This snapshot taken on 30/12/2008, shows web content selected for preservation by The National Archives. External links, forms and search boxes may not work in archived websites.
Best Value in English Local Government:
Summary Results from the Census of Local Authorities in 2001
Executive summary prepared for the
Office of the Deputy Prime Minister
Gareth Enticott, Richard M. Walker, George A. Boyne, Steve Martin and Rachel Ashworth
on behalf of the Cardiff Business School
based Research Team
September 2002
Executive Summary
- This report summarises the results of a major survey of local authorities undertaken as part of the long-term evaluation of the impact of Best Value. The evaluation has been commissioned by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and is being undertaken by a research team led by the Local and Regional Government Research Unit at Cardiff University. The aim of this first census survey is to provide the baseline for the longitudinal evaluation of the impact of Best Value. The census survey focus upon:
- Best Value processes - the way in which authorities implement Best Value;
- Process outcomes - the impact Best Value has on the ways in which authorities design, procure and deliver their services, and;
- Local authority performance.
- The report provides a ‘snapshot’ of the perceptions of a large number and wide range of officers and elected members from a majority of English local authorities in April 2001. The findings are based on the responses of nearly 3,000 officers and members (534 corporate officers, 1,821 service officers and 481 elected members) in 314 English local authorities. The data reveal mixed perceptions of the impact of the Best Value regime in its first year. However, several key messages emerge from the respondents:
- Implementing Best Value is seen as having been a major challenge for most authorities;
- Best Value is regarded as a major driver for organisational change and performance improvement;
- There is mixed evidence that local authorities display some of the process outcomes anticipated from the Best Value regime. Further conclusions will only emerge after future annual surveys about the ways they design, procure and deliver their services;
- The regime has led to improvements to the performance management frameworks in many councils, and;
- Service reviews are producing ambitious targets for improvement, many of which are expected to be achieved within the next two years.
- The census survey highlights some concerns about the way that Best Value is being implemented at the local level. In particular:
- The application of the 4Cs is seen as varied. Consultation with the public and service users is reported to have featured prominently in most reviews, although contact with local businesses has been less common. Tests of competitiveness are not seen by respondents as having been a major part of most reviews;
- Many respondents were critical of the role of external inspectors. The costs associated with inspection were widely seen as having been too high. But pressure from inspectors is regarded as one of the main external drivers of performance improvement, and;
- In many cases the level of political leadership and member involvement in Best Value was relatively low and it was usually corporate officers who took the lead in developing Best Value policy.
- The evidence provided by the current ‘snapshot’ of officers’ and members’ perceptions of the first year of the Best Value regime is mixed. However, there is no evidence to suggest that different types of authority adopted radically different approaches to Best Value in the first year of the regime. There is, however, some evidence in relation to small district councils suggesting that:
- Best Value appears to have been particularly challenging for small districts, and;
- Small districts may be lagging behind other types of authority in terms of the kinds of organisational attributes that Best Value might be expected to encourage.
- The findings also highlight a variety of different voices in relation to Best Value:
- Elected members were more likely than officers to report that their authorities' had implemented Best Value processes;
- The service officers in our sample were favourable about the prospects for service improvement and were more likely to believe that their services had the internal culture, process and strategy characteristics that the Best Value regime might be expected to encourage, and;
- On the whole, corporate officers were less inclined than other respondents to report that their authorities had implemented Best Value processes, and that the kinds of organisational attributes that the Best Value regime might be expected to encourage, were present.
- It is too early to assess the impact of the Best Value regime on the performance of local authorities. Future rounds of the survey of authorities will allow us to draw much firmer conclusions and to compare perceptions of change with changes in performance – as measured by the BVPIs and resident satisfaction. Analysis of the results of the current survey and Best Value performance indicators data for 2001-2002 provide little evidence of any link between an authorities’ performance and its approach to Best Value, or its ‘corporateness’.
- The findings of this survey broadly mirror the experiences of the Best Value pilots and the findings of external auditors and inspectors as reported in the Audit Commission (2001) report Changing Gear. However, the overall picture emerging from the census survey is more positive. Respondents on the whole, and in particular the 1,800 service officers, were more optimistic about Best Value than inspectors. But they are also more sceptical about the value of Best Value inspection processes than was suggested by research undertaken last year for the Audit Commission.
- The differences in the findings clearly reflect the larger sample in this study, than that solicited by the Audit Commission. However, they could also reflect differences in view between our survey respondents and inspectors about what constitutions significant improvement. Alternatively, local authorities could believe that it is possible to deliver improvements through incremental changes to their existing approaches to service delivery, whilst inspectors set much greater store by new approaches to service delivery.
- We will, however, track these issues over the coming years, through future surveys of authorities and in-depth case studies. In particular, we will focus on:
- Performance improvement and the links with Best Value;
- Inspection and how respondents experience the recent proposals to streamline the regime and introduce more 'proportionate' external regulation;
- Monitoring the use of, and barriers to, the 4Cs including which ones, or which combination is effective in driving performance improvement;
- Partnerships with the private sector, and;
- Variations in the experiences between different types of authorities and the different actors in the process.
Outline of the main report:
Executive Summary
Section 1: Introduction
Section 2: Methodology
—an outline of the survey methodology and the ‘theory of change’ upon which the research is based.Section 3: Best Value Processes
—an analysis of the extent to which in its first year, the Best Value regime is perceived by local authorities to have led to the implementation of performance management frameworks, and other processes encouraged or required by the legislation and guidance. Differences in perceptions between officers and elected members, and between different types of authority, are highlighted.Section 4: Drivers of Performance Improvement
—an assessment of respondents’ perceptions of what have been the key (internal and external) drivers of performance improvement in their authority.Section 5: Process Outcomes
—an examination of the extent to which the organisational characteristics encouraged by Best Value are perceived to be in place across different types of authority.Section 6: Assessments of Local Authority Performance in 2001
—a brief description of respondents’ perceptions of their authority’s performance in 2001, including a preliminary analysis of the relationship between performance and (1) organisational context, (2) authorities' approach to Best Value, and (3) ‘corporateness’.Authors:
The census on which this report is based was undertaken by the research team and commissioned by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister to evaluate the long-term impact of Best Value. The survey was conducted by Gareth Enticott. It was designed and overseen by Richard M Walker, George A Boyne and Steve Martin. The analysis of the Best Value performance indicators was undertaken by Rachel Ashworth.
Acknowledgements
We acknowledge with gratitude the assistance of the large numbers of elected members and officers throughout English local government who completed the census. We also acknowledge comments on an earlier draft of the census template from Ian Sanderson from Leeds Metropolitan University and Andrew O’Reilly from the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister.
For further information see:
www.cf.ac.uk/carbs/research/lrgru and www.local-regions.odpm.gov.uk/research/index.htm
