APPENDIX 2

HAMPSHIRE AND ISLE OF WIGHT

CHIEF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH OFFICERS GROUP

INTER AUTHORITY AUDIT FOR

ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL

AUDIT REPORT

AUTHORITY: Isle of Wight Council

DATE: 8^th October 2002

AUDITORS: Abigail Sleat and Neil Hince

SCOPE OF AUDIT: Environmental Control Matrix & Checklist

1.0 PERFORMANCE OF THE AUDIT

1.1 The Audit was conducted with Warren Haynes and Duncan MacDonald, Principal Environmental Health Officers, Environmental Protection. Discussions took place with other Officers in the Environmental Protection Team during the course of the Audit.

1.2 The Audit was carried out using the Environmental Control Audit Checklist (Version D May 2002 Final). The Authority was scored in accordance with the criteria given for each of the 12 elements in the Environmental Control Matrix April 2001.

1.3 Recommendations for further action and examples of best practice identified during the Audit have also been included in the report.

1.4 The Auditors would like to thank the Environmental Protection team for their assistance, openness and hospitality during the Audit.

2.0 OBSERVATIONS

2.1 ENFORCEMENT POLICY

2.1.1 The Environmental Health Enforcement Policy was adopted by Committee on 17 September 1999. The revised version of the Enforcement Policy was adopted by Committee on 7 November 2001.

2.1.2 The Policy is compliant with the principles of the Enforcement Concordat and the Authority has signed up to the Enforcement Concordat.

2.1.3 The Enforcement Policy is available on the Internet and leaflets are available at main reception. Leaflets are sent out to businesses when enforcement action is proposed.

2.1.4 29 files were inspected and all were found to consistent with the Enforcement Policy. 27 Notices were served during the assessment period. All of those examined were found to comply with the Enforcement Policy.

2.1.5 Summary for Enforcement Policy

Matrix Score: 4

Good Practice

1. The auditors were generally impressed by the standard of the case files and

in particular, the summary sheets at the front of each file that provided a quick and accurate summary of investigations. Detailed/current information from case files is readily available to all departmental staff enabling them to offer assistance to customers when the case officer is not available.

2.2 QUALITY ASSURANCE

2.2.1 There are systems of Quality Assurance in place for Environmental Control although the service is not accredited to ISO 9000.

2.2.2 Information sources such as Technical Indexes on-line and procedures produced for Environmental Control are controlled. Procedures are read only and cannot be amended by officers. Standard notices are in the process of being password protected. Staff are informed of revisions by the Principal EHO. Library information including encyclopaedias and Environmental Law reports are not controlled documents.

2.2.3 No internal auditing of the Quality Assurance system is carried out.

2.2.4 The Authority is participating in Inter Authority Auditing for Environmental Control and it is intended that the Head of Consumer Protection will review the Audit report.

2.2.5 There is a comprehensive peer review scheme. Bi-monthly reviews are carried out for all staff. The reviews include an assessment of officer workload and quality checks are made to assess that actions taken are compliant with the policies and procedures. Feedback and comments are made to officers and targets for work are set. Joint visits are also carried out from time to time.

2.2.6 Notices are peer reviewed by Principal Officers before service. There is a crib sheet available to assist accuracy of completion.

2.2.7 Case conference meetings are held weekly where officers can discuss complaints. An ‘Authority Panel’ including senior officers and legal representative reviews evidence put forward for prosecution.

2.2.8 Isle of Wight participated in Hampshire and Isle of Wight Benchmarking Club. Results have been reviewed and targets for remedial action set.

2.2.9 Summary for Quality Assurance

Matrix Score: 2

Good Practice

1. The Auditors favoured the idea of bi-monthly reviews and considered this to be a good way of assessing workloads, monitoring performance and ensuring consistency. This is cited as a best practice that other authorities may wish to adopt.

2. ‘Authority Panels’ are a useful means of ensuring that enforcement action is taken in accordance with the principles of the Enforcement policy and concordat principles.

Recommendations

1. Introduce full document control for the Environmental Control function.

2. Once quality assurance systems are in place, consider internal audit of system.

2.3 STAFF COMPETENCY

2.3.1 All officers are suitably qualified and competent for the tasks undertaken.

2.3.2 Allocation of work is matched to the experience and competence of officers indicated within their job descriptions and personal specifications and is related to the priority of a case.

2.3.3 Officers have delegated powers through the Department Scheme of Delegation. Authorisation of officers is based on their experience and competence. The level of authorisation is clearly displayed on identification cards.

2.3.4 The Authority does not have IIP accreditation.

2.3.5 Staff competency is reviewed through the bi-monthly reviews. In addition, peer review visits take place during out of hours visits although the process is not documented. Mentoring of staff is carried out from time to time as necessary.

2.3.6 Personal Performance Reviews (PPR) are carried out bi-annually where an individual’s performance is reviewed and objectives set. However, as this scheme was introduced after the assessment period for the audit review, it can not been taken into account within the matrix score.

2.3.7 A Departmental Staff Development Plan has been produced. Training needs and wants are identified and prioritised according to organisational needs. The Development and Training Strategy was again adopted after the assessment period.

2.3.8 Summary for Staff Competency

Matrix Score: 2

Best Practice

1. Bi-monthly reviews.

2. Training needs are prioritised within the new Development and Training Plan.

Note that neither of the above good practices could be taken into account because they were introduced after the assessment period. This has affected the matrix score.

2.4 COMMUNICATION WITH STAKEHOLDERS

2.4.1 Customer satisfaction surveys are not carried out. This has been identified as a need and is planned to be carried out when the new computer system is installed. Formal consultation with stakeholders (focus groups) was carried out as part of a Best Value review of the service.

2.4.4 The Authority has an equal opportunities policy, However, the policy deals solely with personnel issues within the Authority. No policy exists for equal opportunities for customers.

Although there is no formal policy at present, the Auditors considered that the team was providing a good range of options to enable those with disabilities or who were unable to visit the Council offices to access the Environmental Control Service. For example, the service can engage the assistance of Social Services Sound Advice or Braille service for hard of hearing or visually impaired. Officers make out of hours visits to complainants who are unable to make use of the service during the day. Ethnic minorities provide a very small population of the Council. To make sensible use of resources whilst meeting their needs, the Service can make use of Portsmouth Translation services where required.

2.4.5 Performance Information is published in the Council magazine that is distributed to all residents. This includes details of the number of requests for service, response rates and resolution times.

2.4.6 The Authority does not have a formal Business Partnership although they have a good working relationship with the Chamber of Commerce.

2.4.6 Summary for Communication with Stakeholders

Matrix Score: 0

Best Practice

1. Good relationship with Chamber of Commerce

2. Flexibility to deal with the needs of ethnic minorities, hard of hearing, visually impaired etc.

3. Publication of performance information includes resolution times.

Recommendations

1. Customer satisfaction surveys be routinely carried out on all aspects of the Environmental Control function. The matrix score will easily be increased once the proposed customer satisfaction survey is introduced.

2. That an equal opportunities policy specifically relating to customers be produced, adopted and implemented by Environmental Health.

3. Consider using forums like Local Business Partnership to raise awareness of the range of Environmental Control issues.

2.5 DERIVATION OF COSTS

2.5.1 Officers’ time is constantly recorded during the investigation of a case against each activity on the job sheet. This is a simple system that appears to increase accuracy and is considered in the Bi-monthly reviews. Time sheets are used for some activities where there is not a job sheet. e.g. for Local Authority Air Pollution Control (LAPC)

2.5.2 Information from this is coded allowing for easy collation of the total time spent on individual areas of Environmental Control, such as noise, air pollution, contaminated land etc. The costs are then calculated for each of these areas and fed into the budget process.

2.5.3 Summary for Derivation of Costs

Matrix Score: 4

Best Practice

1. The Auditors were impressed with the system for time recording which

appeared to be simple enough for staff to administer to a high degree of

accuracy.

2.6 EDUCATION/PROMOTION

2.6.1 Articles are produced from time to time within the Council Newsletter that is issued to all households 6 times a year. Interviews have been conducted with officers for the local radio station.

2.6.2 Authority participates in Local and National campaigns, including Noise Awareness Day. Environmental Protection also had a manned stand at the Garlic Festival. Presentations have been given to local schools and the police in an attempt to improve awareness of the service.

2.6.3 Leaflets are available in approximately 80% of subject areas. The leaflets are available in Environmental Protection and County Hall reception.

Information is to be included on the Environmental Protection website, that is currently under construction.

Leaflets are not specifically produced in ethnic languages. Again this has not been identified a need given the low population and resource implications. Portsmouth Translation services can be used if necessary.

2.6.4 Summary for Education/Promotion

Matrix Score: 3

Best Practice

1. Training Awareness Presentations e.g. to Police, to improve awareness and liaison.

2. Significant effort made to provide information to the public using a variety of methods, including radio, publications, roadshows etc.

2.7 NOISE SERVICE REQUESTS

2.7.1 The Authority has a noise complaint policy. This was last updated in August 2001 and has been formally adopted by the Council. The policy has not, however, been publicised.

2.7.2 The Authority has a general procedure for dealing with noise and separate procedures for audible intruder and vehicle alarms.

2.7.3 Requests for service are assigned one of three priorities; either High (response within 0-3 days), Medium (response within 4-8 days) or Low (response within 9-28 days). Targets for resolution times are also set.

2.7.4 12 cases were examined, including 5 cases where Notices had been served. Based on that evidence, the Auditors were satisfied that 100% of complaints were responded to within the performance targets set by the Authority and fully investigated.

2.7.5 It is estimated that the Authority achieves 80-90% responses within 3 working days, the performance target set by Hampshire Benchmarking Group.

2.7.6 Weekly case conferences act as an open forum for ensuring that all officers are aware of ongoing cases. Officers can also discuss any issues that they have.

2.7.6 Summary for Noise Service Requests

Matrix Score: 2

Best Practice

1. 100% case files complied with Authority’s Performance response rates. Performance targets are set against the priority of a case. Targets are set for resolution times.

Recommendations

1. Ensure noise complaint policy publicised

NOTE: It is noted that disparities between the Authority Performance Targets and those set by the Benchmarking Group mean that the Authority may never attain a higher score on the matrix. It is suggested that any reviews of the matrix consider whether an authority should be measured against its own performance targets and whether there is a need for considering resolution times.

2.8 OTHER SERVICE REQUESTS/CONSULTATIONS

2.8.1 The team responds to the full range of Environmental Control matters including other statutory nuisance investigations, consultations for planning and Public Entertainment Licences are also dealt with.

2.8.2 The Authority does not have a specific policy for other service requests.

2.8.3 The Authority has procedures for dealing with other service requests as well as a procedure for planning consultations.

2.8.4 12 other requests for service were examined. It was established that at least 90% of other service requests were responded to within the Authority’s own performance targets. It is estimated that 80-90% are responded to within 3 days as specified in the performance matrix.

2.8.5 4 consultations were examined. It was established that at least 100% are responded to within the authority’s own performance targets 10 working days. 84% were responded to within the matrix target of 10 working days.

2.8.6 A comprehensive book of standard conditions that were agreed at Corporate level was available.

2.8.7 Summary for Other Service Requests

Matrix Score: 2

Best Practice

1. Comprehensive book of planning conditions provided to assist consistency in dealing with planning applications.

Recommendations

1. Produce policies for other service requests and consultations and ensure these are adopted by Council and publicised

2. Enhance liaison with planners. Improve inter-departmental feedback and checking of conditions/ compliance following consultation on planning applications.

2.9 AIR QUALITY

2.9.1 The DETR has approved Stages 1 and 2 of the Air Quality Review and Assessment.

2.9.2 Consultation was carried out with Members, the EA, Highways, Planning and other agencies. The results of the Air Quality Review and Assessment have not been publicised but a summary is to be incorporated within the website shortly.

2.9.3 NO_x and SO_x tube surveys of the District are undertaken, but PM₁₀’s are not monitored. Quality control diffusion tubes are used.

2.9.4 Real time air quality monitoring is not carried out.

2.9.5 AIR QUALITY

Matrix Score: 2

Recommendation

1. Publicise a summary of the results of Air Quality Assessment and Review.

2.10 AUTHORISED PROCESSES

2.10.1 The Authority does have a policy for authorised processes.

2.10.2 A computer record to show allocations is kept and review sheets are shown at the front of each case file. Details, inspections, fees paid and reviews are all carefully recorded. All authorisations have had at least one review since they have been issued. 100% of authorisations have been reviewed in accordance with DETR guidance in the last 4 years.

2.10.3 The accounting system for charging income and cost accounting was comprehensive.

2.10.4 Summary of Authorised Processes

Matrix Score: 3

Best Practice

1. Good cost recording system.

2.11 CONTAMINATED LAND

2.11.1 Authority has produced a Contaminated Land Strategy which has been published and is operational. The timetable within the Strategy is being followed.

2.11.2 GIS is used and includes Environment Agency information, historical maps and historical land use data showing potential areas of contamination. Only designated Officers within Environmental Protection have access to this information and there is a Quality Assurance system in place for inputting data.

2.11.3 Good working relationship has been developed with local Environment Agency Officer to ensure liaison takes place where controlled water could be affected or potential special site.

2.11.4 Sites have been investigated when highlighted through planning process or by complaint. At the request stage planning lists are examined and any applications with potentially contaminated land are requested for review and further investigation.

2.11.6 Summary for Contaminated Land

Matrix Score: 3

Best Practice

1. Security controls and Quality Assurance procedure for data inputting.

2. Examination of all weekly planning lists for land potentially contaminated by designated officer.

3. The GIS database appears to be user friendly and the records comprehensive.

2.12 OTHER ISSUES

2.12.1 Isle of Wight is a member of SERMG and participates in the sampling programme. A variety of terrestrial samples are taken in accordance with SERMG procedure.

2.12.2 Quarterly reports are put in the members room for information. Proposed to put information on the Internet.

2.12.3 Audits carried out at the request of SERMG.

2.12.4 No sampling of recreational water is undertaken. This is carried out by another Department.

2.12.5 Summary for Other Issues

Matrix Score: 2

3.0 CONCLUSIONS

3.1 Appendix A contains a summary of the matrix scores, examples of best practice and recommendations for further improvement identified during the Audit. It is recommended that as part of the management review of the Audit, that an Action Plan is developed to address these recommendations.

3.2 The service performed very well in the areas of enforcement policy and cost derivation. Scores for lower achieving elements of the matrix such as authorisations and communication with stakeholders could be improved relatively easily by the introduction of appropriate policies. It is noted that the Authority failed to make a higher audit score in some cases where the matrix performance target is different to the Local Authority’s own performance target. The Isle of Wight system of prioritising cases and assigning targets in accordance with the priority was considered to be good practice and it may be useful for the Benchmarking Group to review this system as well as the use of resolution times as another target.

3.3 Strengths noted during the audit included the good team working and communication between Officers. Other strengths noted include the Bi-monthly reviews and comprehensive yet accurate time recording system. The procedures followed for proactive investigation of contaminated land and the comprehensive database were also considered to be strengths.

APPENDIX A

MATRIX SCORES

Enforcement Policy	4
Quality Assurance System	2
Staff Competency	2
Communication with Stakeholders	0
Derivation of Costs	4
Education/Promotion	3
Noise Service Request	2
Other Service Requests/Consultations	2
Air Quality	2
Authorised Processes	3
Contaminated Land	3
Other Issues	2
Average Score	2.4

EXAMPLES OF BEST PRACTICE

· Standard of case files and summary sheets and accessibility to other team members

· Bi-monthly reviews

· Use of ‘Authority Panels’

· Staff Development and Training Plan

· Good relationship with Chamber of Commerce

· Flexibility to deal with needs of ethnic minorities, hard of hearing, visually impaired etc.

· Publication of Performance information included ‘resolution times’

· System of time recording – allows for high degree of accuracy

· Training Awareness Presentations e.g. to Police, to improve awareness and liaison

· Significant effort made to provide information to the public using a variety of methods, including radio, publications, roadshows etc.

· Performance targets set against priority of a case

· Performance targets for ‘resolution times’ and publication of this data

· Comprehensive book of standard planning conditions

· Good cost recording system for LAPC

· Security controls and Quality Assurance system for Contaminated Land Database. GIS system ‘user friendly’, records comprehensive

· Comprehensive examination of weekly planning lists for potentially contaminated land

RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER ACTION

1. Introduce full document control for the Environmental Control function

2. Once quality assurance systems in place, consider internal audit of system.

3. Customer satisfaction surveys should be routinely carried out on all aspects of the Environmental Control function

4. That an equal opportunities policy specifically relating to customers be produced, adopted and implemented by Environmental Health.

5. Consider using forums like Local Business Partnership to raise awareness of the range of Environmental Control issues.

6. Ensure that the noise complaint policy is publicised.

7. Produce policies for other service requests and consultations and ensure these are adopted by the Council and publicised.

8. Publicise a summary of the results of Air Quality Assessment and Review.