Summary of best value

Report: 6
Date: 20 July 2000
By: Clerk and Treasurer

Summary

This report seeks to inform Members of the MPA’s responsibilities for securing Best Value. The report also describes work by the MPS prior to the establishment of the MPA.

A. Supporting information

1. Members will be aware that the MPA is a ‘best value authority’ as defined in Part 1 of the Local Government Act 1999 (the 1999 Act). The Greater London Authority and the other three functional bodies are also best value authorities (ie Transport for London, London Fire and Emergency Planning Authority and the London Development Agency).

2. A summary of the 1999 Act follows and the Act is supported by guidance set out in DETR Circular 10/99. The main themes of the Modernising Government White Paper are also relevant to best value authorities.

3. The MPA must make arrangements to secure continuous improvements in the way its functions are exercised, having regard to a combination of economy, efficiency and effectiveness. In deciding how to fulfil this duty the MPA must consult with: representatives of persons liable to pay any tax, precept or levy in respect of the Authority; non-domestic rate-payers; people likely to use the services provided; and representatives of persons with an interest in these services. The MPA must have regard to guidance from the Secretary of State on the persons to be consulted plus the form, content and timing of consultation.

4. The Secretary of State (after consultation with the MPA) can specify performance indicators that will measure the Authority’s performance in exercising functions and can specify standards to be met in relation to those indicators. The MPA must meet any applicable standards.

5. The MPA must conduct a best value review of all its functions ending on 31 March 2005 (and every five-year period thereafter). The reviews should aim at improving economy, efficiency and effectiveness and follow guidance issued by the Secretary of State concerning the timetable, procedure, form or content of each review. As required by Section 5 of the 1999 Act and secondary legislation the MPA will need to:

• consider whether it should be exercising the function;
• consider the level and way in which it should be exercising the function;
• consider its objectives in relation to the exercise of the function;
• assess its performance by reference to any performance measures specified for the function;
• assess the competitiveness of its performance by reference to the performance of similar functions carried out by other best value authorities and by other businesses (including organisations in the voluntary sector);
• consult other best value authorities and businesses (including organisations in the voluntary sector) about the exercise of the function;
• assess its success in meeting any performance standard related to the function;
• assess its progress towards meeting any relevant performance standard which has been specified but which does not yet apply;
• and asess its performance towards meeting any relevant performance target.

6. The requirements above are typically summarised as the ‘4Cs’: challenge; compare; consult and compete.

7. The MPA must prepare a best value performance plan for each financial year (to be published by 31 March in the previous financial year). As required by Section 6 of the 1999 Act and secondary legislation the plan must include:

• a summary of the MPA’s objectives in respect to its functions (arising from the corporate planning process and reflecting any objectives set nationally);
• a summary of current performance including performance against
  • national best value performance indicators (BVPI);
  • those identified by the Audit Commission;
  • and those developed locally to reflect community preferences;
• a comparison with performance in previous financial years;
• a summary of the Authority’s approach to efficiency improvement;
• a statement describing the programme of reviews;
• the key results of completed reviews;
• the performance targets set for future years;
• a plan of action (for any areas of poor performance or any areas criticised by an auditor / inspector);
• a response to any audit and inspection reports;
• a consultation statement (describing compliance with sections 3 & 5 of 1999 Act);
• and financial information (to assist people understand how well the MPA performed).

8. The Authority’s auditor will audit the performance plan to establish whether it was prepared and published in line with Section 6 and any other guidelines issued. The MPA must publish the audit and prepare a statement of response within 30 days (or sooner if required). The statement must be included in the next performance plan and must include a timetable of actions.

9. The Audit Commission and HMIC may carry out inspections of the MPA’s compliance with Part 1 of the 1999 Act. The inspector has a right of access at all reasonable times to any premises and any document which appears to him to be necessary for the inspection. The inspector can require a person to provide such information or documents as deemed necessary (and attend before him/her for this purpose). The inspecting bodies shall have regard to guidance from the Secretary of State on securing co-ordination of different inspections, inquiries and investigations.

10. If the Secretary of State is satisfied that the MPA is failing to comply with Part 1 of the 1999 Act he can direct it to: prepare or amend a performance plan; follow procedures in relation to the plan; review a function and/or undertake any action considered necessary to secure compliance. The MPA may make representation before directions are made unless the Secretary of State considers the direction sufficiently urgent.

11. The Secretary of State may make regulations about how best value authorities keep financial accounts (eg form, content and publication).

12. The MPS initiated action in line with best value legislation in advance of the Authority taking responsibility on 3 July 2000. The current position with respect to key areas is outlined at Annex A and issues likely to be of immediate interest to the MPA include:

• monitoring performance against best value performance indicators (BVPI);
• degree and type of involvement with individual best value reviews (NB: this topic is covered in a separate report to the FPBV Committee on 20 July 2000);
• MPA resources to support the required degree and type of involvement;
• MPS resources to deliver best value reviews;
• securing an appropriate level of ‘challenge’ within individual reviews;
• co-ordination and support within the GLA family of functional bodies;
• confirming or revising the programme of reviews for Years 2 to 5 (and/or responding to Government requests for specific reviews to be undertaken at a specified time);
• views from either the Audit Commission or HMIC on progress to-date;
• and co-ordination of future audits and inspections.

B. Recommendations

Members to note the Authority’s responsibilities for securing Best Value and the approach taken by the MPS prior to 3 July 2000.

C. Financial implications

The MPS estimated that the best value set-up cost plus costs of the first year’s reviews would be £2.7m (although the current forecast is £2.4m). This will be offset by (as yet unquantified) benefits arising from the conclusion of individual reviews.

D. Review arrangements

The Authority will be involved in monitoring performance against the plan and in developing the 2001/02 plan (including the programme of best value reviews).

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 below or to the Clerk to the Police Authority at the address indicated on the agenda.

• Local Government Act 1999 (Part 1)
• DETR Circular 10/99

F. Contact details

The author of this report is Derrick Norton.

For information contact:

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

Current position

General duty

MPA officials have recently been invited by the GLA to participate in a best value steering group for all four functional bodies. The group has yet to meet and agree its remit.

Best value performance plan

The plan for 2000/01 was developed in full consultation with the MPC/MPCS and on advice from HMIC. However, as the plan is non-statutory in nature, a separate paper to the FPBV Committee on 20 July 2000 recommends Members to note the plan as a document for monitoring MPS performance.

Programme of reviews

The programme of reviews was developed by agreeing prioritisation criteria with the MPC. The criteria were then applied to a functional breakdown of the MPS and poor performance data was also used to determine priorities for review. Three ‘Year 1’ reviews were identified: (1) Consultation; (2) Investigating and detecting crime; (3) Combating bureaucracy and managing information. The current position for all three reviews is presented in a separate MPS paper to the FPBV Committee on 20 July 2000 and it is anticipated that the MPA will wish to consider the reviews proposed for Years 2 to 5.

Best value performance indicators (BVPI)

Performance measures in the plan use baseline data from the last full year of published figures (1998/1999) and 1999/2000 performance data was published at the end of June. The MPS compares its performance to that of similar metropolitan forces. The Government stated that five-year reduction targets must be set for three BVPIs. These targets are:

• 10% reduction in domestic burglary - with 2% reduction in 2000/01;
• 15% reduction in robbery - with 0% increase in 2000/01 (ie no rise);
• 31% reduction in vehicle crime - with 8% reduction in 2000/01.

Audit and inspection

A (non-statutory) auditor’s report should be available in October 2000 and guidelines have been produced by the Audit Commission outlining the process of audit. An analysis of performance plans nationally should be available in September 2000. HMIC has prepared an inspection protocol and has produced a Memorandum of Agreement with the APA. Informal views from HMIC indicate that the MPA is unlikely to be subject to best value inspection before February 2001.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback