Issue - meetings

Q2 2018-19 Performance Overview Report

Meeting: 27/11/2018 - Cabinet (Item 132)

132 Q2 2018-19 Performance Overview Report pdf icon PDF 132 KB

Report of the Executive Member for People and Information, Councillor Alison Webb.

Additional documents:


The Deputy Leader and Executive Member for Corporate Strategy and Investment explained that the report had been to the Overview and Scrutiny Commission where concerns had been raised with regard to staff turnover.  The HR Manager gave Members of the Commission reassurance that there were no real concerns, but had asked the Commission to provide more detail.


Whilst there had been a spike in the number of reported fly-tipping cases, it was due to a concerted effort in the way information had been reported.


The Breckland Lottery was reported as doing well and Members were asked to champion the project back into their communities as 60p out of every £1 went to the charity.


Councillor Wassell asked why there had been a spike in fly-tipping and if it was as a result of the new charges by Norfolk County Council.  The Task and Finish Group were looking at the detail on fly-tipping and it was hoped that more information would be available in the new year.


It was RESOLVED that the proposed changes to the staff turnover performance targets were agreed.


The contents of the report were noted.

Meeting: 08/11/2018 - Overview and Scrutiny Commission (Item 125)

125 Q2 2018-19 Performance Overview Report pdf icon PDF 132 KB

Report of the Executive Member for People and Information, Councillor Alison Webb.

Additional documents:


The Executive Member for People and Information explained that the Performance Report covered the period from 1 July to 31 September 2018.  The key areas of success were highlighted as:


·        FOI response rate had improved dramatically within the Council;

·        Breckland Lottery scheme had shown further success as £14,799 had been generated for community good causes since the lottery had been launched in March 2019;

·        The housing benefit error rate was at its lowest since the figure had been reported.


An area of concern was the staff turnover rate which continued to be monitored by HR.  The report suggested that the maximum threshold for the staff turnover be amended from 10% to 17.5% for 2018/2019 to bring it in line with modern turnover rates for local authorities.


Members were informed that two additional performance measures would be added to the quarterly report to measure the number of RIPA (Regulatory Investigatory Powers Act) applications made by the council each quarter; and, the number of customers who had been made vexatious as set out by the Council’s vexatious policy.


A Member queried that the target for responding to the FOI requests should be at a target of 100% and not 85%.  The Corporate Improvement Manager said that since he had taken on his new role, a greater emphasis of engagement with the service areas had been undertaken to understand why there had been delays and sought a resolution to this.  The Member was reassured by the response but asked that the target was set at 100% as a mandatory requirement.


Councillor Oliver queried why the vexatious and RIPA targets had been added.  He was informed it had been agreed at a previous Cabinet meeting that a yearly report would be provided.  Providing quarterly data meant that both the Commission and Cabinet would see the measures in real-time and could then act on them if they so wished.


Councillor Kybird asked if there had been further information with regard to the staff turnover figures.  The HR Manager said she had no concerns on why Officers were leaving.  She went onto explain that the current performance measure had not been benchmarked for a number of years, and the national turnover attrition rate was between 15 – 20%.  Therefore setting the target to 17.5% was seen as moderate measure.


Members suggested a number of amendments to improve the report. 


The Corporate Improvement and Performance Manager highlighted that the Empty Properties indicator was not accurate, and requested a report back to the Commission on how the Performance Measure could be presented to Members in a meaningful way.  The Commission were in agreement with this.


The report was noted.