The document summarizes an agenda for a meeting of the Environmental Performance Improvement Partnership (EPIP). The meeting aims to discuss achievements of the past year, upcoming changes to performance indicators and area assessments, and how to better use data to demonstrate value for money. It outlines new frameworks like the Comprehensive Area Assessment that will require more evidence of outcomes and impact. The document suggests using tools like Local Futures and Experian to improve access to relevant local data and develop additional indicators of effectiveness.

1. The Future of Environmental
Services, the Future of EPIP
Friday 28th September 2007

2. Welcome & Introductions
Keith Lowe

3. Agenda
11.00 -11.05 Welcome and introductions Keith Lowe
11.05 -11.20 Achievements of the past year and group
discussion Keith Lowe
11.20 -11.50 The CAA and how the environment theme will
look Susan Bennett
11.50 - 12.20 Making better use of data to deliver Value for
Money (VfM) Susan Bennett
12.30 -12.30 Making better use of data to meet customer
needs Dominic Campbell
12.30 -13.15 Lunch

4. Agenda
13.15 -13.45 What it all means for performance improvement
in environmental services
Mick Lowe, LCS Limited
13.45 -14.30 Feedback from the EPIP review and group
discussion
Dominic Campbell, LCS Limited
14.30-15.00 Future direction and possible new initiatives
Mick Lowe/All
15.00 End

5. What we aim to achieve
• Sharing the inspection and improvement agenda ahead of us and
how ‘comparing’ can assist
• What the Comprehensive Area Assessment looks like and its likely
impact upon the ‘environment’ portfolio
• How you might make better use of available information about your
locality to ‘place shape’
• To explore an approach to ‘value for money’
• To hear what you said about the Partnership
• An opportunity to reflect on achievements
• To see if there is a future for EPIP and if so where should it focus
attention

6. How do we know we are providing VFM?
Achievements of the past year and group discussion
• Review of Street Lighting
• Review of Highways & Footways Maintenance
• Review of Parking
• Discussion on outputs
• 2005 2006 Performance Indicators
• Re-vamp of website

7. Comprehensive Area Assessment
(CAA)
……. and Environment Services
Susan Bennett

8. Background
Local Strategic Partnership
Sustainable Communities Strategy
(SCS)
Three year LAA based on objectives in SCS
Targets for improvement

9. Four themes
• Children & Young People
• Safer & Stronger Communities
• Healthier Communities and Older People
• Economic Development and the Environment
Funding is no longer restricted to themes
- can be used across themes…..
New flexibility!

10. New LAA’s …
Will include up to 35 improvement targets drawn
from the national set of 200 PIs
Plus 17 Education and Early Years targets
And will be negotiated by LA’s & Partners
They will replace BVPIs
But…
Some ARE BVPIs……

11. What are they?
Provisional list in May 07 for environment included
existing:
BV99a –Traffic accidents
BVPI 102 – Bus patronage
BVPI 223 –Condition of principal roads
BVPI 224a – Condition of Classified Roads
BVPI 100 – Overruns of works in the highway
BVPI 217 - % of pollution
BV 199 – Street cleanliness
BV 82d – Household waste per head
BV82a&b – Household waste recycled
Consultation of final list and definitions –
Nov 07

12. What are they?
And new ones:
Congestion
Prevention against animal disease
Progress towards a climate resilient local area
Flood management
Air quality
Improved bio-diversity
Efficiency of use of water resource
CO2 reduction – carbon footprint of LA and reduction in community CO2
Customer satisfaction with regulatory services
Number of workplace health and safety incidents

13. New
200 PIs
Will be announced mid-late October 2007…..
With the Comprehensive Spending Review
Purpose?
“To deliver national priorities in a way which
ensures they meet the particular needs and
concerns of local people”

14. Discretion
For LA’s and partners to:
Set additional targets for LAA
No reporting requirements
– other than local requirements
Good news? Or not?

15. Challenge
How to evidence improvement
and value for money with so few
indicators?

16. Regulation
By CAA and MAA –
Multi Area Agreements
7 work streams ongoing in Audit Commission
Consultation on new CAA framework -Nov 07
Consultation on definitions of 200 PIs - Nov 07
Final guidance on technical definitions - Jan 08

17. We know…
• From the consultation
document …
CAA will replace: And target inspection on
an LSP basis on areas
CPA, JARs most at risk
Area Performance
Assessments for Social Care
(APA’s)

18. Changes….
Changes….
• CAA begins in: • April 2009 From
council
assessment
to area
• Transitional year and final • 2008/09 assessment
year of CPA is:
Minimal changes planned
between 2007 and 2009

19. CAA will be:
• Relevant to the quality of life
of local people
• Relate to the area where
people live and be about what
matters for people to have a
decent quality of life
• Be forward looking and based
on risk assessments
• Be delivered jointly by all
regulators

20. Use of resources
Presentation
New CPA : the harder test
Use of
Corporate Assessment
Resources
• Ambition
Financial
CPA Category • Prioritisation
reporting,
• Capacity
Financial
• Performance Management
management and
• Achievement
standing, internal
control and VfM
Children Social
& Young Care Housing Environment Culture Benefits
People (adults)
Colour Coding Key
Level 1 Level 2

22. This means…
LA’s and their partners will have to
supply the evidence
Which will lead to risk assessment
And maybe…
Inspection
We need to plan for this now!

23. Risk based on… :
Resident & customer intelligence
LSP evaluation of the local area
Individual self assessments Local scrutiny and other evidence
Inspections Performance information
Audit/Use of Resources
Direction of travel
Including VFM

24. Challenges….
• How do we make sure the • Across the LSP partners?
information to do this is
available and usable?
• How do we ensure VFM is • Role of EPIP?
demonstrated given fewer
nationally comparable
PIs?

25. Do we…..
Keep
statutory
Concentrate on data where
developing PIs relevant?
with LSP’s?
But if every SCS has
different targets, how Role of EPIP?
are we to compare?

26. Your views
Role of EPIP?

27. Making better use of data to
deliver VfM
Susan Bennett

28. VFM is…
• An important part of CPA
• Integral to making the best use of the Efficiency
agenda
• A key driver of service quality and choice
• Brings together finance, service delivery and
customer interface
• And will need to be demonstrated on a whole LSP
basis under CAA

29. VFM
What it
What you
costs
get for it
Economy VFM
Efficiency
is a
comparative
relationship
Effectiveness Quality

30. How do we knowjudge providing VFM?
We we are VFM…
• By knowing:
• What services cost • Economy
• What we get for the money • Efficiency
• And
• Finding out what our • Effectiveness (including
customers Equity)
• think of the quality

31. And comparing this with others
Nationally – All England - BVPIs, CIPFA
Regionally – Nearest Neighbours
Across Unitaries/ Locally – EPIP

32. So what have we got?
Data on the three E’s for many aspects
of Environment.
Waste example……

33. Economy
National: Efficiency
BV 86 – Cost of waste National:
collection 05-06 BV 84 – Kgs. of household
EPIP:None collection
CIPFA (Waste Collection VFM BV88 – No of collections
Statistics): 04-05 missed
Total net expenditure (Sheet Waste BV91 - Percentage of
1a, Cell 24) households resident in the
Collection authority’s area served by a
APSE - PI01a (Cost of refuse
collection service per kerbside collection of
household) recyclables
APSE - PI01b (Cost of refuse Effectiveness EPIP: None
collection per head of National: Local:% collection reliability
population) BV90(a) - Satisfaction with (Winchester)
waste collection
EPIP: None
APSE - PI17 Customer
satisfaction surveys

34. Also for…
• Waste Disposal
• Street Cleaning
• Street Lighting We could
• Public Conveniences populate VFM
triangles data
• Abandoned Vehicles on these topics
as part of our
• Road Safety routine
• Footway Maintenance reporting
• Highway Maintenance
• Grounds Maintenance

35. EPIP example…
Economy Efficiency
P45(a) – STREET BV 199(a) to (c) –The
CLEANING - Net percentage of relevant land
spending per head of and highways from which
population unacceptable levels of litter
EPIP Bottom quartile (a), graffiti (b), fly-posting (
VFM? c) are visible –
P45(b) – STREET
CLEANING - Net Street EPIP – Top quartile
spending per Kilometre
of highway
Cleaning Nationally, Unitaries – Top
quartile
EPIP 3rd from Bottom
Effectiveness – EPIP 2nd from Bottom. Unitaries, Nationally - Middle
BV89 - satisfaction with cleanliness.

36. Next step
Ask questions about this data
What does it mean, in your context?
Is there a reasonable explanation for the VFM
position?
If not, what are you going to do about it?

37. EPIP only
Economy Efficiency
P45(a) – STREET BV 199(a) to (c) –The
CLEANING - Net percentage of relevant land
spending per head of and highways from which
population unacceptable levels of litter
EPIP (a), graffiti (b), fly-posting (
EPIP Bottom quartile
c) are visible –
P45(b) – STREET VFM?
CLEANING - Net EPIP – Top quartile
spending per Kilometre Street
of highway Cleaning
EPIP 3rd from Bottom
Effectiveness – EPIP 2nd from Bottom
BV89 - satisfaction with cleanliness.

38. Nationally
Efficiency
BV 199(a) to (c) –The
percentage of relevant land
Economy and highways from which
VFM? unacceptable levels of litter
No nationally (a), graffiti (b), fly-posting (
comparable costs Nationally c) are visible –
Unitaries, Nationally – Top
Street quartile
Cleaning ?
Effectiveness – Nationally, Unitaries - Middle
BV89 - satisfaction with cleanliness.

39. Waste Collection
Efficiency
BV 84(a) - EPIP, Unitaries –
Top quartile
Economy
BV 86 – Cost of waste Nationally - Middle
collection BV 84(b) - EPIP, Unitaries,
Nationally – Top quartile
EPIP Middle quartile
BV91(a) –EPIP Bottom, Middle
Unitaries, Nationally - VFM? - Unitaries, Nationally
Bottom
Waste BV91(b) – EPIP 3rd Bottom
Middle – Unitaries, Nationally
Effectiveness – EPIP, Unitaries, Nationally - Middle
BV90(a) - Satisfaction with waste collection.

40. EPIP only
Efficiency
BV 84(a) - EPIP, Unitaries –
Top quartile
Economy
BV 86 – Cost of waste BV 84(b) - EPIP, Top quartile
collection BV91(a) –EPIP Bottom,
EPIP Middle quartile VFM? BV91(b) – EPIP 3rd Bottom
EPIP
Waste
Effectiveness – EPIP Middle
BV90(a) - Satisfaction with waste collection.

41. Nationally
Efficiency
BV 84(a) Unitaries – Top
quartile
Economy
BV 86 – Cost of waste Nationally - Middle
collection BV 84(b) Unitaries, Nationally
– Top quartile
Unitaries, Nationally -
Bottom BV91(a) Middle - Unitaries,
VFM? Nationally
Waste BV91(b) Middle – Unitaries,
Nationally
Effectiveness – Unitaries, Nationally - Middle
BV90(a) - Satisfaction with waste collection.

42. Audit Commission VFM
Data sets narrower
Value For Money tools for councils
http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/

43. Results in…
High cost
Is this VFM? Is this a
priority?
Street
Cleaning
Low performance Waste High performance
An efficient
Is this an agreed service?
non priority?
Low cost

44. Use of VFM
Evidence for your Annual VFM Assessment, Inspections, Peer
Reviews and CAA
Information by which to baseline services and identify areas for
major reviews
A basis for integrated financial and service planning
To draw up SLA’s, their targets and monitor effectiveness of service
Routine performance management with partners

45. Future
• We need to develop VFM data in response to the
CAA framework
• We have much finance and output data
• But few measures of effectiveness
• Agreeing ‘soft’ indicators will be crucial to
demonstrating impact and outcomes for the
community

46. Making better use of data to meet
customer needs
Dominic Campbell

47. Outline
• The case for improving the data
• Two possible products/opportunities
– Local Futures
– Experian
• A proposal

48. The case for improving the data [1]
• Current national and local policy direction:
– Choice and personalisation
– User focus
– Meeting diverse needs
– Value for money, targeted services
– Customer service
– Intelligence-led service provision
• Policy led by reviews all highlighting the importance of data:
– Lyons (place shaping)
– Singh (integration and cohesion)
– Local area agreements (LAAs)
– Comprehensive Area Assessments (CAA) and risk-led intervention
– Review of sub-national economic development

49. The case for improving the data [2]
• Data recognised in EPIP review as the basis of everything
the partnership does but is currently not readily
accessible/useable for members (through the website)
• Effective and meaningful assessment of Value for Money
relies on high quality, relevant data
• Public services (EPIP included) need to improve their
measurement of impact, most notoriously bad at doing so
• BUT then key is translating analysis into action on the
ground. Data is useless on its own

50. Local Futures’ Local Knowledge
• Local Knowledge is a powerful web-based service for local
performance management and area-based strategy-making
• Drawing on over 1000 nationally available indicators, LK is web-
based service is available on annual subscription, for use across an
organisation. It provides an easy-to-use and shared evidence base,
for a range of research and policy applications.

51. Current Local Futures subscribers
• Bracknell Forest
• Reading
• Slough
• Warrington
• West Berkshire
• Wokingham
Possibilities to work with other users (as well as EPIP non-users):
• Bath and NE Somerset
• Cherwell
• North Somerset
• Oxford City
• Oxfordshire County
• Windsor

52. SMART Observatory
Benefits:
- A platform for shared intelligence: allows partners to pool and share
information and knowledge
- A comprehensive evidence base: provides a resource for evidence-
led decision making and informed policy and strategy development
- A powerful performance management tool: provides a state-of-the-
art tool for managing and monitoring performance both within
individual agencies and across partnerships, using locally defined
performance indicators
- Savings on research time and costs: provides access to a powerful
research capability, quickly and easily accessed from any PC allowing
immediate use in research and strategy development

53. SMART Observatories
Thames Gateway Knowledge Platform
Developed for the Thames Gateway London Partnership and sponsored by the
Department for Communities and Local Government, the Thames Gateway
Knowledge Platform is an on-line information service for the Thames Gateway and
its communities.
http://tglp.localknowledge.co.uk
DAWN
Dawn (Data About West Norfolk) developed by Kings Lynn and West Norfolk
Borough Council to support a range of partner-related activities. It supports the
work of the Local Strategic Partnership and is designed both to inform and monitor
local policies and to aid in the targeting of services.
http://dawn.localknowledge.co.uk

55. Experian Data Solutions
What is it?
• Experian’s data products enable detailed analysis of residents based
on census and consumer data
• Mosaic Public Sector covers the whole of the United Kingdom,
classifying every individual, household and postcode into one of 61
types and 11 groups
• Profiled by lifestyle not just demographic
• Different products: most prevalent – Mosaic Public Sector (on
resident population), but also daytime mosaic, benchmarking – LCS
negotiating to trial
• Can hang off other data systems/GIS such as Local Knowledge

56. Uses
• Targeting deprivation and tackling
inequality
• Benchmarking and performance
measurement - only by understanding
the socio-demographic composition of
a local area can performance be
measured fairly and realistic targets set
• Resource planning – target services by
need/predicted demand
• Communications strategies – target by
message and appropriate means e.g.
recycling campaign in LB Barnet

57. A proposal
• LCS to fully work up proposal for SMART Observatory
• As part of this, LCS to work with EPIP members to review current
set of PIs to ensure the local information (LPIs etc) potentially fed
into an observatory met needs around inputs, outputs and
outcomes/impact
• Will require corporate input and support – we need your help!
• No commitment until fully costed

58. EPIP Review:
Feedback and Next Steps
Dominic Campbell
Principal Consultant

59. Outline
• EPIP: the review
• EPIP: some history
• EPIP: terms of reference
• EPIP: consultation and the findings
– strengths
– issues
• EPIP: options appraisal
• EPIP: action planning
• EPIP: discussion

60. EPIP: the review
• Review of partnership to:
– Ensure it provides value for money
– Ensure it continues to perform a useful role
– Assess what has added most value in the past
– Survey the views of existing and past members of the partnership
– Assess whether there is an appetite for new members
• Review involved:
– Surveying members
– Looking at alternative practice in other improvement partnerships
– Assessing national policy developments to ensure relevance into the
future (e.g. CAA)

61. EPIP: some history
• LCS-led EPIP running now for 9 years
• Started as highways engineering benchmarking group
• Membership has fluctuated, starting with 5, peaking at 11 and now
9 member authorities
With aim to develop…
“a partnership of up to 15 Local Authorities with similar
characteristics, such as the make up of the local population,
deprivation indices, type of authority etc… which will offer the
opportunity to learn, share and develop systems, practices and
processes to assist and enable service managers to offer customer
focused continuous improvement”

62. EPIP: terms of reference
• 4 meet ups per year
• 2-3 service reviews per year (over 15 now completed)
• Areas covered by EPIP include:
– Transport
– Highways
– Waste
– Streetscene
– Planning
– Environmental Health
– Trading Standards
• Benchmarking key in assessing and addressing issues relating to
value for money

63. EPIP: consultation and findings
• Survey sent to 13 officers in 9 local authorities, 8 responses
received
Headline findings
• Overall EPIP viewed as beneficial to organisations (all but one rating
it as 2 or 3 out of 6 with 1 as ‘very useful’)
• Strong appetite for more members of a similar type (i.e. unitaries)
with no upper limit on numbers
• Mixed review of widening remit to all environment block
• Idea of involving non-local authority organisations not popular
• EPIP could provide better value for money
• Fee increase viewed as acceptable only if members get more for
more (e.g. better website)

64. EPIP: strengths
• Service review are popular in the main and have led to examples of
positive outcomes, be it additional funding, driving improvement
work in street lighting and feeding business planning activity
• Meetings extremely popular as chance to share and learn (mostly
scoring 2 out of 6)
• Value for money – survey view mixed, but comparisons to other
environment/non-environment partnerships (although few directly
comparable, as either learning sets e.g. Shared Intelligence or mere
data collection on the whole e.g. APSE) price of EPIP is favourable
given the partnership receives a combination of all these services to
a degree

65. EPIP: issues [1]
• Reviews are too long and too in-depth leading to a lack of follow up
action in local authorities as a result. Most members would prefer
short snappy documents with pointers to best practice to follow up
on themselves (LCS as facilitator rather than trying to be expert in
the field)
• Website – rarely used (annually for BVPI data alone) and not hugely
useful, however perception of value for money would improve
greatly if the website were improved through:
– User friendly data repository of up to date information
– Single source of all key national policy documentation
– Member discussion forum
– Regular update e-mail from LCS to outline what is new/has changed

66. EPIP: issues [2]
• Measurement and tracking of benefits and outcomes on the ground
attributable to EPIP is not captured in a systematic and consistent
way leaving it vulnerable
• Communications between LCS and members – lukewarm response
to effectiveness of communications outside of meetings with little
done to enable a sense of togetherness between EPIP members
• Awareness raising within local authorities – managers in
environment block very aware, related themes (e.g. housing) and
corporate centre far less so, local partner organisations not at all
• Not all members cooperate with EPIP (reviews/data collection),
often keen to support EPIP reviews directly relevant to them but
not supporting others

67. EPIP: options appraisal
1. Do nothing – remain as is
2. Look to expand EPIP model/way of working ‘as is’ to
include additional local authorities
3. Expand EPIP scope to cover entire Environment theme
with existing EPIP customer base
4. Expand scope within Environment theme and seek to
expand number of authorities to those currently in EPIP
5. Wrap Up EPIP

68. EPIP: recommended approach
3. Expand scope to cover entire Environment theme with existing
EPIP members
– Broaden partnership to encompass all environment themed
services
– Consolidate current membership
– Rework meetings to cover cross-cutting themes at plenary
(annual/six monthly) supported by service-based sub-group
meetings as action learning (six monthly/quarterly)
– Resolve key underlying issues relating to exiting set up in
advance of EPIP marketing campaign to additional unitary
authorities (including website/technology support to
partnership – see last presentation)

69. EPIP: action planning
Immediate
• Improve the website as key document repository and as a
user/member community discussion forum
• Format and nature of service reviews to be revised (inc
move to VfM approach), after current car parking review
• Review performance indicators collected to ensure right
mix of inputs, outputs and outcomes (including customer
satisfaction and impact measures)
• Improve LCS communications – quality and frequency
(newsletter/monthly update email)

70. EPIP: action planning
Longer term
• Improve the website as a data repository/analytical tool
(see next session)
• Marketing campaign to other unitary authorities (2008)
• Members to work with LCS to raise profile and cross-
working re EPIP at local level
• Move to one off annual payment in April to simplify
billing

71. EPIP: discussion
• Do you agree with this picture of EPIP?
• Is there anything that has been missed?
• What are your views on the option appraisal and
recommended approach for EPIP as outlined above?
• Do you agree with the headline actions to improve the
partnership?

72. The Bigger Agenda to Dwell on!
• Comprehensive Spending Review
• Supplementary Business Rates
• More Affordable Housing
– 240,000 new homes per annum in England
– Brownfield sites, eco-towns and villages
– Local Authority Building houses
– New Housing Agency focusing on surplus public land
– Planning Policy Statement Four – to speed up process
– Planning Gain Bill to change the current arrangements
– Threat to the current ‘Merton’ concept

73. The Bigger Agenda to Dwell on!
• Multi Area and Local Area Agreements
• Participatory Budgeting
• Local Transport Bill
– Regulate Buses (but what about the commissioners!)
– Regeneration Powers
– Liveability Policies
• Concessionary Fares and the cost implications
• Local Government Reorganisation
• Choice and Personalisation