1. New Forest District Council Service planning surgery – PPRN 19/1/07

2. The basics Integrated within the expenditure and strategic planning processes (see Performance Management Framework) Fundamental and annual review options – Annual review light touch adjustment and update of service plan; – Fundamental review - major challenge of procurement, efficiency, process, objectives, customer/ partners perspective etc Review of performance links in with existing quarterly exception reporting of indicators and targets Medium term improvement plans – at least 3 to 4 year period

4. Involvement of others Lead scrutiny member involved in development of plans Portfolio holders prioritise improvement plans and resources – Annual review – more lead scrutiny involvement who report by exception to their panel; portfolio holder’s key decision – Fundamental review – portfolio holder more heavily involved process, cabinet approval Customer assessments on a continual basis for annual; residents (citizen’s panel or as appropriate) for fundamental review Services encouraged to include staff and customers in development of plans

5. Support to services Service planning guidelines available online Key headings for service to follow – provided these are included format flexible – Outline of service – Contribution to Corporate Plan – Medium term issues and opportunities – Resources – Consultation – Performance results and overall assessment of performance – Corporate Issues – Service Improvement Plan Optional pro-formas to complete Corporate issues covered through planning such as ICT, HR, equalities, risk assessment – individual officers drive initiatives Individual meetings with each service and Performance officer to improve aspects of their service planning skills Services drive their own assessments and plans

6. What Next? Improved monitoring of service improvement plans Implementation of performance management system More outcome focussed performance management Monthly reporting on measures Include risk assessment and resources allocation against SIP

7. Issues …. Are we trying to include too much? Is the flexible approach really working – does it matter if all plans are different? Will we get better results with a more corporate led process? Limited drive/ input from senior management - No impetus to undertake fundamental service reviews Want to change from paper exercise to adding value Do you monitor the plans and/or service improvement plans? Getting the challenge right – fundamental review every 4 years enough? How are resources (financial and staff) considered against service improvement plans in other authorities Are corporate plans/ priorities really driving the service plans?