Agenda item

This year-end update report outlines South Kesteven District Councils performance against the Corporate Plan Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) for the year of 2022/2023. The end of year data represents information up to 31 March 2023.

The Head of Corporate Projects, Policy and Performance presented the report that built on historical reports to provide an update on performance to the end of the 2022/2023 financial year. It incorporated the changes recommended by the last KPI review to outline areas of the council’s performance which were successful and to advise where challenges may lay.

Appendix A within the report outlined the overall performance against the original actions, as well as specific performance against the sub measures contained within those. Specific commentary was provided for each action, and summarised as follows:

·       Four of the actions are rated Green. These are actions which are on or above target as planned.

·       One action was rated as Amber, these are those off target by less than 10% or where milestone achievement is delayed but with resolution in place to be achieved within a reasonable timeframe.

·       One action was rated as Red, this is falling significantly below target.

One Member raised a query on extending the provision of Closed Circuit Television (CCTV) cameras within certain areas of the District using the UK Shared Prosperity Fund.

The Assistant Director of Operations and Public Protection confirmed that the current proposal for CCTV was to upgrade the existing cameras rather than adding any additional cameras at this time.

The Police and Crime Commissioner was preparing a report in relation to CCTV across Lincolnshire regarding location and provision, however this report would not include any provision or funding for additional cameras. It would seek to identify existing and potential opportunities.

It was suggested that the Committee receive a report in the future on CCTV.

Members congratulated Officers on securing funding of £284,000 to change the historic analogue CCTV system to digital.

Another Member raised concern on the significant increase in anti-social behaviour at the parks in Grantham.

An explanation was requested as to why priority number 10, protecting our most vulnerable residents with robust, safeguarding processes, was rated red.

The Acting Director of Housing confirmed there had been a high staff turnover, over the last 12-18 months. All new starters had been issued with online training packages. It was emphasised that Line Managers should be ensuring their team complete the safeguarding training in a timely manner.

Safeguarding sessions had also been undertaken for elected Members through the induction process, where 57% of Members attended.

Concern was raised on the data sharing of information between the Council’s Housing Department and the Local Policing Team regarding protection orders.

The Council had liaised with the Police around reinforcing partnership working with the use of the case management system, E-Cins. Monthly meetings also took place where all ongoing anti-social behaviour cases were discussed and logged onto the system.

A Member queried whether all existing staff employed by the Council had received relevant training, particularly Officers that visit properties and possible vulnerable residents.

The Acting Director of Housing clarified that all Housing Officers, Assistants and Trade workers had received their Prevent and Safeguarding training to ensure full awareness of their responsibilities. Over 85% of the current safeguarding referrals made by the Council had come from the Housing department in the past 24 months. A Domestic Abuse Officer had recently been employed to identify and tackle any potential safeguarding issues.

It was questioned whether staff were expected to complete training annually or whether it was enrolling training only.

It was highlighted that every new starter completed their training within the first six months of their employment. Staff are then required to complete further refresher training every 24 months.

A Member queried as to why the induction training had a timescale of six months, rather than the first few days of employment. It was suggested that an induction programme before commencing a new role would seem sensible.

There was a more urgent dispatch of training for front line Officers of the Council. The current training offering was a best-practice online course and not all employees were working online, which allowed them the caveat of six months to complete the training. New employees were reminded of the completion of training at induction.

Clarification was sought around the safeguarding of residents in the District living in private rented accommodation. For which it was confirmed the same principles applied to the safeguarding of residents living in private rented accommodation.

The current percentage of trained staff (37%) was discussed. It was queried as to whether the target of 100% could be reached and if so, the timescale of this.

It was confirmed that the completion target was 100% for all staff. The percentage had increased at the end of 2022 to approximately 70% completion. The aim was to have 100% of staff trained on a rolling basis, however staff turn around may affect the completion percentage. Further reporting frequency had been requested to ensure that staff can be reminded of completion.

A Member queried whether staff were given time out of their working day to complete the training and whether there had been any issues surrounding access.

The Acting Director of Housing clarified that those Officers who did not utilise a laptop during their day-to-day duties, would be given time within their first two weeks of employment to complete the training within the office.

It was hoped that all staff would be trained by the end of the calendar year.

The Chairman reiterated the importance of elected Members completing their safeguarding training. 

A Member queried the ‘not-reported’ KPI’s set out in the report.

The Head of Corporate Projects, Policy and Performance clarified that the KPI’s ‘not-reported’ were those completed, amended during the Corporate Plan period or incorporated to other KPI’s. Other KPI’s within the report were the responsibility of other Overview and Scrutiny Committees.

AGREED:

1.    To review and scrutinise the performance against the Corporate Plan Key Performance Indicators in relation to the delivery of the Corporate Plan priorities and outcomes.

2.    Use the report to inform and support ongoing work programme.