Best value update

Report: 7
Date: 22 July 2002
By: Clerk

Summary

This report updates members on actions agreed at the final meeting of the best value programme board.

A. Recommendations

1. That members approve the minutes of the final best value programme board on 23 May 2002 (attached at Appendix 1); and
2. That members note progress on actions agreed at the meeting.

B. Supporting information

1. PPR Committee has taken over the role previously undertaken by the MPA/MPS best value programme board. The board’s final meeting was on 23 May 2002 and the minutes of that meeting are attached at Appendix 1.

Best value review of managing people

2. The board considered a report from the MPS recommending that the Authority’s best value review of managing people be deferred for two years. The board resolved not to approve the recommendation and requested a scoping report for a human resources best value review to be submitted to the first meeting of the Planning, Performance and Review Committee.

3. A scoping report has not been submitted and a verbal update will be provided at the meeting.

Best value review of e-government

4. The board also considered an MPA report setting out the GLA’s proposed scope of a joint best value review of ‘e-government’.

5. The board concluded that participating fully in the review would be unlikely to deliver benefits to the MPA/MPS commensurate with the resources required. Therefore, the board decided that the MPA should not participate in the review but that the best value policy officers keep themselves informed of progress.

C. Financial implications

There are no direct financial implications.

D. Background papers

None.

E. Contact details

Report author: Derrick Norton, MPA.

For information contact:

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

Appendix 1: Best Value Programme Board

Minutes of the final meeting held on 23 May 2002, at 4.00pm, room AG12, Romney House

Present

MPA Members: Reshard Auladin (Chair), Richard Barnes, Richard Sumray, Rachel Whittaker (for item 8) and Cecile Wright

MPA Officers: Derrick Norton (Best Value Manager), Sally Palmer (Best Value officer) and John Crompton (Committee Services).

MPS: DAC Stephen House (for Assistant Commissioner Ghaffur) , Diana Marchant (Best Value Programme Manager), Supt David Chinchen (Record Management Best Value Review Team Leader), Howard Back and Raj Varma (Best Value Review Team)

Introduction and apologies

There were no apologies.

Minutes of last meeting – 07 March 2002

The minutes of the meeting held on 7 March were agreed.

Matters arising

The matters outlined in the paper were noted. 
On item 4b the Board indicated that if a lead member could not attend a particular meeting their place be taken by an officer.

With regard to item 6 Derrick Norton advised that at its meeting on 14 March 2002 the CDO Committee had resolved that the Draft Consultation Strategy and Implementation Plan be approved and that the BVPB had discharged its duty to satisfy itself that arrangements were in hand for implementing and monitoring the plan.

On item 15 noted that a letter had been received from DAC House and the action was complete.

Update on Best Value reviews

1. Overview of review programme
   DAC House commented that the managing demand/operational policing review was clearly going to be a very large piece of work which may require some oversight by the Planning, Performance and Review Committee.
   The Chair stressed that it was important for the MPA to be involved in the scoping of all reviews. 
   Report noted.
2. Highlight reports for ongoing reviews
   Members welcomed the new format. There was a discussion related to the exception report for bringing offenders to justice. Diana Marchant advised the board that the report was for information pending consideration and decision at the BOTJ project board on 30 May.
   Report noted.
   Arising –
   In reply to a question from the Clerk DAC House advised that there was no bar to a member of the civilian staff leading a review team, but the experience to date had been that it had been easier to identify police officers to carry out this role.
3. Summary of costs
   In the table on page 50 noted that the figures for the cost of the programme support team were subject to confirmation as it appeared that the figure for 2001/02 and the previous year were transposed. 
   Noted that the information shown on pages 51 to 53 was effectively supporting information and was not intended to be part of the report.
   Subject thereto, report noted.
4. Summary of benefits
   Members indicated that the table at page 56 was rather difficult to read. The Clerk wondered whether it might be possible to provide information on the costs and benefits of other reviews which were being carried out such as Accenture reviews. 
   Report noted.

Update on programme support work

1. Summary of key issues
   In reply to a question Diana Marchant advised that the functions provided by the new business improvement software included costing and the ability to map a process
   Report noted.

Crime management improvement plan

Derrick Norton advised that the phrase “non-financial costs” which appeared in the improvement plan should be amended to read “non-quantifiable costs” He also advised that the improvement plan was needed to facilitate an HMIC inspection which was due to start in September.
Report approved.

Records management final report

Supt David Chinchen the review team leader, Howard Back and Raj Varma attended for consideration of this item. It was noted that assuming that the final report and implementation plan was approved by FPBV on 29 May a full implementation plan would be in place on 17 June. Implementation would be monitored by the Planning, Performance and Review Committee.

The Board thanked Supt Chinchen and the review team for their work on this review.

Managing people baseline report

Rachel Whittaker attended for consideration of this item. She pointed out that in addition to the factors detailed in the paper the HR Directorate would be involved in the implementation of the somewhat detailed recent national pay agreement and the introduction of the police community support officers. In the circumstances a short deferment of the review might be justified, with a start being made by January 2003.

Other members considered that there were valid reasons for carrying out a HR review and that this should start in July. The scope of a review should be submitted to the first meeting of the Planning, Performance and Review Committee.

Resolved
That the recommendation be not adopted, and a scoping report for a HR best value review be submitted to the first meeting of the Planning, Performance and Review Committee. 
Action Derrick Norton/Diana Marchant

E-Government review scoping report

The Chair questioned whether a best value review would be appropriate given that much of what was proposed for review was still at a development stage. Also, there was no indication as to what the benefits of carrying out the review might be for the MPA/MPS.

Resolved
That the MPA does not participate in the proposed joint GLA group best value review of e-government, but that the best value policy officers keep themselves informed of the progress of the review.
Action Sally Palmer

Reviewing the Best Value review programme
See item 8

Future arrangements

Noted that following a review of the MPA committee structure this was the last meeting of the Programme Board as its functions had been subsumed into that of the Planning, Performance and Review Committee.

Any other business: None.

Date of next meeting: N/A

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback