Issue - meetings

Quarter 1 Improvement Plan Monitoring Report 2016/17

Meeting: 15/09/2016 - Corporate Resources Overview & Scrutiny Committee (Item 38)

38 Quarter 1 Improvement Plan Monitoring Report 2016/17 pdf icon PDF 84 KB

Additional documents:

Decision:

That the report be received.

Minutes:

The Corporate Business & Communications Executive Officer presented the update report to consider progress towards the delivery of the impacts set out in the 2015/16 Improvement Plan, focussing on the areas of under-performance relevant to the Committee during the first quarter of 2016/17.  An update on the amount of efficiency targets achieved was circulated to Members.

 

Concerns were raised by Councillor Robin Guest on the trend status showing a downturn in 50% of key performance indicators.  The officer had no concerns at this stage and gave explanation on the context as only two of the seven indicators had decreased - one on efficiency targets and the other on sickness absence narrowly missing the target.  Councillor Guest also felt that the use of arrows did not show the whole picture and should be reviewed.  This was noted by the officer who also agreed to look at consistency and to include commas in figures as requested by the Chairman.

 

Following comments from the Chairman on the latter indicator, it was explained that the aspirational target of 9.60 was over the longer term and that officers were liaising with the supplier of the reporting software to review headings to help with clarity of the document.  The Chairman also felt that the use of double-ended arrows could appear confusing to which the officer replied that the glossary in the report could explain more clearly about the terms used.

 

Councillor Arnold Woolley suggested that switching to a clock system would help to show the direction of trend more clearly.

 

Councillor Richard Jones said that the ‘red’ status on achieving efficiency targets did not give enough detail and that meeting the target was the only way to show improvement.  It was explained that 86% of efficiencies were expected to be met, which was a good level, and that the ‘red’ status reflected the fact that some efficiencies were not predicted to be achieved.

 

RESOLVED:

 

That the report be received.