Interaction between the CDO Committee and the Consultation Review Best Value Project Board

Report: 7
Date: 26 September 2000
By: Clerk

Summary

A. Supporting information

The Best Value review of the MRP Consultation commenced while the MPA was in the transition phase.

Objectives and scope

The primary objective of this project is to produce a consultation strategy that the MPA and the MPS can agree. The immediate benefit of the strategy will be the delivery of more appropriate policing services through better understanding of customers' needs and expectations flowing from more effective consultation.

The strategy will be developed following a Best Value Review of consultation in the MPS. A Best Value Review of consultation will:

• Challenge why consultation is done and how it is provided;
• Compare the way in which the MPS consults with the ways in which other police forces plus public and private bodies consult;
• Consult both externally and internally with the public, our partners and police authorities;
• Consider fair competition from other agencies that can carry out consultation exercises on behalf of the MPS.

(See Appendix 1)

The MPS managed, and to a large extent directed the programme although there was MPA transition team involvement in the project process.

There was not the opportunity for member direction of the project, and it therefore fell to the MPS to take the project management lead in determining the shape and direction of the project, in consultation with MPATT officers.

Experience in best value review process

Best Value, as a new Government requirement is new to the MPS and to MPA and the Best Value Consultation Review Project was the first review programme to be implemented The MPA is the Best Value authority for the service, and as such will be subject to reviews by the Audit Commission and HMI Inspectorate. Research from Local Government experience of implementing Best Values reviews indicates that the process is fraught with difficulties. That is even when local authorities were attempting to review a small specific, service such as Refuse collection, the Personnel function or Cleaning services where targets were relatively easy to measure.

Best value review of consultation

The MPS/MPA review of consultation is a huge and highly complex project.

The MPS and MPATT created various structures to support the project. At the time of their creation, little thought was given as to how these boards, panels and project team would interface with any sub-committee of the MPA. This is not surprising since the CDO Committee had not been formed.

Since the launch of the MPA the MPA offices and MPS project team managers have sought to ensure that the CDO has every opportunity to fulfil its duty as the Committee with the remit for implementing and monitoring the consultation processes for the Authority. This has involved steering the project in the direction it assesses as most appropriate in order to ensure its completion and with the strategic direction that it will require consultation.

MPA & best value reviews

The Finance, Planning and Best Value Committee at its Chairs Briefing meeting on Friday 15 September highlighted the need for the MPA, as the Best Value Authority, to initiate a review of the three Best Value Review projects that are currently underway. If the Authority agrees this proposal, it will be able to gain a deeper understanding of its role as the Best Value Authority, the processes entailed in such reviews, and the Inspectorates (Audit Commission, District Audit and Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary) expectations of such and future reviews

Interaction between the CDO committee, and the best value review of consultation project

The interaction between the CDO Committee and the Consultation Best Value Review project need to be understood within the historical context of the setting up of the project. Since then, further thought has been given to this, and a representation of the relationship and interaction between the CDO Committee and the BV reviews project is represented in the diagram at Appendix 2.

The main interactions are as outlined in the chart by numbers is presented to assist clarification.

The MPS Programme Board. This Board was set up in March 2000, at a time when it was not yet clear that the MPA was going to be established. The MPATT was represented on the Programme Board, and Ian Gaskell continues to represent the interest of the MPA. Assistant Commissioner Andy Dunn, chairs the Board however, the Chair's position has been offered to the MPA.

The Board is responsible for the MPS/MPA legal duty for:

• all aspects of the process of the Best Value project
• liasing with the District Audit and
• overseeing the strategic direction of the project

The Project is accountable to the Programme Board which is carried out to guidelines set by Government.

The Programme Board will cease once the Project completes its work.

The Project Board - the Project Board deals with the day-to-day operation and administration of the Project. It is accountable to the Programme Board. AC Anderson Dunn, MPS, Chairs the Project Board, and the CDO Chair, R. David Muir is represented on this Board.

Metropolitan Police Authority - the MPA is the Best Value Authority for the MPS, and as such has the statutory responsibility for all Best Value reviews. As such, it will be reviewed and inspected by the Audit Commission and HMIC, on the same basis as a local authority, in line with Government legislation. All current Best Value reviews are the responsibility of the MPA, which may delegate this responsibility to its Committees in order to ensure that the outputs satisfy the requirements of the Authority. The CDO Committee has been remitted the responsibility for the Review of Consultation BV Project.

Consultation, Outreach and Diversity Committee – The CDO committee is seen as being responsible for ensuring that the Project achieves its outcomes and the emerging strategy for the Authority. Although it has no line responsibility, it has the strategic responsibility to influence the processes of the Project, where it assesses these to be important to the outcomes. The MPA BV Project Team could be seen to be directly accountable to the CDO Committee (and therefore to the Chair by default).

The other relationships outlined in the chart are presumed, as it is important to stress that this is the current understanding. There is little written documentation that do not specify these relationships and interactions between the committees, especially since the MPA, nor the CDO were in existence at the formation of some of these structures. It is important, however, to stress that the MPS is already making adjustments to the processes that it is putting in place for emerging BV review projects.

MPA project management

Although the BV review of consultation comes under the MPA's overall responsibility for consultation, it is separately managed. However the two streams of work regularly consult with each other.

B. Recommendations

1. As the project is in its final stages the CDO Committee may wish to secure an agreement with the Chair of the Finance, Planning and Best Value Committee on responsibilities for 'signing off' the project report.
2. In line with other BV reviews currently underway the Chair of the Committee may recommend to the Chair's Co-ordinating and Urgency Committee that a review should be undertaken on the processes for establishing the current reviews to ensure that lines of responsibilities and accountabilities between the MPA and MPS clearly understood and agreed in the early stages.

C. Financial implications

There are no financial implications to this report.

D. Review arrangements

That the Committee receives regular updates on this issue.

E. Background papers

The following is a statutory list of background papers (under the Local Government Act 1972 S.100 D) which disclose facts or matters on which the report is based and which have been relied on to a material extent in preparing this report. They are available on request to either the contact officer listed above or to the Clerk to the Police Authority at the address indicated on the agenda.

F. Contact details

The author of this report is Julia Smith, MPA.

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback