GLA group "Equalities for all" Best Value Review

Report: 11
Date: 14 March 2002
By: Clerk

Summary

The GLA Group 'Equalities for All' Best Value Review is in its final stages of completion. This report highlights the progress made and outlines a process for constructing the final report and recommendations.

A. Recommendation

1. That Members note the work undertaken to progress the Equalities for All Review;
2. That Members give consideration to the issues identified in paragraph 12 of the report; and
3. That Members agree the reporting schedule outlined in paragraphs 13-14 of the report.

B. Supporting information

1. The crosscutting Best Value Review of Equalities was launched on 27 June 2001, with the purpose of a review across all the functional bodies of the GLA. The Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA); Greater London Authority (GLA); London Development Agency (LDA); London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority (LFEPA); and Transport for London (TFL) are all represented on the review which is led by the GLA. The MPA considered that the review had much to learn from the equality practices of the MPS and it was therefore decided that the MPS should be represented on both the review team and the project board.

2. The project team has been responsible for progressing much of the project development whilst the carrying out the day-to-day work. The MPA and MPS are represented on the review team and have lead responsibilities for specific aspects of the project. This group has met weekly throughout the project.

3. The project board reviews and monitors the outputs of the review team. The Clerk to the MPA, Catherine Crawford and Commander Cressida Dick are represented on the project board. More recently Cecile Lothian has joined the project board to provide a member perspective. The project board has met relatively infrequency compared with other best value review bodies. Whilst this may have had a significant effect on the development of the project, it does mean that there are a number of issues for the Board to address.

4. A start-up report/initial project plan was produced by the review team and approved by the project board at their meeting in October 2001. The report outlined the project aims and phases, with timescales and outcomes to be achieved at each phase. All members of the GLA Group accepted the start-up report. It was subsequently presented to this CDO Committee for approval.

5. As a cross functional best value review, it was important that the methodology used by the review was sufficiently robust to satisfy best value requirement. As there had not been a best value review of the nature and scale of that proposed by the GLA Group, close working was established with the Audit Commission, HMIC and District Audit to ensure that the methodologies that were being proposed would satisfy the '4 Cs' – challenges, compare, compete and consult. . This was confirmed in several meetings with District Audit, HMIC and Audit Commission who agreed that the process developed by the project would be used as a benchmark for other subsequent complex crosscutting reviews. The project has also benefited from the advice of Jane Foot, author of the publication 'Cross Cutting BV reviews'. Ms Foot has recently been contracted by the GLA to undertake the work required on consultation.

6. One of the key methodologies of the project was the development of baseline report in order to compare the initial organisational information across the GLA Group. The purpose of the baseline data was to gain an overview of the way in which each organisation, at a strategic level, addressed equal opportunities and diversity. The relative complexities of the MPS and the GLA Group rendered this exercise extremely challenging. However, it was achieved, and a composite baseline report, outlining the information provided by the Group members and the MPS was compiled. This document proved to be extremely useful and was used as the basis for identifying the key components for further exploration in the review.

7. Members of this committee have had the opportunity to comment on this the early information contained in the baseline review.

8. Six different strands of work were identified as the key outcomes of the challenge event that required further development by the project. These are: Performance Management, Exemplary Employer, Vision and Leadership, Improving Services, Consultation and Culture Change. Each work strand had clear terms of reference and officers were tasked to develop the objectives and timescales for achieving outcomes. All are nearing completion and their findings and recommendations will be reflected in the draft report that is scheduled to be finalised by 31 March 2002.

Consultation and Challenge events

9. The review has held three consultation and challenge events. The first was held in October. This was reasonably well attended, and addressed by Lee Jasper and Diane Abbott MP. Around 100 key stakeholders were invited, and of these around 70 attended. Delegates were invited to challenge the key roles identified in the baseline review. The views and suggestions that arose from the event formed the basis for refining the work to be progressed by the review team. Further consultation and challenge events were held in February for staff associations and members of the four functional bodies. The events were not as widely supported as was hoped but the contributions of those who attended were extremely useful in influencing the outcomes for the final phase of the review.

10. The GLA plan to present the draft of the project, once it has been approved by the project board, to the Mayor and subsequently to a meeting of the Mayor's Management Board. Each member of the GLA Group is then expected to present the report to its appropriate decision making structures so that the report can be ratified by June 2002 to meet the Mayor's deadline for a June publication launch. This is a very tight timescale for the MPA.

Issues for consideration

11. The originally published milestones in the project have been missed. This has been largely due to the nature of a crosscutting review, where considerable time is spent collecting data from unfamiliar organisations, and educating the members of the team as to the nature of the different bodies. It is possible that an effective crosscutting review needs twice the length of time as a standard best value review, as most of the committee time on the review is spent agreeing joint approaches to work. This in turn means that data is requested in a format that is not in the corporate layout for the organisation, and considerable time is spent both collecting and re-adjusting it.

12. The review has clearly been under-resourced. This has had an impact on the project timescale. Members of the GLA Group, including the MPA and the MPS, had not anticipated the extent of the commitment that would be required by the project. Although this review is nearing completion, members will need to consider seriously the similar resource implications for the best value review of consultation that is currently underway and the impact on the work of the Consultation Unit within the MPA Secretariat, should additional budget not be available to increase the staffing in the Unit, or buy in the resource required to carry out the work.

Review project timescales

13. According to the original review timescale, the team should have reported draft recommendations to the project board meeting in January 2002. This has not happened; however a project board meeting has been scheduled for 21 March to consider the draft report.

14. Following the Mayor's Management Board the Authority would be able to hold full and detailed discussions on the draft report and its recommendations and the following reporting procedure is proposed:

1. The draft will be circulated to CDO members for initial comment.
2. The report will be presented to the CDO committee meeting on 9 May.
3. The Best Value Programme Board will also consider the report at its scheduled meeting in May.
4. Depending on the outcomes of the discussions held, the CDO committee will recommend approval of the report at the full Authority meeting of either 23 May or 27 June. The June date may present difficulties for the GLA publication deadline, however, it is proposed that the Authority should not formally commit itself to an earlier sign off date in advance of seeing the content of the report.

15. Following a joint meeting between MPA and MPS staff, it was agreed that once the report is available, a joint consultation meeting for the MPS Management Board and the MPA members should be scheduled to consider the report. A date for this is to be decided and members of this committee will be informed of this.

C. Financial implications

It is too soon to be specific about the direct financial considerations associated with report itself; but the Consultation Unit may be under-resourced to progress the recommendations of the report. Members will also need to consider the associated resources for the best value consultation project that is already underway.

D. Background papers

None.

E. Contact details

Report author: Julia Smith, CDO, MPA.

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback