Partners IN Salford Delivery & Governance

Feedback on the suggestions from recent consultation for discussion by Salford Strategic Partnership Executive

The question we want to answer

What would a Local Strategic Partnership fit for Salford’s needs do and look like?

• • • • •

Thinking about…….

LAA Delivery at city and neighbourhood level Integrating public services where necessary Aligning public sector resources (Increasingly) enabling efficiencies and transformation Linking the local to the central

• • • • • • • • • In summary, we have developed proposals that should deliver better outcomes for Salford

A clearer, more meaningful role for the current SSP Board More clout for the LSP Executive with more focus on aligning partners resources and public sector reform and efficiency Strengthened senior level support for the Executive through the LAA Board – disbanding current SSP Mgt Group Retain thematic approach but stronger focus on joint commissioning within themes Reconciles ‘Thinks’ and Thematics into one structure Small number of focused Joint Commissioning Groups to bring themes together on most challenging and more cross cutting issues Stronger relationship between neighbourhood/locality delivery and governance and LSP level work Clearer relationship between LSP and scrutiny functions Joined up research and intelligence

Methodology (July – September 2009) • Follow on from Future Search and Spotlight • Consultation interviews and group sessions with 28 representatives from across the partnership • We took a ‘form follows function’ approach – Strategic – Executive – Thematic – Neighbourhood/Community (through links with the Neighbourhood Review) – Support processes (research and intelligence, performance management, etc) • Best practice from other LSPs and the Audit Commission

Key proposal 1: We need to ensure widespread partner input into the LSP – ‘a broad church’

Required functions:

• • • • •

Ensure widespread and meaningful input into the vision and direction for the city Reflection of the diversity of the city – communities and services Ensure clarity, understanding, consensus and sounding board for progress reports ‘Think’ time on major issues Joint learning and development opportunities Suggestions:

• • • •

Reform SSP Board to become the ‘SSP Strategic Forum’ to better reflect these functions Forum informs and affirms overall direction, supports production, progress and delivery of the Sustainable Community Strategy (SCS) and Local Area Agreement (LAA) All members of the SSP Board to be involved elsewhere in the LSP structure Membership to be reviewed to include duty to cooperate partner authorities

Key proposal 2: Executive drives strong and focused leadership of public service delivery, reform and efficiency – Community leadership in action • • • •

Required functions: Highest level joint ownership of vision and delivery Strong capacity to resolve key concerns Ensuring alignment of partner’s business plans and resources with SCS and LAA Driving reform and efficiency across public services Suggestions:

• • • •

SSP Executive remains accountable for driving forward the strategic direction and delivery of the partnership SSP Executive to focus more strongly on alignment of business plans and resources, opportunities for transformation and efficiency Ensure the SSP Executive reflects a ‘tight’ and focused group of senior representatives Senior level LAA Programme Board to support the SSP Executive by coordinating and monitoring delivery of performance and commissioning – replacing the SSP Management Group

Key proposal 3: Driving delivery - a thematic model that can share priorities better • • •

Principles: Retain a thematic approach but … Identify accountable agency/ies for each ‘theme’ Themes each manage cross cutting issues eg cohesion, community engagement SSP Executive LAA Programme Board SSP Forum Joint intelligence, research, performance management… Health & Wellbeing LAA objectives on…

• • •

Reducing smoking Reducing obesity Reducing alcohol and drug misuse

• • •

Reducing teenage pregnancy Maximising quality of life for older people Safeguarding vulnerable adults Crime & Disorder Reduction

•

Reducing the fear of crime

•

Reducing anti-social behaviour Children & Young People

•

Reducing numbers of looked after children

• •

Increasing educational attainment Improving parenting

•

Reducing child poverty Work & Skills

•

Increasing basic skills

• •

Increasing access to higher education Reducing worklessness City, Housing Transport & Environment

•

Addressing climate change

• •

Improving transport connectivity to services Growing and developing business and enterprise in Salford

• •

Developing MediaCityUK Maximising access to affordable, decent homes

•

Increasing environmental attractiveness Shared Priority Joint Strategic Commissioning Groups (Number TBD)

Making commissioning central to delivery and sharing priorities Commissioning is a continuous cycle with four phases each as important as the other. Resourcing analysis and service planning without monitoring would make it difficult for commissioners to understand what outcomes they were achieving and the quality of commissioned activities.

1. ANALYSE

citizen’s and customer’s needs and aspirations Quantitative Data Perception Data Community Engagement

2. PLAN

how to help citizens and customers to meet their needs and aspirations Strategy Operational Planning Procurement

4. REVIEW

delivery to check how well we are helping citizens and customers to meet their needs and aspirations Performance Monitoring Evaluation; Learning Changing Delivery

3. DO

secure and manage delivery to help citizens and customers to meet their needs and aspirations Operational Delivery

We need to join up on some things more than others

Tier 1 Partnership Priorities that can be delivered by individual organisations No Delivery Risk Less case for integration Tier 2 Priorities that require to be delivered by a number of partners Some delivery risk Clear case for joining up Tier 3 Priorities that are everybody’s business Critical delivery risk Clear that outcome is everybody’s business

Joint Strategic Commissioning is of most importance for Tier 2 and Tier 3 Priorities

Driving delivery – Joint Commissioning Groups

Skills & Work Aspects of Skills & Work Child Poverty Aspects of Health Inequalities Aspects of Enterprise Development Joint Strategic Commissioning Group – ‘people’ Key agencies who can deliver on more complex people issues: eg: Council, PCT, JCP, Police, Children’s, Services, College… Aspects of 13-19 Attainment Family Support Aspects of Crime Reduction & Reducing Re offending

Key Proposal 4: ‘Top down meets bottom up’ – links with neighbourhood/community delivery • • •

Required functions: A robust way for local priorities to directly inform central and local planning and vice versa Neighbourhoods and communities can access and impact on the success of the LSP Cross-cutting issues (eg community cohesion, community engagement etc) need to be owned and addressed by the executive thematic structures

• •

Suggestions: This work to be synchronised with the emerging recommendations of the Neighbourhood Review There is a requirement for a challenge and coordination function for the cross-cutting activities:

 Community Cohesion  Community Engagement and Empowerment  Narrowing the Gap    Communities of Identity Neighbourhood Working (the Neighbourhood Review) 3rd Sector Access and Influence

Delivery is owned throughout the system – issues and priorities escalate up and down as needed Executive Sub Region Region National (LAA/MAA) LAA Programme Board Thematic and Joint Commissioning Groups Neighbourhood Partnership Boards Neighbourhood arrangements (tbd)

Key Proposal 5: Joint Support Processes • •

Required functions: A joint ‘engine room’ of support services is required to underpin the delivery of the city’s priorities (eg Research, Intelligence, Performance Management etc) Driving efficiency and effectiveness in these common functions

• • • •

Suggestions: Think Efficiency and Collaborate to Innovate to provide more joined up support for partnerships and commissioners Clear links to the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny function Support mechanisms to include representation from across the partnership for:

 Research & Intelligence     Performance Management Project Management Partnership Working Evaluation  Equalities and Diversity

Joint Strategic Commissioning to be developed as the key underpinning process for driving partnership delivery

Summary: each piece has a critical and distinct role to play to add value SSP Forum SSP Executive LAA programme Board

Oversight, partnership development and engagement Sets priorities, ultimate accountability, high level strategy and delivery, driving public sector reform Overseeing whole LAA and SCS delivery, gripping and driving delivery on key risks and cross cutting issues, supports Executive Strategy, commissioning and performance management within and across themes Thematics and Joint Commissioning Groups Joint research, intelligence and performance mgt

Neighbourhood arrangements

Central and local needs analysis, research, performance management Area planning and delivery, community engagement, local accountability

• • • • • • • • • In summary, we have developed proposals that should deliver better outcomes for Salford

A clearer, more meaningful role for the current SSP Board More clout for the LSP Executive with more focus on aligning partners resources and public sector reform and efficiency Strengthened senior level support for the Executive through the LAA Board – disbanding current SSP Mgt Group Retain thematic approach but stronger focus on joint commissioning within themes Reconciles ‘Thinks’ and Thematics into one structure Small number of focused Joint Commissioning Groups to bring themes together on most challenging and more cross cutting issues Stronger relationship between neighbourhood/locality delivery and governance and LSP level work Clearer relationship between LSP and scrutiny functions Joined up research and intelligence