Agenda and minutes

In Councillor Michael Devaney absence, Councillor Dennis Edgerly took the Chair for this meeting of the Task Group.

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Alan Cain and Michael Devaney and Claire Thompson (Performance, Partnership and Equality Manager)

Members are reminded of their responsibility to declare any personal interest in respect of matters contained in this agenda. If the interest arises only as result of your membership of another public body or one to which you have been appointed by the Council then you only need to declare it if you intend to speak.

If the personal interest is a prejudicial interest, you must withdraw from the meeting. Normally you should leave the room before the business starts to be discussed. You do, however, have the same right to speak as a member of the public and may remain in the room to enable you to exercise that right and then leave immediately. In either case you must not seek to improperly influence a decision on the matter.

No declarations of interest were received.

To confirm as a correct record the minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Task Group – Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) held on 21 October 2008 (enclosed)

RESOLVED            That the minutes of the meeting of the Overview and Scrutiny Task Group – LSP were confirmed as a correct record for signing by the Chair subject to the following amendment:

08.10    Objective 3

Investigate how the LSP will tackle one of the issues for the Borough, the high rate of alcohol harm related hospital admission rates and the impact on anti social behaviour.

08.10    Objective 3

Action

Councillor Hasina Khan to research ways of raising awareness of the effects of alcohol in ethnic communities

Councillor Khan had contacted a group called Preston United that ran courses in the community on a wide range of issues including Drugs and Alcohol Awareness. They mainly worked in Preston but were willing to deliver their services in the Chorley area.

RESOLVED – That the Group invited a representative of Preston United to a future meeting to talk about the work that they carry out.

Feedback from the Member Learning Session on the work of the Chorley Partnership and its Thematic Groups

The Head of Democratic Services provided feedback from the recent Member Learning Session that had been held on 17 November 2008 on the work of the Chorley Partnership and it thematic groups. The session had been well attended and Members had asked questions in relation to the following:

• Performance indicators for the Local Area Agreement (LAA)
• What local indicators were we measuring through the LSP
• Gathering evidence with a view to demonstrating that the Families First project does provide a more effective and coordinated response and also saves money
• The process for identifying families for the Families First Project and whether or not families could refuse to be involved.
• The selection criteria/type of rural business that could be helped under the economic strand of the LSP/ key projects
• Rural diversification

The Chair suggested that scrutiny may wish to review another LSP project in the future.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

Report of Assistant Chief Executive (Policy and Performance) (enclosed)

Copy of newsletter (enclosed)

The Assistant Chief Executive (Policy and Performance) outlined the current approach to information sharing regarding the work of the Chorley Partnership and its thematic groups with the Members and citizens of Chorley.

• A quarterly performance report on Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) activity was circulated to the Members of the Executive Cabinet and the Overview and Scrutiny Committee
• A quarterly digest of LSP meetings including the LSP Executive, LSP Board and theme groups was circulated to all Members via email.
• The Chorley People Newsletter was sent to all Members in the post.
• Articles on the LSP achievements were published in the Borough News that was distributed to all residents in the Borough in the post and was also available to be picked up at various ‘dump bins’.
• A Lancashire County Council Newsletter ‘Ambition’ on the Lancashire Partnership and District LSP activity is distributed to all County Councillors.
• All the agendas and minutes of the Chorley Partnership and its thematic groups are published (post meeting) on the Chorley Partnership website, this website can be accessed directly or from a link from the home page on Chorley Council’s Website.
• To date two Member Learning Sessions have taken place on the LSP and its activities.
• All Members had been invited to a number of ad hoc Workshops aimed at influencing LSP partnership strategies.

Members acknowledged that there were a range of opportunities to access information about the LSP and its groups.

RESOLVED – 1.      That the current approach be noted.

2.         That future information regarding LSP activity will be included in the Members e.bulletin ‘in theknow’

3.         That links will be provided on ‘intheknow’ to the ‘Ambition’ county newsletter and the Chorley Partnership website.

4.         That we endeavour to encourage the thematic groups to publish all their agendas and minutes within three working days of their meetings to promote a consistent approach.

Report of Assistant Chief Executive (Policy and Performance) (enclosed)

The Group received a report of the Assistant Chief Executive (Policy and Performance) that proposed a definition of ‘added value’ to support the LSP task Group in evaluating the LSP projects.

The only two dictionary definitions of ‘added value’ found, mainly related to supplying commodities (goods and services). Looking at ‘added value’ from a project prospective and drawing on the discussion at the last LSP Task Group meeting, ‘added value’ could be defined as any or all of the following:

• When a project results in an improvement or outcome that would not have occurred unless the project had taken place.
• When a project results in an improvement or outcome being achieved more quickly than would otherwise have been the case if the project had not taken place.
• When a project delivers more than originally expected e.g. a greater return on investment; exceeding outcome or improvement targets; realising additional benefits in other associated areas.

Members also felt that ‘added value’ could also be defined as:

• Aligning budgets and co-ordinating resources to obtain a better project and a better outcome.

The report also outlined the framework currently used with partners to identify key success criteria for projects and how this is used to select and then monitor the LSP projects both during and at the conclusion of the projects. Information was also provided to Members on whether the key success criteria for the LSP projects commissioned in 2007/08 had been met and an officer view on whether they had ‘added value’, and it was highlighted that the Alcohol Consequences Project had already led to securing an extra £30k of funding.

The Assistant Chief Executive (Policy and Performance) commented that under the present procedures, there is no question relating to the ’added value’ and that perhaps a question relating to this could be introduced into all project management implementation.

RESOLVED – That the report be noted.

Members of the Group will draw up a list of potential questions.

It was RESOLVED that the Chair, Councillor Michael Devaney and Councillor Dennis Edgerley would meet with the Assistant Chief Executive (Policy and Performance) to draw up a list of questions for Mr Allan Jones, Chair of the Chorley Partnership who had been invited to attend a future meeting of the Group.

Draft scoping document attached for discussion.

The Group considered the draft scoping document that had been drawn up since the last meeting taking into account the issues and concerns Members had expressed.

RESOLVED – That the scoping document for the inquiry be accepted subject to the change of wording in minute 08.15 and be submitted to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting on 1 December 2008 for approval.

Members of the public who have requested the opportunity to ask a question(s) on an item(s) on the agenda will be asked to put their question(s) to the Panel. Each member of the public will be allowed to ask one supplementary question within his/her allocated 3 minutes.  

There were no questions from members of the public.