Agenda item

[To consider amber rated performance indicators, and suggest which indicators should be prioritised to prevent under-performance in the future.]

Charlotte Johns, Head of Transformation, presented the Corporate Performance Report outlining some of the trends in performance of the Council.

Cllr Bolshaw sought clarity on figures provided for the number of visitors to cultural venues. He queried why there was no target set for this measure and asked what constituted as a venue. The Head of Transformation explained that the performance indicator was designed to capture the importance of promoting Wolverhampton’s heritage and cultural offer. She noted that this is a difficult area to monitor and that the Council tracks the number of visitors to its art galleries and museums. She added that there was a reduction in the fourth quarter’s performance as this was after the Christmas period when there was a surge of activity. She explained that work was taking place to change the methodology for this indicator so that the quality of data can be improved. Cllr Bateman suggested the Council should be monitoring the number of hotel beds in Wolverhampton as a way of measuring visitor numbers. He noted that Centro could provide data about transport users, which could also be valuable. The Head of Transformation explained that the current indicators were chosen based on corporate priority of promoting cultural attractions. Cllr Brookfield noted that perhaps the issue was symptomatic of a bigger problem for Wolverhampton, namely that it the City is not promoting itself enough. 

Cllr Angus raised queried the performance indicator for the prevalence of excess weigh in adults. The Head of Transformation explained that this indicator is baselined against national data, which is not yet available. She reassured the Board that Public Health has been collating local data as a way of monitoring the direction of travel in this field. Cllr Angus also voiced concern about the number of sick days lost to absence, and asked if there was benchmarking data to compare the Council’s performance. The Head of Transformation explained that the indicator is currently not comparable with other councils’ data due to the way the information is collated; however, the methodology for this indicator will change for 2015/16, so that benchmarking is possible. She added that there is a Sickness Management Board that considers information relating to absences and that this issue is also being considered by a Cabinet Member.

Cllr Findlay noted the issue of sickness absence, and asked what processes were in place for monitoring absence. The Head of Transformation explained mangers operate a duty of care like other organisations. She noted that absence information is now recorded centrally rather than across different departments. She added that developments on the Agresso system will allow the Council to assess correlations between sickness leave and other factors such as agency staff.

A discussion followed about whether there was a link between the number of appraisals and sickness absences. The Head of Transformation explained that refreshed appraisal paperwork will address issues such as stress and wellbeing. She noted that the main issue with appraisals was that they have not been recorded centrally, not that they hadn’t been happening. Cllr Brookfield queried how long it will take before the new appraisal system becomes fully operational. It will not be until later in 2015/16 that the data quality is higher. Cllr Brookfield added that there should be a rider about agency staff, so that appraisal data is not distorted. She also noted a wider issue of social work agency staff being able to move between regional authorities offering the best pay deals and working packages. She noted that there were also issues about losing experienced social workers.

Resolved

1)    That the Stronger City Economy Scrutiny Panel receive a report on cultural venues, footfall through transport links and hotel bed figures, and that panel respond back to Board about findings.

2)    That the Scrutiny Board receive an update report on the First Impressions of the City review, and this item be added to the work programme.

3)    That the Scrutiny Board receive an update report on looked after children and the Families R First programme.