The Nation's Biggest Supporter
GET FUNDING
GET RESOURCES
NEWS & MEDIA
ABOUT SPORT ENGLAND
NATIONAL GOVERNING BODIES
RESEARCH
PLANNING FOR SPORT
POLICY INTO PRACTICE
CHILDREN AND YOUNG PEOPLE
LOCAL AUTHORITIES
SCHOOLS
CLUBS
COACHES
COUNTY SPORTS PARTNERSHIPS
EQUALITY AND DIVERSITY
TOWARDS AN EXCELLENT SERVICE
QUEST
DOWNLOADS
USEFUL LINKS
SHAPING PLACES THROUGH SPORT
BUILDING SCHOOLS FOR THE FUTURE
COMPREHENSIVE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT
PLANNING ACROSS BOUNDARIES
CONSULTATION
PARTNERSHIP DELIVERY
LOCAL STRATEGIC PLANNING
LAA KEY OBJECTIVES
LOCAL STRATEGIES
CORPORATE PERFORMANCE IMPROVEMENT
CPI BACKGROUND
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT OVERVIEW
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT TOOLS
VALUE OF SPORT
FUNDING
GUIDE TO CPA
Planning across boundaries
Corporate performance improvement
Background to corporate performance
Performance management overview
Performance management tools
Managing individual and team performance
The process of local sport & recreation strategy preparation
Key Docs
HM Treasury: Securing better outcomes; developing a new performance framework
HM Treasury: New Localism – Citizen Engagement, Neighbourhood and Public Services: Evidence from Local Government ODPM 2005
IDeA: Performance management: a cultural revolution
IDeA: A review of performance improvement models and tools
IDeA; Beyond consultation: public involvement in performance management
IDeA: Priorities and prioritisation:
Audit Commission: Public Sports and Recreation
Tools
General toolkit
Public Services Productivity Panel
IDeA: Online interactive tool
IDeA: Guidance on service planning
IDeA: Guidance on target setting
IDeA: PMMI guidance on PM IT systems
IDeA: Performance management and CPA,
IDeA: List of councils judged to be managing their performance well
For Sport, managing our performance as a means of improving the way we do things has been part of the agenda for a long time.
Until the mid-1980s council sports and recreation facilities were almost wholly managed in-house. Since then, there has been a shift towards management by private sector contractors, and more recently to management by trusts. Although in-house management still predominates, the proportion of trust-managed facilities has nearly doubled over the last four years to 21 per cent, with private contractors maintaining a constant 17 per cent share of provision.
Under this mix of market provision local authorities are still expected to be able to demonstrate good performance and value for money. Initially this was all about cost, and local authorities were required to go through Compulsory Competitive Tendering (CCT). Amongst other things this had the effect of separating “Client” and “Contractor” functions and gave rise to services being specified in a “contract”. Although this has not been a requirement for several years, the hangover from these arrangements can still be seen in councils today, with separation of financial, and sometimes operational, accountability.
After CCT came Best Value. Which was a wider but still prescriptive set of performance management requirements. Based on service reviews and external inspection, Best Value saw the rise of the Audit Commission’s role in interventionist activity in local government, and the development of a new government inspectorate within the Commission. Some Best Value initiatives are still with us, particularly the Best Value Performance Indicators (BVPIs).
The Government’s Comprehensive Performance Assessment process (CPA) followed Best Value and the emphasis on self assessment and continuous improvement came in. Alongside some very specific savings requirements – see Gershon - CPA still relies on inspection and scoring, both for organisations as a whole, and for specific services. CPA is now changing and possibly quite radically. In the short term the new CPA arrangements for District Councils are available. Those for single tier authorities are already out, but the agenda is set to change more radically after 2008.
It is likely that at all levels in delivering sport, setting standards, monitoring delivery and scrutiny, meeting local and stakeholder interests are taking over from national targets. Central Government controls will still be in place, but these will be focussed more towards monitoring how well Councils are responding to community needs and working with community partners, than on meeting national PIs.
This move away from essentially service based performance measures to locally based reporting of our performance is a real challenge. The HM Treasury / ODPM document “Securing better outcomes; developing a new performance framework” draws on the experience of Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) to inform a new approach to delivering performance reporting at a local level. (New Localism – Citizen Engagement, Neighbourhood and Public Services: Evidence from Local Government ODPM 2005). IT systems are now being developed that can be operated, accessed and managed by a range of partners and stakeholders. This means that you may soon be reporting, not to your local council on your performance, but direct to the local community itself.
More
East | East Midlands | London | North East | North West | South East | South West | West Midlands | Yorkshire
Graphic Version | How to use this site | Site map | A-Z Index | Contact Us