Management arrangements for best value

Report: 10
Date: 19 September 2000
By: Clerk

Summary

This paper proposes new arrangements for managing ‘best value’ and proposes roles and responsibilities for Members within those arrangements.

A. Supporting information

Introduction

1. Members will be aware of the Authority’s responsibility to secure ‘best value’ (ie ‘to secure continuous improvements in the way its functions are exercised having regard to a combination of economy, efficiency and effectiveness’).

2. The MPS initiated a programme of work to deliver best value in advance of establishing the MPA. The MPS also made interim arrangements to direct and monitor the work pending involvements by Members (see Report 7: FPBV 20 July 2000). However, simply ‘adding’ the new MPA structure onto the arrangements put in place by the MPS would lead to seven tiers of management. Such a structure is not considered desirable and an alternative structure is proposed below.

3. Proposals are also made regarding the role of Members within the alternative structure. These roles reflect the Authority’s duty to secure the delivery of best value rather than manage the process of delivery directly.

National perspective

4. The proposals below were developed after discussion with the Association of Police Authorities on the approaches taken by other police services and on the emerging findings of the national audit of best value performance plans. The proposals also reflect early findings of the (non-statutory) audit of the MPS’ Policing and Performance Plan 2000/01 and an assessment of its pilot best value review (BVR).

5. However, Members should be aware that best value in policing is still in its infancy and there is, as yet, no agreed ‘model’ for structuring and supporting involvement by police authorities. Future audits and inspections of the MPA’s plans, progress and performance will determine whether or not it has taken the ‘correct’ approach.

Proposed management structure

6. It is considered that best value obligations acting on the Authority demand a clear and coherent management structure if they are to be discharged successfully. The technique of ‘programme management’ offers such a structure and was used by the MPS to develop current arrangements for managing best value. In summary, programme management is the ‘selection, planning and management of a portfolio of projects to achieve a related set of business objectives’. The technique is supported by guidelines that allow organisations to tailor the approach used.

7. It is considered that a ‘programme management’ approach should continue but that the number of management levels should be minimised. This consideration means that some decision-making authority will need to be delegated to MPS-chaired bodies (albeit with MPA representation) to ensure best value is not over-managed.

8. Appendix A proposes a structure for delivering best value based on the minimum number of decision-making levels needed to implement executive, programme and project management. The ‘preferred option’ for each level is shown in Column C and is based on the ‘possible options’ that stem from current arrangements (shown in Column B). In summary, the proposals at Annex A are that:

• The Finance, Planning and Best Value Committee undertake an ‘executive management’ role (on behalf of the Authority) and provide leadership, strategic direction and oversight of best value;
• Best value is delivered via a programme of projects and project-based work overseen by a ‘Best Value Programme Board’ chaired by the Deputy Commissioner (as ‘Programme Director’) reporting to the FPBV Committee
  • The proposed body would integrate and replace the current MPS Steering Group and MPS Programme Board;
  • The Committee’s lead Member for best value would sit on the new board;
  • There would be MPA officer support (see para 15 below);
• Individual ‘best value reviews’ are carried out as projects, each one overseen by a ‘Best Value Review Project Board’ chaired by a member of MPS Management Board (as ‘Project Director’) reporting to the Programme Board;
  • A nominated Member would sit on each BVR Project Board (in line with the FPBV decision taken on 20 July 2000);
  • There would be MPA officer support (see para 15 below);
• Work to support all BVRs and other work related to best value in general is undertaken by a ‘Programme Support Team’ under the direction of a ‘Programme Manager’ reporting to the Programme Board;
  • This integrates the existing ‘Core Team’ within the proposed structure.

Proposed roles and responsibilities

9. Appendix B proposes programme and project management roles for MPS managers largely unchanged from present arrangements. The responsibility of Members to secure best value, and to scrutinise the MPS, is considered to preclude them from taking a direct management role (eg chairing Project Boards). However, Members will want to provide leadership, strategic direction and oversight in line with Home Office best value guidelines and proposals for achieving this are presented below.

Role within executive management

10. Members of the FPBV Committee (with authority delegated from the MPA) will provide leadership, direction and oversight by developing and monitoring the Best Value Performance Plan plus its associated programme of best value reviews. Members of the Best Value Sub-group would be available to discuss issues informally on an ad hoc basis and without prejudice to the Committee’s formal role.

Role within programme management

11. The lead Member for best value would act as the FPBV Committee’s representative on the proposed Best Value Programme Board. The Member would present the views of the FPBV Committee, advise on whether matters should be remitted to it and/or feedback MPS views. The Programme Board would look to approve project plans for BVRs, monitor progress and approve completion. The Programme Board would also oversee general consultation with staff associations about best value.

Role within project management (of best value reviews)

12. A Member sitting on a BVR Project Board would help provide a customer-centred perspective plus independent lay scrutiny of plans and progress. Depending on the review in question, and the Member’s experience, the role could include making specific knowledge and expertise available to the BVR Team. The Member would not be expected to approve plans or products on behalf of the Authority.

13. Over-and-above these specific roles, Members at each management level will want to maintain oversight of three key areas of best value:

• Continuous improvement in performance in line with BVPI priorities, targets and plans (complementing the role of other Committees);
• The business case for the best value programme overall plus individual BVR projects (ie justifying and monitoring costs, ensuring that requirements / benefits are identified, monitored and delivered);
• Compliance with legislation; statutory guidelines; feedback and directions from auditors / inspectors; MPA/MPS decisions, plans and guidelines; plus any internal and external good practice.

Support for Members

14. The legal duty acting on the MPA and the roles proposed for Members has implications for staff resources. The MPA will wish to assure itself that appropriate resources are available for BVRs and for the work in support of best value overall (eg management accounting, quality assurance, benefits management and so on).

15. Typically, such staff will be under the direction and control of the Commissioner. However, Home Office guidelines state that police authorities are likely to require additional dedicated resources if they are to play a credible role in best value. In the MPA context this would mean employing staff to support Member involvement at the three management levels (ie executive, programme and project management).

16. Subject to decisions on this paper, proposals regarding the type and extent of support directly available to the MPA will be presented in a subsequent report. The role played by MPA staff should complement, and add value to, the work of MPS managers and staff in delivering best value on behalf of the Authority.

B. Recommendations

1. To implement the management structure described at paragraph 8.
2. To endorse the roles and responsibilities of Members described at paragraphs 10 to 13.

C. Financial implications

There are no direct financial implications. The financial implications of MPA officer support for best value will be quantified in a subsequent paper.

D. Review arrangements

The MPA’s approach to best value is subject to annual independent audit. The Authority is legally bound to publish the audit, plus a statement of response, and to include the statement in its next published best value performance plan. Individual best value reviews are subject to inspection by Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary.

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.

None.

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

Appendix A

Please contact the MPA for a copy of Appendix A.

Appendix B: Summary of management responsibilities for best value

Programme Director

Provide leadership, direction and oversight of the programme; ensure the programme’s outputs and outcomes are delivered cost-effectively; chair of Programme Board and reports to FPBV Committee.

Deputy Commissioner

Programme Manager Day-to-day management (to quality, time and budget) of work in support of the overall programme and work common to all BVR's; monitoring plans/progress of individual BVR's; identification and management of dependencies and interfaces with other work; efficient management of common resources / skills within the programme; chair of any supporting meetings (including consultation with staff associations) and reports to Programme Board.

Senior manager BVR Project Director

Provide leadership, direction and oversight for each BVR (within the programme environment); ensure the project’s outputs and outcomes are delivered cost-effectively; chair of BVR Project Board and reports to Programme Board.

Member of Management Board BVR Team Leader (project manager)

Day-to-day management of the BVR project to quality, time and budget; chairs team meetings and reports to the BVR Project Board. Senior business manager supported by project management advisor; or Senior project manager supported by business advisor.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback