Efficiency and effectiveness review programme

Report: 9
Date: 17 April 2001
By: Treasurer

Summary

The report by Accenture on mapping and scoping for the proposed efficiency and effectiveness review programme is presented. Members are asked to endorse the programme for implementation on a flexible basis and to agree the steps to take the programme forward.

A. Recommendations

1. Members receive the report by Accenture and endorse the proposed efficiency and effectiveness programme for implementation on a flexible basis.
2. Members agree the proposed steps for taking the programme forward as set out in paragraphs 6-9 below.

B. Supporting information

Introduction

1. The initial steps to establish an efficiency and effectiveness review programme were reported to the Committee at its meeting in January. A provision of £1 million per year for three years has been included in the MPA's budget to fund the programme. A firm of consultants, Accenture, were appointed to carry out a mapping and scoping exercise and their report is included with the agenda for today's meeting. The consultants' conclusions were considered by the Steering Group comprising the Mayor, the Chair of the MPA and the Commissioner (represented by DAC Becks) on 30 March 2001.

Mapping/scoping report

2. Accenture's report (Appendix 1, available from MPA) contains an executive summary on page 3. The programme of reviews proposed by Accenture is set out on pages 12-13 of their report. The Steering Group supported the programme, to be taken forward on a flexible basis, but were concerned that the relationship between this programme and the Authority's Best Value review programme was not sufficiently clear and Accenture have produced an additional note to their report addressing this issue (Appendix 2, see Supporting material). Appendix 3 (available from MPA) to Accenture's report, which sets out a substantial amount of detailed information on the individual review subjects, is available on request. Accenture will be present at the Committee to speak to their report, if required.

The purpose of the efficiency and effectiveness (E&E) review programme

3. The purpose of the E&E review programme is to secure short and medium term efficiency and effectiveness gains from current activity in a budget context designed to deliver improvements to front line policing with constrained resources. The reviews will not generally seek to address the fundamental challenge involved in Best Value. They will therefore naturally complement and precede the broad-based fundamental Best Value reviews.

4. The E&E reviews will sit beside current internal MPS reviews taking place outside the Best Value framework. A key feature of the E&E reviews is to ensure an independent outlook through the use of external consultants. One aspect of the programme will be the need to scope the boundaries between its work and these other reviews, including differentiating between reviews and other development or policy activity, and testing quality of work already carried out.

Taking the programme forward

5. The following paragraphs set out the steps that need to be taken in order to progress the E&E programme in accordance with the recommendations in Accenture's report.

6. It is essential to secure stakeholder agreement and ownership. In this case the key stakeholders are the MPA, the MPS, and the GLA, both the Mayor and the Assembly. Proposed ways of achieving this are:

• a full report to the meeting of the MPA in May with the support of this Committee;
• the same report to go to the MPS Management Board with appropriate briefings cascaded within the MPS;
• a summary report to the Mayor's Advisory Cabinet;
• the same report to the GLA Budget Committee.

7. There needs to be agreement about clear responsibilities for the management of the E&E programme. This should comprise the following elements:

• budget responsibility to rest with the Treasurer, MPA;
• programme management to be focused on the Project Board (comprising Treasurer MPA (Chair), Clerk MPA, Director of Resources MPS, Deputy Commissioner MPS, Director of Finance and Performance GLA, Mayor's Adviser(s)).;
• a MPS manager with sufficient seniority to provide clout should be appointed as programme manager with consultancy support providing independent QA plus specialist programme management;
• the MPA Finance Planning and Best Value Committee, on advice of the Project Board, to approve reviews, and monitor their progress and implementation;
• the Steering Group comprising the Chair of the MPA, the Mayor and the Commissioner to take a strategic overview of the programme.

8. The relationship with existing review programmes will need to be clearly set out along the lines outlined in paragraphs 3 and 4 above. Individual timings of Best Value reviews may need to be adjusted but otherwise the Best Value programme will clearly remain in place. All development activity must be effectively coordinated, including establishing tests to determine relevance of reviews and criteria for new reviews. It is proposed that the Project Board should agree a process with the MPS for doing this, who have already done considerable work in this area, work which is nearly complete.

9. The procurement process for E&E reviews needs to be agreed. It is proposed that it should operate as follows:

• the procurement process will be managed by the Project Board with necessary approvals by the Finance Planning and Best value Committee;
• the scope of each review will be defined having regard to any relevant existing reviews. The scope may include QA of internal review activity and will cover support for the implementation of recommendations;
• there will be a presumption that external resources will be used in order to ensure independence. Internal resources may form part of a review team and where a review is to be carried out internally there will, as a minimum, be external quality assurance;
• consultants will be selected from the existing MPS framework arrangement for financial consultancy services. This includes most of the major firms. It is felt that there would be value in having a unified approach, but at the same time we should avoid making too large a commitment to a single firm. It is therefore suggested that we should invite proposals to carry out a first tranche of reviews, including the overall programme management and QA roles. This would allow a further competitive process for placing subsequent tranches of work. The Project Board should draw up proposals for the first contract for approval by the Committee.

C. Financial implications

Budget provision of £1 million has been included in the 2001/02 budget to fund the efficiency and effectiveness programme.

D. Background papers

None

E. Contact details

The author of this report is Peter Martin, Treasurer.

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback