Best Value Audit Report 2001 2002

Kirklees Council

Sujets

• management
• managers

Informations

• Publié par: Puher
• Nombre de lectures: 16
• Langue: English

Extrait

audit 2000/2001
Best Value Audit Report –
BVPP 2001/2002
Kirklees Metropolitan
Council
INSIDE THIS REPORT
PAGE 2
• Purpose of report
• Overall conclusions and main findings
PAGE 3
• Respective responsibilities of the Authority
and the auditors
• The Best Value Performance Plan 2001/2002
PAGE 4
• Integrating Best Value into the Council’s
business
PAGE 6
• Performance management
• Improving services
PAGE 7
• Improving services
• Responding to challenge
APPENDIX 1
• Statutory audit certificate and opinion

Referen ce: kirkleesBVreport2001.doc
Date: June 2001Kirklees Metropolitan Council audit 2000/2001
It is our view that neither the new performance
KEY MESSAGES management framework, nor the revised BV
approach are likely to secure improvement in
delivery without improved quality assurance Purpose of report
processes.
This is the report that the auditor is required to
Though the quality assurance processes for
provide on the Best Value Performance Plan
performance measurement have developed
(BVPP) under Section 7 of the Local Government
slightly, this has not led to a significant
Act 1999.
improvement in quality. This is evidenced by
Our statutory certificate and opinion are attached errors and inaccuracies in some of the
at Appendix 1. performance information published in the Plan.
The purpose of the report is to inform Members This Statutory audit report which was issued on
and chief officers of the key issues which arose 21 June 2001:
from the audit of Kirklees’ second BVPP and the
• includes a qualified opinion, on the basis that
actions which are required.
the Authority did not distribute a summary
This year’s audit of the BVPP has, in line with the BVPP to all households in a timely manner.
requirements of the Code of Audit Practice, been This was because the Chief Executive and
integrated with the rest of the audit. Returning Officer delayed its distribution as
he judged that the document could be seen Our work included a detailed follow-up of
as a political document in the ‘run up’ to the progress against recommendations made in the
General Election first BVPP audit and an assessment of overall
progress in relation to BV. • contains recommendations which require a
formal Council response
Overall conclusions and main
• does not recommend that the Audit
findings Commission should carry out a Best Value
inspection or that the Secretary of State give Kirklees has produced a well presented and
a direction. useful BVPP. However, the Council’s own view,
with which we concur, is that its established BV The Council must consider this report and
processes will not realise the full benefits of BV. formally respond to the recommendations
Services have improved slightly overall, but this contained within it within 30 working days.
is perhaps more as a result of historical
strengths, than as a result of BV itself.
In response:
• the Authority is currently in the process of
revising its overall approach to BV including
the five-year review programme, its
corporate BV support arrangement and its
approach to the 4Cs
• a new performance management framework
has been developed and is currently being
launched.
This agenda needs to be moved forward with
vigour and with a particular focus on achieving
positive outcomes.
Best Value Audit Report – BVPP 2001/2002 kirkleesBVreport2001.doc Page 2 Kirklees Metropolitan Council audit 2000/2001
Quality assurance of performance information 1
included in the Plan was poor, and as a result
just under 10% of the required BV indicators Respective
were inaccurate. responsibilities of the
The Plan meets all other statutory requirements
Authority and the and should provide users with a useful
perspective of the Council’s performance. auditors
Distribution Under the Local Government Act 1999, specified
local government bodies are required to comply
with the general duty of BV, which is defined as DETR regulations require councils to make
making arrangements to secure continuous available by 31 March summarised information to
improvement in the way in which their functions local households and other places of residence,
are exercised, having regard to a combination of and to service users and local business and
economy, efficiency and effectiveness. The voluntary interests in such a way as to ensure
audited body is required to publish annually a fair access for the whole local community. The
BVPP, which summarises the body’s assessments normal interpretation of this is that the summary
of its performance and position in relation to BV. BVPP should be distributed to all households
The audited body is responsible for preparing the within four weeks of 31 March.
BVPP and for the information and assessments
Anticipating an April or May election, the Chief
that are set out within it, and the assumptions
Executive and Returning Officer judged that the
and estimates on which they are based. It is also
BVPP summary could be seen as a political
responsible for putting in place appropriate
document and therefore delayed distribution until
performance management and internal control
mid July 2001. This is too late for the Authority
systems, from which the information and
to comply with BV regulations. As a result we
assessments in the BVPP are derived.
have qualified our opinion on the BVPP.
Auditors should consider and report on whether
the audited body has complied with statutory Content
requirements in respect of the preparation and
The content of the BVPP was compliant in all publication of its BVPP.
respects with legislation and followed guidance
Auditors are not required to form a view on the
reasonably well.
completeness or accuracy of the information or
However, the accuracy of Best Value Performance the realism and achievability of the assessments
Indicators (BVPIs) was generally poor: published by the audited body in its BVPP.
• 8.4% of the BVPIs were materially inaccurate
2
• around 4% of the required BVPIs were
omitted The Best Value
• nearly 10% of the quoted 2001/2002 targets Performance Plan had been changed from last year’s plan
without explanation. 2001/2002
This is a matter of concern since inaccuracies and
The Authority did not distribute a summary of the omissions were raised as part of last year’s audit.
BVPP to all households within a reasonable It is evident that the quality assurance process
timescale and therefore our opinion on the Plan is which the Authority tried to introduce made only
qualified. a marginal difference. Without significant
improvement in the quality of BVPIs the
Best Value Audit Report – BVPP 2001/2002 kirkleesBVreport2001.doc Page 3 Kirklees Metropolitan Council audit 2000/2001
Authority is at risk of qualification on these 3
grounds in future years.
Other issues relating to the Plan raised at last Integrating Best Value
year’s audit have been addressed particularly in into the Council’s
terms of improved editorial review and the
inclusion of an index. business
Kirklees embarked on BV from a position of Impact
strength, with many service areas enjoying a
The Plan is well designed, readable and tradition of good management and service
communicates the main messages simply and delivery. The Authority has a reasonably robust
with clarity. Particularly impressive is the format Vision and Strategy and a strong history of
for summarising completed reviews. linking service and financial planning.
Although the Authority has an established Value
framework for Best Value which has operated
The Plan should be valuable to stakeholders in adequately throughout the past year, the
enabling a wider understanding of the Council’s Authority itself feels that this is not sufficiently
business, its Vision and Strategy and issues developed to secure continuous service
facing the Council. There is a sufficient focus on improvement.
performance and performance information to The corporate BV framework is currently
enable stakeholders to monitor progress and undergoing a radical revision, as is the published
make the Council accountable, although the five-year BV review programme.
inaccuracies and omissions noted above reduce
the usefulness of this information. Corporate framework
More up to date comparison and commentary on
Experience of the first year of BV in Kirklees has
current performance would further enable
been mixed, as in the case in many authorities.
citizen’s to gain a balanced view of Kirklees’
As described in a later section of this report, the
progress.
Authority has moved forward in some areas,
Stronger cross-referencing between the BVPP particularly in the establishment of structures to
main document and the statistical companion facilitate corporate management of the
would also be of benefit. performance of individual services.
However, the past year has demonstrated some
Recommendations
acknowledged difficulties in the process:
Ensure that future summary BVPPs are distributed to
• the five year BV review programme is all households within a reasonable timescale of
c