arising directly from this report.
8. Other considerations
8.1 Benchmarking against other Local Authorities is an important part of performance monitoring, as highlighted in the Grant Thornton audit report. The Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG) has provided councils with the Local Authority Data Explorer tool. This tool allows the Council to obtain benchmarking data against statistically near neighbours (Appendix C). The available data reports on residual household waste, recycling contamination, household recycling rates, major and non-major planning applications, council tax collection and council tax revenue. As this data source is only updated annually and managed by an external government body, we will conduct an end-of-year review when the data is available. This information will be incorporated into the Council’s performance management framework and presented to the CPRC. Additionally, access will be given to an online benchmarking tool used by Grant Thornton (CFO Insights) for finance and wider KPIs which will further enhance our benchmarking capacity.
8.2 The Grant Thornton Annual Audit Report included comments on KPIs and performance management. This revised process and approach, including regular benchmarking, will help meet audit report recommendations and key actions, further embedding our performance management framework across the Council.
8.3 Appendix B shows an example of performance management and monitoring practices from Guildford Borough Council. It is proposed to develop a similar reporting process for the Council’s website.
8.4 It should be noted that as local government reorganisation progresses there may be a need to adjust and align key performance indicators to match the requirements of any newly elected shadow unitary authority.
9. Equality and Diversity
9.1 Accurate and relevant metrics are essential for making informed decisions that promote diversity and inclusion. By regularly reviewing KPIs, the organisation can identify potential equity gaps and make necessary adjustments to address them.
10. Sustainability/Climate Change Implications
10.1 Including KPIs related to sustainability and climate change, allows the Council to track its progress in reducing carbon emissions, energy consumption, and waste. This helps ensure that the Council’s efforts to its net zero carbon emissions target are both effective and measurable.
10.2 Publishing KPI data and reporting outcomes regularly can increase accountability. It ensures that the Council’s climate-related initiatives are transparent with a focus on sustainability practices within the organisation.
11. Timetable for implementation
11.1 February 2025 – Testing of the new Service Plan and KPI reporting platform will be carried out.
11.2 March 2025 – adoption of the revised Corporate Key Performance Indicators by Corporate Policy and Resources Committee.
11.3 March 2025 – Training delivered to Service Leads on how to use the new reporting platform.
11.4 01 April 2025 – New reporting tool implemented
11.5 01 April 2025 – New Corporate KPIs are implemented.
12. Contact
12.1 Sandy Muirhead, Group Head – Commissioning and Transformation
12.2 Sacha Bailey, Projects Officer
12.3 Leigh Street, Projects Officer
Background papers: There are none.
Appendices:
Appendix A – List of revised Corporate KPIs
Appendix B – Example of Guildford Performance Monitoring
Appendix C – List of Councils for benchmarking