Agenda item

Andy Bates (Principal Adviser) introduced the item which set out the findings of the independent evaluation of the LGA Corporate Peer Challenge programme, along with the initial response. Some recommendations were being considered for immediate implementation, whilst Members’ guidance was sought on a number of other recommendations outlined in the report.

Discussion

In the discussion that followed, Members comments’ included:

·         Members of the Board discussed the report from Cardiff University and expressed disappointment that it had not gone further in identifying more tangible or quantifiable data evidencing the impact of the Corporate Peer Challenge. Members highlighted the importance of evidencing the impact as an integral part of continuing to strengthen the sector-led improvement offer.

·         Going forward, the Board suggested securing more systematic, structured and quantitative feedback from Leaders and Chief Executives from participating councils.

·         Whilst considering the recommendations in paragraph 7 of the report, members highlighted that a number of the recommendations already reflect current LGA practice. 

·         The Board discussed the challenge of encouraging all councils to actively engage in peer challenges and highlighted the importance of a proactive approach so as to mitigate against any potential future Government intervention. In doing so, the value of opposition members in making the case for CPCs within their authorities was emphasised.

·         Members agreed the aim of the recommendation at 7.14, but concluded that publication of non-engaging councils would not necessarily deliver the desired outcome and risked being counterproductive. Members noted that details of non-participating councils were already shared with Lead Members and the political group offices to purse through political channels.

·         Members also suggested that meetings of the appropriate lead regional member peer and Principal Adviser with the Leader and Chief Executive might be a good way of overcoming any reluctance to take up the CPC offer, along with professional routes where necessary and appropriate.

·         Whilst the Board concurred with 7.19 in principle, members noted that where Member Peers were not from the ruling group, the expectation should be for them to seek to influence and encourage take up by their authority.

Decisions

The Improvement and Innovation Board:

      i.        noted the key findings from the independent evaluation of the LGA Corporate Peer Challenge Programme;

     ii.        agreed the evaluation’s recommendations and LGA’s initial responses as set out in paragraph 7.1 to 7.13;

    iii.        agreed that the recommendation to publish a list of councils that have not yet engaged with CPC (paragraph 7.14) not be adopted;

   iv.        agreed recommendations and actions 7.17 – 7.19, subject to amendment to reflect differing expectations for Member Peers that were not from within the ruling group; and

    v.        agreed that systematic and structured feedback following Peer Reviews be sought from elected members and officers within participating councils.

Actions

1.    Continue to provide a confidential list of those authorities currently yet to undertake or commit to a CPC to Lead Members and Political Group Offices. Paul Clarke

2.    Implement systematic and structured post CPC feedback mechanisms with participating members and officers. Principle Advisers