Service review

Report: 8b
Date: 29 September 2005
By: Chief Executive and Clerk

Summary

The following paper outlines the involvement of MPA officers and Members in the service review process. It comments on the proposals put forward by the review. It also puts forward a recommended structure for MPA oversight of the next stage of the review.

A. Recommendation

1. That Members note the role played by the MPA in the service review and the views communicated to the MPS Management Board.
2. That the Authority support the service review proposals recommended for implementation by the MPS Management Board subject to detailed plans as set out in paragraph 7.
3. Endorse the proposed governance arrangements for the implementation planning phase of the service review.

B. Supporting information

1. From the outset there was agreement between the Commissioner and the MPA that the service review would be jointly owned by the MPS and the MPA. This was underpinned by MPA approval of the terms of reference for the review, at its meeting on 31st March 2005. This paper sets out the involvement the MPA has had, at officer and Member level throughout the review. It also summarises the views of the Oversight Group, which were sent to the Commissioner before the Management Board considered its final recommendations. Proposals are also included for the MPA’s governance arrangements during the next phase of implementation planning.

Oversight Group

2. Members have provided active oversight of the review through the oversight group, which has met monthly since April 2005 (although the July meeting was cancelled due to the operational demands of the terrorist atrocities). This group has sought to challenge the methodology of the review, provided feedback on the findings of the review and latterly raised concerns with the Commissioner and management board about the emerging findings of the review, in order to ensure they could be taken into account when management board was taking decisions about the recommendations from the review. These were contained in the letter of 2 September 2005 from the Chair of the Authority, which is attached at Appendix A together with the Commissioner’s response. It is clear that some of the issues raised will be subject to ongoing development which the Authority will want to monitor.

3. The group has received reports from the MPS on the progress of the reveiw supplemented by reports from MPA officers, highlighting concerns as the review progressed.

4. All members were invited to a workshop on 13 September where presentations were given of the corporate strategy and Together as well as the service review proposals.

Project Board

5. Catherine Crawford and Peter Martin (as a consultant adviser to the Authority) are members of the Project Board for the review. The Board has met monthly since April. The Board has had decision-making responsibility throughout the review process and has met monthly to ensure the review was delivering against its plans. The Board also made decisions required by the project team as and when they were needed.

Working Group and Project Team

6. There was regular involvement of MPA officers and advisers (Peter Martin and Siobhan Coldwell) at both these groups. They have also held meetings with team leaders to discuss the direction of particular strands of work, and, with colleagues, have been actively involved in workshops, challenge panel sessions and partner consultation events.

MPS recommendations

7. The report from the Commissioner, covering corporate strategy and Together as well as service review, sets out ten broad areas to be taken forward for implementation. (See paragraphs 21-30 of the MPS report.) The view of the Oversight Group is that the Authority should support these proposals in principle, with final approval being subject to detailed proposals outlining:

• the financial consequences both in terms of cashable savings and efficiency gains and costs and investment requirements;
• the anticipated outputs and benefits, quantified as far as possible;
• implementation plans; and
• service plans for the business groups that reflect the impact of the service review.

8. The Authority will also want to see as a matter of urgency work to update key underpinning strategies particularly for human resources, estates and IT. There remain some subjects considered as part of the review, which are not apparently covered by the ten proposals and these need to be brought forward in due course. Furthermore, although the service review has represented a period of intensive activity over the last six months, it needs to be succeeded by a process of continuous improvement that can be sustained into the future.

9. The current budget process (2006/07) is not explicitly identifying savings or growth that will be delivered as part of the service review, although some of the savings that were identified are contributing to the savings exercise currently being undertaken by the MPS. As detailed implementation proposals are developed they will need to be considered in the context of the medium term financial plan.

Future governance arrangements

10. Over the next six months the MPS will be developing detailed implementation plans and business cases aimed at delivering the high level proposals that have resulted from the service review to date. Particularly in view of the points made above in paragraphs 7-9, the MPA will need to ensure effective oversight of those developments and it will be asked to endorse proposals in due course.

11. Co-ordination and Policing Committee (COP) will remain as the lead MPA committee with regard to the service review – any decisions that require MPA approval will be submitted to this committee (who may in turn refer a decision to full authority).

12. The current oversight group, established in April 2005, should be continued, in order to provide oversight of the next stage of service review. The group should continue to be chaired by the Chair of the Police Authority, Len Duvall. Membership will not change.

13. The terms of reference for the group should include:

• To monitor progress of the proposals endorsed by full authority on 29th September 2005
• To receive regular reports on the outputs of the implementation planning stage, including any relevant business cases.
• To provide advice and support to the MPS and the MPA on the MPA perspective in relation to the review
• To provide a challenge and accountability mechanism for implementation of the service review

14. We have yet to formalise governance arrangements with the MPS on the next stage of the review. MPA and GLA officers have been members of the project board and it would be our recommendation that this arrangement is continued.

C. Race and equality impact

The MPA has ensured that race and equality issues have been addressed throughout the review.

D. Financial implications

Peter Martin has been retained by the MPA at a small cost to provide extra capacity during the review period. Part of the role he has undertaken has been involvement in the service review.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report author: Siobhan Coldwell, Head of Scrutiny and Review, MPA

For more information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Appendix 1: Letter from Len Duvall, Chair of the MPA, to Sir Ian Blair

Sir Ian Blair
Commissioner
Metropolitan Police Service
New Scotland Yard
Broadway
LONDON SW1H 0BG

2nd September 2005

Dear Ian

Service Review

Following a very constructive meeting of the Oversight Group this morning I want to set out a number of issues of concern to the Authority so that they can be taken into account in the Management Board discussions on Monday. Alan Brown has also undertaken to relay back points raised in the Group.

Some of the matters included in my previous letter of 22 July are still relevant and other points are set out in the Members Briefing covering report, which I attach for information.

Overall structure

The Authority remains concerned that the overall structure of the organisation has not yet been addressed. I understand the logic of reviewing component parts and then considering the most appropriate structure for new ways of working. However I think some options should be emerging now so that their potential benefits/disbenefits can be fully considered.

Devolution

The future role of devolution has still to be clarified. Proposals to reorganise (and centralise) support functions does not necessarily diminish the extent of devolution, which is essentially about the place in the organisation where key management decisions are taken.

Finance and performance

Further work is needed to ensure that there are robust financial costs and savings and also to link proposals for change with expected impacts on service performance. This also needs to be put in the context of the anticipated benefits that will be achieved in the face of significant upheaval.

Focus

There are clear advantages to be derived from integrating corporate strategy, Together and service review. However you need to ensure that this does not lead to a loss of focus on service review and the reshaping of the service. We all need to be clear that we are just at the beginning of that process and there needs to be a continuing commitment.

Strategies

The Authority is concerned that there should be urgent consideration of key strategies that are intimately affected by the potential changes emerging from the service review. The estates and IT strategies in particular were identified. Clearly both strategies have to contribute to the emerging corporate strategy but in each case there are strategies already in place and being pursued. The MPA has to be satisfied that current decisions in these areas are not likely to conflict with post-service review, post-corporate strategy requirements. In this context it is disappointing that the estates issues were in effect taken off the service review agenda.

In a wider context, we are concerned that we have yet to see a overall view of how the various strands of work merge together to shape the MPS of the future and how this will change the services delivered to Londoners.

Communications

We were assured that a communications strategy was in place and the Authority needs to see this as a matter of urgency. Internal communication will be particularly crucial given the strong potential for resistance to change in the organisation.

Timetable

The timetable for the service review was set six months ago. The exceptional operational demands since 7 July have inevitably impacted on the service’s capability in terms of progressing the review. They have also limited the opportunity for MPA members to consider the review findings. Consequently we are now facing a very tight timetable to achieve an agreed position for the full Authority meeting on 29 September. We are seeking to ensure that members are effectively engaged but we also need to consider what can be decided on 29 September and what carries over into the subsequent implementation planning phase.

Yours sincerely

Len Duvall, AM
Chair of the Metropolitan Police Authority

Cc Catherine Crawford, Chief Executive and Clerk to the Metropolitan Police Authority
Paul Stephenson, Chair, Service Review Project Board

Appendix 2: Letter from Sir Ian Blair, Commissioner MPS, to Len Duvall

Len Duvall AM
Chair, Metropolitan Police Authority
10 Dean Farrar Street
LONDON SW1H 0NY

13 September 2005

Service Review

Dear Len,

Dear Len,

Since your letter of the 2nd of September we have made considerable advances on Service Review, Together, the Corporate Strategy and Mid-Term Financial Plan. The detail of how these have come together is subject to formal reports to the authority. However in your letter you raised some specific concerns and, whilst I believe these are covered in the body of other reports, I wanted to assure the authority we had taken these into account.

Overall Structure

You will notice within the report a description of the MPS structure.

• The organisation will have a stronger but smaller corporate centre, responsible for strategic planning, investment and performance
• This will be supported by a lean headquarters, made up of the business groups who will set policy and processes and ensure compliance
• Services will continue to be delivered through Operational Command Units and new Shared Service Centres

The primary point of delivery will remain the Boroughs who will continue to work closely with CDRP partners to reduce crime and disorder across London and who will be supported by the other parts of the MPS to achieve this.

This framework will be used to develop the Deputy Commissioner’s Command and the Business Group Headquarters into a new Corporate Centre. The detail of this will be developed in consultation with staff and as new operating practices are devised.

You will be aware that the Management Board’s operating arrangements have already started to work in this way and other changes will flow from this. This should lead to considerable rationalisation and the release of resources for re-direction elsewhere.

Devolution

Throughout the debates of the past few weeks much has been about what should be devolved and what should be centralised. It is clear that there are opportunities from economies of larger scale that centralisation could bring. The proposals we are making reinforce the need to devolve decision making whilst producing effective and efficient support structures. Much of this will include the centralisation of transactional work into shared service centres, the formalisation of corporate processes [e.g. Crime investigation, surveillance, etc.] and ensuring that maximum benefit is attained from the corporate contracts that have been established instead of an uncoordinated local purchasing process that has developed at command unit level.

The overall emerging picture is of a franchised model. The centre will set policy and direction and provide the pathway through which resources can be obtained. The devolvement of local decision making will be set within some corporate minimum service delivery requirements, that are standardised and coordinated across the organisation, to ensure that there is sufficient resilience.

Finance and performance

The need for detailed financial planning and benefits realisation is recognised as being a critical factor in re-shaping the organisation. The fact that Service Review, Together and the Corporate Strategy are now all to be unified within one piece of work will allow the financial processes to be more rigorous and, as a consequence produce more reliable predictions and data. One outcome of the Service Review has been a different insight into which resources are used for which function. This has led to a set of discussions about budget planning and the ability to closer link performance to resource utilisation.

We are now going through a process that will establish personal ownership for each of the strands to be taken forward within service review. Part of the responsibility of ownership will be to develop the outline business cases that currently exist and validate the financial aspects to include the anticipated timescales and milestones, benefits envisaged (performance/resource releasing/ cashable saving etc.), the change process that will be undertaken, the dependencies that need to be considered to achieve success and an indication as to how the benefits that are realised will be redeployed or, when they will be made available centrally.

Focus

We are determined to ensure that the focus is not lost as we move from review to implementation and that our performance must be maintained during the period of reorganisation. To achieve this those responsible for service delivery need to be those delivering the change. How this will best be achieved is subject to ongoing discussions at management board and with Stephen Rimmer to ensure that we have a complimentary approach from the very start of the implementation phase. 

Strategies

The service review proposals require a significant change to the way the organisation looks and communicates for the benefits to be realised. The need to update and reassess our estate management, I.T and HR strategies are therefore recognised as being paramount. Having now established the direction of travel we intend to take, the directorates are in a position to review their existing strategies and refine them in line with delivering the widening mission within 3 years. This is ongoing work and will need to be regularly re-visited throughout the implementation phase as part of the overall project management and governance structures that are now being established. More work is being done to understand the key dependencies in order that plans can take these into account.

Budget

Keith Luck is currently undertaking a budget review process with each member of management board to include their bids for next years budget, proposed MTFP savings and the links or crossovers with service review work-streams and business group proposals. At the end of this process we will have an accurate financial picture of where responsibility for each budget line will be and the origin and direction of each piece of work being taken forward. 

Communications

The communication strategy has been written by DPA and is now being progressed. Internally, Claire Appleby (Director Human Resources) is liasing and working with the Trade Unions, Federations and Staff Associations whilst Petrina Cribb from the Service review team is still undertaking broad consultation both internally and externally. We see the need for clear communications as central to any change programme particularly one on this scale.

Timetable

Service Review should now be seen as part of the strategic change within the MPS. The importance of the review will be reflected in the critical pathways that are being developed and will take into account the other significant strategic programmes including C3i, Integrated Borough Operations and Metcall. Detailed consultation and planning will take place over the next two months and it is anticipated that agreement on detailed plans should be possible by Christmas. Implementation of the changes will then be timetabled to take place, under the direction of Stephen Rimmer who joins us next month, in an integrated form over the 3-year period from April 2006.

Conclusion

I believe that the proposals being suggested, the linkage with Together and the direction of the Corporate Strategy have come together to produce an excellent way forward for the MPA and MPS. This will be a difficult to achieve and we will have many challenges en route but what is described is a blueprint for a forward looking, modern and Citizen focussed police service to meet the needs of London. 

Yours sincerely,

Sir Ian Blair
Commissioner

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback