1. Torbay Council Partnerships Review August 2006

2. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Date Page 2 Torbay Council Partnerships Background The Audit Commission defines partnership as “an agreement between two or more independent bodies to work collectively to achieve an objective” Source: Governing Partnerships, Oct 2005 Torbay has entered into a wide range of partnership arrangements to plan for and meet the needs of the various communities within the bay. These range from Ward Partnerships (reviewed in 2003/06), to Torbay Development Agency and the Torbay Strategic Partnership. This review assesses Torbay’s approach to partnership working by focussing on a sample of three partnerships.

3. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Date Page 3 Torbay Council Partnerships Focus of the Review Torbay Care Trust Coast and Countryside Trust, Play Partnership For each, we considered and analysed Objectives and targets Inputs and outcomes Performance management Governance Relationships Approach Meetings with Chief Executive, Mayor, Director/s and lead officers Meetings or focus group with representatives of partners Interview selected Members Document review – eg SLA’s, objectives / intended outcomes, performance reports.

4. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Date Page 4 Torbay Council Partnerships Findings 1: Care Trust Evidence of Added Value Efficiencies are being achieved (budget reduction) Plans to reduce spend further (without reducing service) are in place Need to consider whether there are further savings to be followed through at the Council – support service reduction Working relationships and leadership Initial success of partnership was a result of effective working relationships and ability of partners to adapt Relationships at the top level continue to be positive overall Continued support from Council leaders is fundamental Care Trust had not anticipated the impact of local democracy Governance Partnership agreement is quite comprehensive and annual agreement is being updated Lead member is actively involved Scrutiny of Care Trust has been active There is a recognised need for a joint Board / officer meeting There are differing views re clarity of role councillors on the Trust Board

5. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Date Page 5 Torbay Council Partnerships Findings 1: Care Trust (ctd) Performance Management Evidence of performance improvement in selected indicators Targets set were not revised to link with reduction in budget – need to be decided at an earlier stage (plans in place this year to address) Clear evidence of reporting and some challenge at Performance Improvement Meetings Financial Management / Risks Key issue of budget agreement and overspend risk to Torbay if Care Trust plans are not realised The agreement states that “overspends will be apportioned in a just and equitable manner” – more clarity is needed Serving the public Some evidence that early pilots have led to improved service delivery (external consultant’s report) Key decisions are being tested by the public / consultation Service users are being engaged in key decisions

6. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Date Page 6 Torbay Council Partnerships Findings 2: Coast and Countryside Trust Added Value clear financial and asset benefits – increased resources for standstill funding from Torbay There has been no formal review of benefits Working relationships and leadership Torbay Members and Officers demonstrate commitment Working relationships seem open, positive and supportive “if anything, the partnership has become stronger over time” Chief Exec C&CT Governance Rapid turnover of councillor representative Clarity needed re role of council member – effectiveness of role currently depends on individual The agreement allows for significant control (and flexibility) by the Trust over its own activities and strategies Torbay Officers have been actively engaged in range of activities

7. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Date Page 7 Torbay Council Partnerships Findings 2: Coast and Countryside Trust (ctd) Performance Management Activities are reported at Trust meetings but it is not clear how performance is measured The agreement does not specify standards to be achieved or activities undertaken Financial and risk Management The current annual agreement of budget causes difficulties for long term planning Overall, the existence of the Coast and Countryside Trust reduces the financial risk to Torbay and the public Serving the public Activities are actively reported to the general public via website, leaflets There is active involvement and consultation with a wide range of interest groups

8. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Date Page 8 Torbay Council Partnerships Findings 3: Play Partnership: Added Value Appropriate use of skills and shared use of resources to identify needs, consult communities and bid for funding Has achieved funding that the council on its own would not have achieved – value for money Working relationships and Leadership Demonstrated shared ownership of strategy – jointly developed Positive working relationships and clear commitment (of time and effort) Shared implementation of strategy (still at early stages) Governance Good representation from wide range of bodies Key attendees have decision making authority on behalf of their own organisations – speeds decision making Torbay officers act in key secretarial and management role

9. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Date Page 9 Torbay Council Partnerships Findings 3: Play Partnership (ctd) Performance Management Delivery of the Play Strategy is written into Torbay service plans – performance of these scrutinised by PIMs and O&S Progress of the partnership is self-monitored Serving the public Clear and highly effective involvement of public and reporting back results to community groups and public Finance and Risks Evidence of pooling of budgets to allow flexibility and maximise funding Torbay provide secretarial support and key roles – minimises potential risk High involvement of various communities raised expectations but also created disappointment

10. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Date Page 10 Torbay Council Partnerships Conclusions re partnership working What Torbay are doing well…. Generally considered to be a good partner – but could always do better! Demonstrates by behaviours of key officers that they are working in partnership – commitment of time and resource, trust Culture of partnership working has filtered down through the organisation Some efficiency savings are being achieved via partnerships Documentation supporting some Partnerships is fairly comprehensive Partnerships are bringing increased resources to Torbay

11. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Date Page 11 Torbay Council Partnerships Conclusions re Partnership Working (ctd) - Areas for improvement There is no hard evidence of cost benefit analysis or estimate of VFM or cost v outcomes before entering (or after entering partnerships) There is no policy or strategy re entering partnerships Strategic objectives and roles could be more clearly defined from the outset Documentation could be more tightly worded in some cases to reduce risk and assist performance management Targets and outcomes need to be set and reviewed to reflect resources allocated to partnerships There is no systematic review of partnerships

12. PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Date Page 12 Torbay Council Partnerships Recommendations Develop and introduce a partnership strategy: to include Issues to be considered before entering Definition of strategic objectives Role of Members Governance arrangements Targets and performance elements Standard of conduct for members and officers re partnership working Cost / Benefit analysis Systematic review of Partnerships (with partners) to include (effectiveness, outcomes and future involvement) The Council and Care Trust should assess if a more formal basis of agreeing overruns is required to ensure that there is a transparent method of apportioning spends. Revisit the Coast and Countryside Trust agreement – consider the possibility of a longer term funding arrangement in return for more specific performance management