Agenda item

(Service Director (Strategy, Delivery and Performance)) To consider the attached report on Corporate Programme Governance and Reporting, and the Quarter 1 and Quarter 2 performance of KPIs. (NB: This item was deferred from the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting on 15 October 2020).

This item, which had been deferred by Overview and Scrutiny on 15 October 2020, was current up until 30 September 2020. L Wade, Strategy, Delivery and Performance Director, summarised the key points in the report, which included an internal officer governance structure that had been established to focus on the delivery of the Corporate programmes aligned to the Stronger ambition objectives. This would strengthen governance and internal decision-making, as the programmes would be led by a director enabling corporate performance management to be aligned with individual performance management. All projects would be aligned under one of the three Stronger select agendas.

There were three exceptions under the Corporate plan programmes scope and performance measuring report. These were:

·      Telecare offering project;

·      ICT restructure delayed by Covid-19; and

·      Local Plan due to Inspector’s capacity to digest main modifications’ (MMs) submissions.

Under Town Centre development, Councillor D Wixley queried what was meant by ‘barriers’ in the feasibility study that set out opportunities and remedies for barriers in relation to high streets in Waltham Abbey, Ongar, Loughton, Buckhurst Hill and Epping. N Dawe, Chief Operating Officer, replied that there were no specific barriers, but this was part of the high streets’ reviews and making high streets safe. The draft paper for Waltham Abbey had identified 28 points to help raise the barriers, e.g. street furniture. Councillor D Wixley was specifically interested in Loughton but would like to know the barriers for each high street. The Chief Operating Officer agreed to apprise Councillor D Wixley of the barriers identified thus far for each town centre to help make them safe.

Councillor J H Whitehouse said that the report was interesting and informative but asked why under the select committees’ corporate programmes of work, Stronger Place had more than either Stronger Communities or Stronger Council because it was unbalanced? G Blakemore, Chief Executive, replied that select committee scrutiny was driven by members, not officer driven, and suggested that this was followed up by the scrutiny chairmen and vice-chairmen at their next Joint Meeting in January 2021. Councillor J H Whitehouse reminded the Committee that it was agreed that any Housing policies would go to Overview and Scrutiny Committee before they went to Cabinet. Options would show the level of delay provided. There were summaries in each sector that highlighted any exceptions.

            Resolved:

(1)          That the Committee noted the internal governance that has been established to manage and deliver the programmes of work aligned to the Stronger council ambitions in 2020/21;

(2)          That the Committee noted the programme of work aligned to the Stronger select ambitions;

(3)          That the Committee noted the scope of the corporate programme of work and associated benefits in 20/21 which will be used to baseline Corporate performance management;

(4)       That the Committee agreed on the scope of reporting for Overview and Scrutiny in 2020/21 such that:

(a) Detailed progress on programmes of work and project level would be scrutinised by Stronger Council; and

(b) Overview and Scrutiny Committee would receive summaries and scrutinise any exceptions.

(5)       That the committee reviewed the report in relation to the performance of the programme of work for 2020/21 and noted the following exceptions at red status:

(a) Telecare offering project: Due to delay in cessation of service following withdrawal of ECC tender. Milestones would be re-baselined in quarter 3.

(b) ICT Restructure – due to delay in completion of the restructure.

(c) Local Plan – due to delay in the review of main modifications document as a result of inspectors limited capacity to review.

(6)       That the committee reviewed the performance of quarters 1 and quarter of the KPIs that were previously used in 2019/20 and noted those KPIs that had not been reported; and

(7)       That the committee reviewed the recommended KPIs below and agreed these
16 KPIs for 2020/21: