Agenda item
STRATEGIC PERFORMANCE AND DELIVERY REPORTING - Q1 2021/22
The Strategic performance and delivery report – Q1 2021/22 is going to Cabinet on 22 September 2021 , and provides an update on the delivery and implementation of the council’s Strategic Plan throughout 2021/22.
Minutes:
The Committee received a report that provided an update on the Council’s performance against the performance indicators included in the Councils Strategic Plan in quarter 1 of 2021/22. The main points of the discussion and questions arising may be summarised as follows.
The Committee:
v Welcomed the new, easier-to-read format of the report.
v Heard that the current government-funded early years childcare to disadvantaged families had been specifically targeted at reducing the early years attainment gap and was intended to better prepare disadvantaged children for the start of formal schooling. However, it was recognised that it is also important to ensure children have a healthy and balanced diet in their early years as this gives their bodies a chance to properly grow; children need carbohydrates for their energy and protein for their muscle growth and to strengthen their immune systems. Therefore, LBTH was looking at how to make this offer more appealing to both families and providers.
v Noted that with regard to sickness absence a measurement of absence within the organisation is necessary when deciding on the need for, or setting, an absence target. Although having a target in place will not reduce absence in its own right, it plays is an essential element in any overall absence management programme.
v Noted that the Borough’s current level recycling was due to a combination of factors, particularly the impact of recycling contamination on the performance figure (e.g. when materials are sorted into the wrong recycling bin, or when materials are not properly cleaned). It was felt to be important to look at how the Council and its partner agencies can change people’s attitudes to recycling (e.g. what do residents need to know/receive/be made aware of). In addition, waste collections may be delayed as regular staff are absent due to illness and/or self-isolation. In addition, whilst agency staff are in place to provide the usual service, it was noted that there may be delays to normal collection days and time.
v Agreed that if the Council is to increase the percentage that is being recycled it needs to collaborate with the people and businesses of Tower Hamlets and provide leadership to businesses, housing associations and others that have a responsibility for managing waste.
v Noted that Tower Hamlets has the highest density of housing in London and the population continues to grow. This provides an additional challenge as recycling rates are lower from flats compared to kerbside properties and over 80 per cent of properties in Tower Hamlets are flats.
v Noted that only 32.6 percent of senior staff are BAME, equating to just over sixty-eight full time equivalent staff and whilst a target for this measure has not yet been set the staff profile needs to be a proper reflection of the communities that the Council seeks to serve and this needs to be addressed. However, on the 27th October 2021 the Cabinet will be considering the recommendations of the Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Inequalities Commission Action Plan that address this particular matter.
v Stated that Scrutiny needs to be more involved in a timely fashion target setting as it has an essential role to play in improving services, to help better understand local people and to support the Mayor and the Executive in making robust judgements about its priorities.
v Requested for an update on the questions raised prior to the summer recess regarding the Performance Measures Numbers (34); Level of public realm cleanliness; (35) Level of CO2 emissions generated by the council's activities; (36) Level of household recycling; (40) Residents' satisfaction with the area as a place to live; (63) Residents' perception of being involved in decision-making; and (65) Residents' perception of council transparency.
v Accepted that the Council need staff to continue to function and manage the increasing need for services and information whilst dealing with their own personal situations and emotions, which could result in long-term sickness absence, either now or when the crisis has passed.
v Noted that in regard to the house-building targets for homes built in LBTH, the Council are serious about meeting its housing need and understand that this is the starting point for establishing the requirement through the local plan, but it is critical to be clear that must be the right starting point, backed by evidence.
v Agreed that it would be helpful that such external targets have clear explanations within the performance reports. This would ensure that the Committee would be aware of the full range of targets both internal and external that the Council has to address.
Following a full and wide-ranging discussion, the Chair thanked all those Committee Members in attendance together with (i) John Biggs, Executive Mayor; (ii) Will Tuckley Chief Executive; (iii) Thorsten Dreyer, Head of Intelligence and Performance for their contributions to the discussions on this critical issue.
Accordingly, the Committee resolved:
|
1. Welcome the greater clarity now contained within the report on the Council’s performance against the relevant indicators. 2. To note the Quarter 1 summary status, performance of the strategic measures at the end of Q1, and to note progress and challenges in regard to delivery and performance (e.g. Why not every target is achieved). 3. Those areas of concern (e.g. deficient performance) in developing per-decision scrutiny questions (Item 6.4 refers). 4. To request an update on the questions raised regarding Performance Measures Numbers 34; Level of public realm cleanliness; 35 Level of CO2 emissions generated by the council's activities; 36 Level of household recycling; 40 Residents' satisfaction with the area as a place to live; 63 Residents' perception of being involved in decision-making; and 65 Residents' perception of council transparency. |
Supporting documents: