(a)

the report was the fourth and final quarterly performance report for 2021/22 and covered the period January to March 2022 and provided an opportunity to show improving and strong performance as well as challenges;

(b)

key achievements included: the % of household sent for recycling, reuse or composting increased in Q4 to 36.1%; the streets graded as at an acceptable standard had seen a consistent improvement in 2021/22 with 89% of the city’s streets scored as at an acceptable standard; there were further reductions in the percentage of repeat referrals into the Council’s social care service; last year the Council collected 98.7% of business rates and 96.8% of council tax which were achieving annual targets;

(c)

challenges in the report included: the rates of children on multiple child protection plans had increased slightly to 27.5% resulting in a missed target; sickness rates had increased (inclusive of covid 19 figures) and was considered to be one of the main reasons for short-term sickness during March 2022.

(d)

who set the target for recycling at 39% as this was considered to be low and not very ambitious; it was responded that several things were taken into account when setting a target including discussion through the services, and the target set based on previous performance and benchmarking in terms of other local authorities and national indicators;

(e)

it was requested that detail be provided to Members as to the 39% target set for recycling in terms of why this percentage was agreed; It was responded that a written response would be provided to Members;

(f)

were all recyclables collected recycled? It was responded that a written response would be provided to Members;

(g)

could an update be provided to Members as to the carbon emissions emitted by the Council as the report didn’t give an indication as to if it was moving in the right direction? It was responded that the Council had started to track carbon emissions and information would be provided to Members;

(h)

did the council receive a revenue from composting; it was responded that a response would be provided to Members;

(i)

how was the Council considering the creation of a varied efficient sustainable transport network with no assessment of the use of public transport? It was responded that there was an indicator as to bus patronage and that information could be made available to Members if required;

(j)

scrutiny panels had previously been offered a workshop to assess whether, from a scrutiny perspective, they considered that the KPIs were appropriate and that the panel would have an opportunity to feed into if that was the case and could feed into the process; it was hoped that the workshops would be delivered within the current municipal year in order to scrutiny to give a perspective upon the KPIs; it was responded that the recommendation would be taken forward and it would be listed as an item for consideration at the Scrutiny Management Board;

(k)

it was commented that the figures for transport were taken from the yearly NHT survey however Plymouth did not appear to be compared against other comparable cities as Plymouth’s trend was in a negative way on all KPIs. The NHT survey that the figures were based upon gave a false impression of where Plymouth was nationally;

(l)

with regards to the focus on prevention and early intervention (KPIS 10 – 13), the number of rough sleepers was very small compared to the number of families in bed and breakfast; it was requested that this issue be covered in the KPI workshop.

1.      

a written response would be provided to Members providing more detail as to why there was a 39% target set for recycling as this was considered rather low;

2.      

a written response would be provided to Members as to whether all recyclables collected were able to be recycled;

3.      

a written response would be provided to Members upon carbon emissions emitted by the Council;

4.      

a written response would be provided to Members regarding if the Council received revenue from composting;

5.      

a workshop is held so Members can understand and help the positively influence the process of target setting regarding key performance indicators and discuss what performance information is most appropriate for the scrutiny function (this would be listed as an item for consideration at the Scrutiny Management Board);

6.      

the Corporate Plan Quarter Four Performance Report is noted.