|
RESOURCES SELECT COMMITTEE - 3 FEBRUARY 2005 GREAT ACCESS TO GREAT SERVICES (GAGS) ACCOUNTABILITY REPORT OF THE
HEAD OF SELECT COMMITTEE AND REVIEW TEAM |
REASON FOR SELECT
COMMITTEE CONSIDERATION
This report was requested by the Resources Select Committee, which
agreed the terms of reference for the Review at its meeting on 2 August 2004.
|
ACTION REQUIRED BY THE SELECT COMMITTEE 1)
To receive the report, note current progress and make any recommendations
to the Executive that it feels necessary to achieve full accountability
regarding the GAGS Programme. 2)
To review progress as part of the new Work Programme of the Select
Committee, post election. 3)
To recommend that the Portfolio Holder reviews the Customer Services
performance indicators within the QPMR as recommended by the Programme Board |
BACKGROUND
The Committee had received a report on a number of issues relating to GAGS,
but requested the Select Committee and Review Team to undertake a further
review under the following terms of reference
i) outline the current GAGS project “structure” and “lines of responsibility”, ie the position of the Executive, Select Committee(s), Programme Board, Directors Group, Special Interest Group (Members), Task Force (ICT, Property Services etc), Core Group, Front Office Working Group etc.
ii) ascertain perceived gaps / weaknesses in accountability / the decision-making processes, unclear responsibilities and associated issues / problems.
iii) Identify what the criteria should be for strong accountability.
iv) outline options for a clearer, more accountable structure / set of reporting lines, at the Member / Senior Officer level, to allow the GAGS project to be carried out more effectively.
RELEVANT PLANS,
POLICIES, STRATEGIES AND PERFORMANCE INDICATORS
Improving access to Council services is now a key Council priority and
the four core GAGS principles have been approved and endorsed at various meetings
of the Authority.
There are 5 performance indicators that are monitored through the QPMR,
namely
1)
customer
enquiries dealt with at the first point of contact – as a % of total enquiries
logged on the CRM system
2)
average
response time to answer telephone calls
3)
average time to
see customers upon arrival
4)
number of
complaints upheld relating to failure to achieve service standards – as a % of
all customer complaints upheld
5)
overall
customer satisfaction rating. (Target is for 90% of respondents to state that
they received service that was at least GOOD or better)
CONSULTATION
PROCESS
This report has been produced following consultation with Portfolio
Holder (also the Chairman of the GAGS Programme Board), the Head of Legal and Democratic
Services, the Head of Organisational Development (also the GAGS Project
Manager) and the Project Support Officer.
FINANCIAL, LEGAL,
CRIME AND DISORDER IMPLICATIONS
The main financial implication arising from recent changes in the way
GAGS is being delivered, which is endorsed by this report, is that all projects
coming within the GAGS Programme should be fully costed and have agreed
budgets. The Project Manager should highlight any budget shortfalls to allow
discussion on financing options, possible virements / savings and / or work
that will not be possible to commence.
Depending upon the option chosen for how the Programme Board is
constituted in future, there could be implications as to its decision-making
powers.
No Crime and Disorder or specific Legal implications have been
identified.
APPENDICES
ATTACHED
GAGS Accountability report – 12 January 2005
(Steve Milford)
GAGS Shaping Paper – 18 November 2004 (David Price)
Contact Point : Steve Milford, Principal Review Officer, ext 3620
([email protected])