Agenda item

This report sets out the performance data for the second quarter of 2012/13.

The Scrutiny Committee received a report of the Partnerships and Performance Section Head setting out the Key Performance Indicators and the second quarter performance measures for 2012/13.  The Partnerships and Performance Section Head highlighted some of the key aspects of the report.  She reminded Members that benchmarking information could be provided if required. 

In response to a question from the previous meeting, the Partnerships and Performance Section Head confirmed that Environmental Services took the service lead for all complaints received by the Council.  It was no longer covered by Corporate Services as this service no longer existed within the Council.  The figures in the report were therefore for the whole of the Council.

ES9 (percentage of the total tonnage of household waste arising which have been recycled)

Following a question from Councillor Bell, the Partnerships and Performance Section Head advised that she understood that due to the poor weather it was difficult to keep the garden waste down.  This was likely to have an impact through the year.

Councillor Khan noted the high level of wastage.  He asked whether the Council had considered a weekly collection. 

The Partnerships and Performance Section Head informed the Scrutiny Committee that the Council needed to collect 40% of recyclables in order to receive recycling credits and it was currently on target.

Councillor Rackett said that it was important that the Council considered the feasibility of a weekly collection and what this would do to the recycling rates and the cost of providing the service.  He was aware that in many terraced areas the recycling boxes were full after one week and residents then put their recycling into the household waste instead. 

CS13 (KPI6) (number of households living in temporary accommodation

Councillor Bell noted the target and actual data for this measure.  He asked whether officers expected this figure to rise due to the impact caused by changes to housing benefits.

The Partnerships and Performance Section Head informed the Scrutiny Committee that officers were working with the private sector to find accommodation.  The Housing Team’s structure had changed during the year.  One team concentrated on the supply of accommodation.  This included properties with Registered Social Landlords and the private sector.

Councillor Bell said that he was aware of the budget of £150,000 to pay for bed and breakfast accommodation.  He asked whether it was likely that more resources could be required.

The Partnerships and Performance Section Head advised that she would contact the service for future projections.

HR1 (KPI8) (sickness absence – working days lost)

Following a question from Councillor Khan regarding sickness absence, the Partnerships and Performance Section Head advised that the statistics in the report did not separate the short term sickness and the long term sickness.  The Council had implemented new management procedures for short term sickness.  For example a letter was sent to the employee by their manager on the second day of absence.  For those on long term sickness there were other procedures in place including occupational health advice.  The overall figure could be broken down further.

The Committee and Scrutiny Officer informed Members that recently a monthly bulletin had been started setting out details of sickness across the Council.  It was available on the Intranet and she would forward the information to the Scrutiny Committee.

Councillor Meerabux asked whether the sickness level was linked to the possibility of outsourcing services and the risk of redundancy.  For example the officers might be feeling under pressure. 

The Partnerships and Performance Section Head responded that any organisation going through a period of change had an impact on its staff.  Stress was included in the detailed statistics.  It was possible to compare data over a period of years.

Cor2 (complaints resolved at stage one)

Councillor Martins noted the low level of complaints resolved compared to the target of 90%.

The Partnerships and Performance Section Head confirmed that this measure was below target.  Response to complaints had to be fitted into the day to day work of services and this was sometimes difficult to achieve.  The analysis of complaints included those that had been upheld and those that had not been upheld. 

CS12 (KPI5) (number of affordable homes delivered)

Councillor Aron referred to actual number of affordable homes delivered in the second quarter compared to the target.  She asked whether the 49 properties were on the Cassio Campus site.  She also enquired if this would have an impact on the waiting list.

The Partnerships and Performance Section Head explained that sometimes targets were based on previous years.  It was possible that the service had been too optimistic when setting the target but this could be difficult with an area like the delivery of housing.  With regard to the impact on those waiting for a property, the Partnerships and Performance Section Head advised that the service had commented that it was fortunate that a number of premises had become available.  There could be an impact at a later date if the supply of new homes coming through were to fall.

The Chair referred to the appendix and the various abbreviations used throughout the document.  She asked that in future reports the abbreviations were explained.

RESOLVED –

1.      that the Scrutiny Committee’s comments on the performance of the council’s key performance indicators for 2012/13 at the end of quarter 2 be noted.

2.      that the Scrutiny Committee’s comments on the additional performance measures at the end of quarter 2 be noted.