Agenda item

O&S.93/17     

The Panel considered the Quarter 2 performance report for 2017/18.  In conclusion, the report highlighted that the measures for this Quarter had maintained their good level of performance.

In discussion, reference was made to:-

(a)    planning enforcement workload.  In addition to repeating previously raised concerns relating to the capacity and resilience of the planning enforcement service area, a Member also highlighted a specific example that indicated that the published case register did not include all matters and was therefore inaccurate.

In reply, the Head of Paid Service appreciated Member concerns but was satisfied that the resource allocation for the Planning Enforcement service was appropriate for the workload.  With regard to the accuracy of the register, the Member was encouraged to pursue this matter with the Planning Enforcement Specialist outside of this meeting.

Furthermore, other Members shared their positive recent experiences of the service and promoted the value of the drop-in sessions with local Ward Members.

In accordance with the findings of the Development Management Service Peer Review, the Panel requested that, as part of the future quarterly performance measures report, it be in receipt of the latest set of indicators that had been presented to the Development Management Committee.

As part of any future review into performance indicators, a Member also asked that consideration be given to measuring and reporting the average case workload per planning officer;

(b)    recycling sack requests.  A Member noted the number of recycling related calls and website processes during this quarter.  These statistics were felt to support his view that the Council should have put messages out in the public arena to advise that, due to factors outside the control of the Council, the authority had run out of recycling sacks;

(c)    the average number of missed bins.  Whilst acknowledging the unavoidable staff absences over the recent festive period, some Members recognised that communication with Members had been much improved since the establishment of the new management team.  Moreover, the Panel wished to expressed its gratitude to the efforts of the Council’s Operations Team, who worked tirelessly to deliver such a good frontline service;

(d)    Member access to performance measures on their IPads.  By way of an update, the Vice-Chairman informed that IT was still trying to resolve a technical security issue to ensure that Members had immediate access to performance measures on their IPads;

(e)    the average time taken for processing Disabled Facilities Grants (DFGs).  The Panel congratulated lead officers for their performance regarding the average time taken for processing DFGs;

(f)     sickness statistics.  Members considered the sickness statistics indicator to be positive.  In reply, officers informed that, whilst the winter had seen a flu epidemic, the Council had offered a free vaccination to its staff and elected Members.  When considering these performance measures, it was suggested that this initiative had been both successful and well received.

It was then:

RESOLVED

1.      That Members note the performance levels against target communicated in the Balanced Scorecard and the performance figures supplied in the Background and the Exception report; and

2.      That, as part of future quarterly performance reports, the latest set of indicators (as presented to the Development Management Committee) be included.