The Scottish Government

Listen

THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN SCOTLAND ACT 2003
Best Value Guidance
Measures To Support Public Performance Reporting

This document is also available in pdf format (204k)

PREFACE
1. Introduction
2. What is Public Performance Reporting?
3. Why should local authorities give an honest and balanced picture of their performance?
4. How should local authorities develop performance measures?
5. Who are stakeholders and how much do they want to know?
6. How should information be communicated?
7. When is the right time to publish?

ANNEXES
A Extract from guidance issued by the Best Value Task Force in pursuance of s2(1)(b) of the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 - Chapter 10 Accountability
B Extracts from Connecting with Communities - the case study evidence (part 1)
- Key barriers to effective communications
- Key ingredients to effective communications
C Research from Scottish Consumer Council and MORI, on what stakeholders want

Local Government in Scotland
Act 2003
Guidance on s13:

THE DUTY TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE REPORTING TO THE PUBLIC OF THE OUTCOME OF THE PERFORMANCE OF ITS FUNCTIONS

PREFACE

PART ONE: INTRODUCTION

1. The statutory guidance issued under s2(1)(b) of the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 by the Best Value Task Force (BVTF) includes a chapter which sets out the ideal components of an individual authority's approach to, and content of, its Public Performance Reporting. It is attached at Annex A. It has been used as the starting point of this statutory guidance which is issued under the authority of s13(7) of the Act. This reflects the close relationship of performance reporting and the duty of Best Value.

2. To support the statutory requirements described above, authorities should have a strategic approach for Public Performance Reporting to ensure it is planned, systematic, monitored and reviewed. There are a number of key issues which must be considered in the development of such a framework:

• Authorities should aim to provide Public Performance Reporting in a manner which engages stakeholders in the improvement process.
• Authorities should give an honest and balanced picture of their performance, and develop performance measures which are appropriate for Public Performance Reporting.
• Authorities should know who their stakeholders are and how much performance information they want to be given.
• Authorities should publish performance information in ways which will engage stakeholders.
• Authorities should try to time the publication of reports to suit stakeholder preferences as well as their own.

3. In order to address these key issues, authorities need to develop their approach to Public Performance Reporting well beyond the simple publication of information specified in primary legislation and regulations.

4. In addition, authorities are encouraged to continue to refer to any other advice on good communications practice that they find helpful. Annex B highlights key issues from research undertaken in English local authorities, which may be of particular value in the development and review of Public Performance Reporting strategies in Scotland. Annex C summarises the findings of recent research conducted in Scotland.

PART TWO: WHAT IS PUBLIC PERFORMANCE REPORTING?

1. Public Performance Reporting (PPR) is a fundamental component of Best Value, since it underpins the development of a culture of customer focus and continuous improvement. Reporting performance creates an important record of the authority's progress towards its objectives and, as such, should be developed alongside internal performance management systems.

2. Authorities should aim to report performance in a way which engages stakeholders in the improvement process. Public Performance Reporting should give stakeholders information that allows them to make informed judgements about public services, to contribute to decisions about what standards of service should be pursued, and to challenge performance in the interests of future service improvement. To be productive, PPR has to involve the right information going in the right way to the right people at the right time.

3. Some information is required to be published under service specific legislation. In addition, the Scottish Ministers have power to define specific information for publication by issuing regulations under s13 of the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003. This information is considered to be of national interest. But, as outlined in this guidance, authorities also need to plan for and deliver broader performance reporting strategies that are appropriate to their stakeholders and particular local circumstances.

4. The real challenge of PPR goes beyond the specific requirements set by Ministers or the Scottish Parliament. It is to provide information on key activities appropriate to selected target audiences in terms of volume and detail. This may mean a decision not to publish detailed information on the grounds that it goes beyond the needs of stakeholders. This takes advantage of the availability of information which is already collected for management or monitoring purposes. We expect Public Performance Reporting frameworks to be both refined and expanded over time, as authorities' understanding of stakeholder interests develops.

5. The collection and reporting of performance information can be complex and resource intensive. It is therefore important that effort is not wasted. Each authority should develop a corporate strategy for PPR which allows it to evolve in a controlled manner, and can be monitored and reviewed to achieve the right balance between quality and cost. The strategy will be expected to demonstrate a stakeholder focus and authorities should seek stakeholder views throughout its development.

6. More specifically, it also means that performance measures developed to support PPR should reflect:

• the information needs of the stakeholders;
• an alignment with identified key aims/objectives/areas for improvement;
• a benefit from reporting which is proportionate to the cost of collection.

PART THREE: WHY SHOULD LOCAL AUTHORITIES GIVE AN HONEST AND BALANCED PICTURE OF THEIR PERFORMANCE?

1. Public services are provided on behalf of the public and in their interests: they are not just 'customers'. This means that in addition to the legitimacy authorities derive from the democratic process, they must also be ready to be held to account for their performance on an ongoing basis. Increasingly, stakeholders expect public sector organisations to be transparent, responsive and accountable. They are entitled to know how their money is being spent and to what effect.

2. Local authorities have an obvious and direct accountability at the ballot box. But while elections give local authorities their democratic legitimacy and mandate, the results cannot capture and reflect completely the ongoing range of interests and concerns of different stakeholder communities. There is therefore a need for a more direct means of prompting comment on the authority's performance through the provision of performance information which suggests acceptable service standards and reveals how well the authority meets them.

3. The authority should ensure that resulting feedback is used to inform future improvement activity. If performance reports do not prompt such feedback, it is possible that the information reported is about the wrong issues or that it is not being reported in an appropriate way.

4. Authorities should also view Public Performance Reporting as a primary opportunity to outline to their stakeholders the circumstances and rationale behind their policy and spending priorities, and to explain why some balancing of different expectations or prioritisation of activity may be required.

5. Public Performance Reporting should also be treated as a platform for further engagement with stakeholders through the authority's consultation and improvement processes. Capturing and considering feedback (including complaints) from stakeholders can inform the planning, managing and evaluation of services.

6. Authorities should continue to develop local performance measures that are based upon an analysis of feedback (especially formal complaints) received from the public. It is fundamental to an effective, customer focused, improvement approach to provide opportunities for comment or complaint. This information needs to be captured and methodically fed into improvement systems. Reporting back to the public on such analysis and resulting actions taken is a strong demonstration that the authority listens and responds to their stakeholders.

PART FOUR: HOW SHOULD LOCAL AUTHORITIES DEVELOP PERFORMANCE MEASURES?

1. The duty to secure Best Value is to secure improvement, not to develop performance measurement systems. But improvement cannot be demonstrated unless what has changed and how it has changed can be identified. This means performance measurement and performance management systems to drive improvement effort.

2. It is for an authority to define the specifics of its own performance measures as an aid to performance management, identifying a selection of measures which are closely linked to identified key priorities (including those of most concern to users) and which can show whether adequate improvement is being achieved over time. An extract from guidance issued by the Best Value Task Force in pursuance of S2(1)(b) of the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003, on characteristics of Best Value arrangements, can be found at Annex A. Many authorities have adopted the balanced score card approach ¹ to ensure that the performance information is relevant and linked to the authority's overall objectives and priorities.

3. The need to monitor progress will often also involve identifying targets for improvement that progress can be reported against and which can be compared to those of other organisations. Even though the system as a whole might be customised to suit local priorities, steps should be taken to compare definitions and interpretations with those used by other service providers, so as to avoid needless variations that would undermine comparisons of performance.

4. This does not mean publishing local or national data simply because it is available. Nor does it mean publishing only the best or worst results. Local authorities should aim to report in a rounded, balanced and honest manner. They should take into account stakeholder interests, identified priorities, recommendations for improvement and declared targets.

PART FIVE: WHO ARE STAKEHOLDERS AND HOW MUCH DO THEY WANT TO KNOW?

1. As the term Public Performance Reporting suggests, information should be presented primarily for giving account of the authority's performance to a wider public. Although reports might recycle information assembled for internal management purposes, and include Statutory Performance Indicators where it is meaningful to the targeted audiences, the interests and capacity of public service users and other stakeholders needs to be considered in deciding how information should be presented.

2. Authorities need to consider the range of communities and individuals they are accountable to - the general public, service users, consumers, residents, community and voluntary groups and other stakeholders. All have a diversity of needs and interests.

3. Although performance information is usually reported as a means of accounting to the wider public, local authority employees, professional organisations and trade unions also have a need for this information in dealing with enquiries from the public, in their own employee development work or in other related activities. Financial and statistical data may be the appropriate format for such groups as opposed to the more accessible formats considered for the general public.

4. Local authorities are also under a specific statutory duty to produce a report on Community Planning in their area, under s17 of the 2003 Act. The statutory guidance on Community Planning ² makes it clear that it is open to authorities to integrate such reports into their Public Performance Reporting frameworks as these frameworks develop. Other specific requirements can be dealt with similarly (e.g. Chief Constables have a duty under s15(1) of the Police (Scotland) Act 1967 to submit an annual report to the Police Authority).

5. In order to reflect this diversity in both the approach to dissemination and in the content of information, authorities should explore different ways of publishing performance information for different audiences. It will not be necessary or realistic to provide performance information specific to every community and every individual, but as Public Performance Reporting frameworks develop, efforts need to be taken to manage the diversity of interests.

6. Research by MORI ³ shows that getting the public to notice changes in services takes time. Public perceptions of how well a service is performing may be a poor reflection of actual performance: services can improve while public opinion of them gets worse. Poor public perceptions can be because of a particular image of the service projected in the media or political debate, or because of rising public expectation, or because judgements are based on out of date or poorly understood information.

7. Actual users of services tend to be more positive than the public as a whole. In addition, authorities' concern about performance can be disproportionate to the needs of users. However poor public perceptions may also be due to deterioration in the service which is not picked up quickly enough, often due to inadequate or ill-chosen performance information.

8. Giving stakeholders information about context - i.e. the factors which influence performance outcomes - may be as important as publishing the performance information itself. Links to long term and short term policies, objectives, targets, milestones and standards need to be made clear. Where these improvement drivers have not been wholly effective, the authority should explain why. Sometimes there are valuable messages for stakeholders in such explanations - such as the impact of their own behaviour on council performance. Background information may be necessary to give people a more rounded and balanced picture of how the authority is performing, and how the actions of the public contribute to that performance.

9. Base information derived from operational performance management and information systems is usually complex and often technical. This information may need to be filtered and put into language suitable for the stakeholder group being addressed. Such information should maintain its integrity and reflect an honest and balanced picture of the authority's performance even if public perception already underestimates the true position. Statements made in PPR should have a demonstrable audit trail to the core performance monitoring data from which it has been derived.

10. Obviously a careful balance will need to be struck between supplying too many people with too much information and too few people with too little information. Authorities should recognise that stakeholders at least need to know where to get information when they need it. Authorities should be looking to encourage an increase in awareness and interest, as well as a demand for performance information, not trying to keep supply under tight controls.

11. User consultation and research is vital to understanding stakeholder priorities, and both soft and hard measures of opinion are likely to be useful. However, a great deal of ground can be covered with the use of common sense and existing sources of information. Authorities should seek the views of stakeholders in the development of their PPR strategy and provide mechanisms for feedback on the information provided and on their PPR approach.

12. Authorities should also consider the viability of presenting performance information on a local area or communities of interest basis, as this can be more informative to service users than information for the entire authority. This is borne out in the research summarised in Annex C, which underpins a number of other issues authorities should consider in developing PPR approaches.

13. To sum up: performance information must be relevant and meaningful if the public and other stakeholders are to be engaged. This means that:

• Information is based on what people need and want to know, rather than on what information is easily available to the authority.
• Where appropriate, sufficient information is provided to enable stakeholders to make informed comparisons of performance achieved in different years and/or with other organisations.
• Information is presented clearly, in plain language and in a tone and style that people can readily relate to, so that it is easy to understand and digest.
• Presentation takes into account the needs of people from socially excluded and under represented groups.
• Official jargon is avoided and any technical terms are clearly explained.
• Imaginative use is made of simple charts, diagrams, illustrations and symbols to convey statistical information, which can often help users to understand complex data.
• Where appropriate, the collection and validation methodologies are outlined to describe the quality and reliability of information.
• All published information is kept as accurate and up to date as possible.
• Where appropriate, provide an explanation of the activity and the reported outcomes, as some stakeholders may benefit from additional commentary to understand the context of the performance information and the issues that impact upon the level of performance achieved.
• Where appropriate, provide further information to signpost how and where more detailed or further information can be accessed.

PART SIX: HOW SHOULD INFORMATION BE COMMUNICATED?

1. Authorities will want to make sure that the information reaches the audience for which it was intended and it is therefore likely that a range of mechanisms and media can be used to communicate performance information to various target audiences. An obvious means is via elected members. Officers should support them by producing information in digest form to ensure that members are clearly and comprehensively informed. Authorities should also consider, where appropriate and viable, how best to make information available at different levels of detail to appeal to stakeholders according to their level of interest.

2. The internet is one obvious means of presenting information in a multi-layered way. But whilst the internet, e-mail and other digital messaging may be seen increasingly as a cost-effective method of communicating performance information, care should be taken to ensure that stakeholders have access to such a resource and are likely to use it. Where necessary, to accommodate service users and professional audiences, authorities should consider producing separate reports to meet the needs of different audiences.

3. Information should be provided in a manner and media that is clearly appropriate for the target audience. This may include the use of specific language sets (e.g. Gaelic or Urdu) or via alternative mediums such as sign language or Braille. Account
should be taken of standards applying to information for people with disabilities, which have been developed by the Scottish Accessible Information Forum. ⁴

4. To aid further inclusion, due attention should be given to the needs of all people who are uncomfortable with or have difficulties using printed media. Use should be made of any standing arrangements for engaging with different stakeholder communities to promote discussion and feedback on performance. Again, a wide range of methods are available, such as citizens' panels, community and tenant forums, conferences and workshops. Venues should be accessible to all members of the public including those with a disability.

5. However the information is communicated, it will be important to ensure clarity and that an appropriate degree of consistency of approach is maintained across the authority. This may include integrating the reporting of performance information with the relevant reporting arrangements for Community Planning.

6. Public service organisations can learn from each others' experience. Sharing information about what techniques work effectively in particular situations has an important role to play in improving performance in reporting. It stimulates debate and promotes good practice in the development of strategies and activities which are focused on the needs of the stakeholder rather than the organisation's own priorities.

7. Authorities should also, where appropriate, engage the expertise of communications specialists within the organisation in the development of PPR approaches. This can aid consistency with other communications strategies, policies and systems, as well as provision of professional advice.

PART SEVEN: WHEN IS THE RIGHT TIME TO PUBLISH?

1. For some performance information, deadlines are set by regulation or statute. For example, local authorities are required to publish all statutory performance indicators within six months of the year to which the Direction from the Accounts Commission relates. They are also expected to publish certain financial information at particular times of the year (e.g. to support council tax demands).

2. Otherwise, authorities are free to publish any other performance information at times and frequencies of their own choosing. This does not have to relate to when the information is available, since if performance is to be managed effectively, performance monitoring must be undertaken on an ongoing basis.

3. Plans for publication should be determined by factors other than the availability of information. There is considerable scope to time information around the needs of different audiences and the requirements of different planning cycles. Reporting times should allow sufficient time for stakeholders to provide feedback that can inform key policy decisions and target setting and be fed into the next planning cycle.

4. Authorities should also consider when stakeholders are likely to be most interested in performance information or when they will find it most relevant. For example:

• When may parents be most interested in Education performance information?
• When may local people or local businesses be most interested in knowing what the authority has and intends to spend money on?
• When would be the most appropriate time to publish winter maintenance performance information?
• When do local businesses find it most beneficial to receive performance information on major local developments?
• When would various stakeholders be most interested in litter management performance?

5. The timing of publication should not be determined by what the information shows about performance. Local authorities are, first and foremost, public servants and therefore are duty bound to account for their actions and performance regardless of politics or pride.

ANNEX A
EXTRACT FROM GUIDANCE ISSUED BY BEST VALUE TASK FORCE IN PURSUANCE OF S2(1)(b) OF THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT IN SCOTLAND ACT 2003

CHARACTERISTICS OF BEST VALUE ARRANGEMENTS: CHAPTER ONE

A local authority which secures Best Value will be able to demonstrate:

• COMMITMENT AND LEADERSHIP

This means:

1. That members are involved in setting the strategic direction for Best Value and there is a mechanism for internal scrutiny by members of performance and service outcomes.

3. That overall strategic priorities are informed by a good understanding of the needs of the authority's communities and the setting of priorities and assessment of performance against relevant targets is undertaken with transparency.

7. That members and senior managers ensure accountability and transparency through effective internal and external performance reporting.

CHARACTERISTICS OF BEST VALUE ARRANGEMENTS: CHAPTER TWO

A local authority which secures Best Value will be able to demonstrate:

• RESPONSIVENESS AND CONSULTATION

5. That stakeholders feel that the authority listens to, and takes account of, their views and are provided with information about the actions taken through transparency in the decision-making process and performance reporting.

CHARACTERISTICS OF BEST VALUE ARRANGEMENTS: CHAPTER THREE

A local authority which secures Best Value will be able to demonstrate:

• SOUND GOVERNANCE AT A STRATEGIC, FINANCIAL AND OPERATIONAL LEVEL

This means:

4. That indicators, which allow performance to be assessed, are formulated as part of the planning process. Senior management regularly receive information that allows them to inform members of progress made.

5. That action is taken in the next planning round to learn from success and address areas of under-performance.

6. That other key processes are linked to or integrated with the planning cycle, including strategic analyses, stakeholder consultations, fundamental reviews, performance management, staff appraisal and development schemes, and public performance reporting.

This means:

1. That performance is systematically measured across all areas of activity.

3. That performance information is accurate, up to date, includes relevant trends, comparisons, standards and targets, and is rigorously monitored on a regular basis.

4. That the authority's performance management system is effective in addressing areas of under-performance, identifying the scope for improvement, agreeing remedial action and monitoring implementation.

5. That comparative analyses are systematically used in order to identify the authority's performance potential and to learn from others as appropriate, including local authorities, other public sector agencies, commercial organisations, and not-for-profit organisations.

6. That performance is reported on systematically to management, elected members, users and the public. The information provided in each case is relevant to its audience and clearly shows whether strategic and operational objectives and targets are being met. The reports are honest and balanced, and include information about what improvements are required during the forthcoming period.

CHARACTERISTICS OF BEST VALUE ARRANGEMENTS: CHAPTER FOUR

A local authority which secures Best Value will be able to demonstrate:

• SOUND MANAGEMENT OF RESOURCES

This means:

4. That the authority ensures that all employees are managed effectively and efficiently, that they know what is expected of them, their performance is regularly assessed, and they are assisted in improving.

CHARACTERISTICS OF BEST VALUE ARRANGEMENTS: CHAPTER FIVE

A local authority which secures Best Value will be able to demonstrate:

• USE OF REVIEW AND OPTIONS APPRAISAL

This means, with regard to review activity:

5. That it is undertaken on a systematic basis and concentrates on identified priorities, and areas where performance may be poor, which are of importance to stakeholders, which are of significant concern to the authority or otherwise offer clear opportunities for improvements in services.

CHARACTERISTICS OF BEST VALUE ARRANGEMENTS: CHAPTER SEVEN

A local authority which secures Best Value will be able to demonstrate

• A CONTRIBUTION TO SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

This means:

4. That 'quality of life' indicators are identified to measure performance in contributing to the achievement of sustainable development and reported to the public.

CHARACTERISTICS OF BEST VALUE ARRANGEMENTS: CHAPTER EIGHT

A local authority which secures Best Value will be able to demonstrate

• EQUAL OPPORTUNITIES ARRANGEMENTS

This means:

3. That there is a commitment at both elected member and officer level to mainstream equalities within the Best Value framework:

a) when undertaking reviews they take account of equalities issues and assess the impact of policy proposals on equal opportunities;

b) equalities requirements are taken into account in the procurement strategy;

c) equalities performance measures are identified to measure their performance in the delivery of equal opportunities and reported to the public;

d) employment policies are fully in line with their commitment to equal opportunities and training is in place to support that commitment.

CHARACTERISTICS OF BEST VALUE ARRANGEMENTS: CHAPTER NINE

A local authority which secures Best Value will be able to demonstrate

• JOINT WORKING

This means:

2. That the authority is committed to working with partner organisations to ensure a joined up approach to meeting the needs of its stakeholders and communities. This includes:

a) agreeing respective roles and commitments;

b) integrated management of resources where appropriate;

c) effective monitoring of collective performance;

d) joint problem solving.

6. That in joint working with any partners the authority works openly to an agreed vision, objectives and performance management and reporting mechanisms.

CHARACTERISTICS OF BEST VALUE ARRANGEMENTS: CHAPTER TEN

A local authority which secures Best Value will be able to demonstrate

• ACCOUNTABILITY

This means:

1. That the authority has identified what information stakeholders need in order to form a view on the performance of the authority. It recognises that different sections of the community will have different needs in terms of getting information and responds accordingly. It presents this information in a form that people find useful, accessible and that allows stakeholders to form a clear view of the authority's overall performance.

2. That in terms of its approach to Public Performance Reporting, the authority:

a) Has clearly identified what information will be provided at a service activity level and which at a corporate level;

b) Derives the information utilized in Public Performance Reporting from its performance management and information systems;

c) Considers a range of media and conveys this information in one or a number of ways that make it easy for stakeholders to find out what they want to know;

d) Includes clear guidance as to where and how stakeholders can access more detailed information on specific topics;

e) Presents the information in a clear, easy-to-understand and concise form taking account of equalities and accessibility issues;

f) Has an accessible feedback system which encourages stakeholders to comment on the information and mechanisms of Public Performance Reporting, and ensures this feedback is reviewed regularly to inform improvement activities.

3. That the content of the authority's Public Performance Reporting is easy to understand and concise and includes:

a) Information on what services the authority provides, what people can expect of them, and how people can get access to them;

b) Information on what the authority has learned from consultation about what matters to its stakeholders and what it is doing to respond to these concerns;

c) Information that shows how the authority is working with other bodies to best meet the needs of its communities through Community Planning;

d) Information that allows the public to see that the authority is spending its money wisely and achieving value for money on behalf of its communities. It shows clearly that the authority is eliminating waste, focusing on priorities, achieving value for money, and doing things that work;

e) Information that provides a rounded, honest and balanced picture of how the authority is performing;

f) Trend information, comparative information, and performance against targets or benchmarks to help stakeholders assess how performance is changing;

g) Information on what the authority is doing to improve its performance and impact, what targets it has for improvement, and what improvements have been achieved since it last reported.

4. That the authority has regard to guidance produced under s13 in relation to reporting financial and performance information matters.

ANNEX B
PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT & PERFORMANCE REPORTING

Extracts From 'Connecting With Communities - Improving Communications In Local Government, The Case Study Evidence (Part 1) Summary' 2002 - A Report Looking At Communications In English Authorities ⁵

Key barriers to effective communications

• Lack of commitment from the top, and poor leadership at both managerial and political level.
• 'Silo' mentality leading to diffuse, confused communication.
• Lack of investment/unwillingness to spend.
• Not enough communications staff of the right seniority.
• Too little attention to branding as opposed to logos.
• Traditionalism and bureaucracy.
• Wasted money through use of inappropriate communications.
• No evaluation of impact.
• Lack of a coherent strategy that is 'lived' by key staff/members, as opposed to a document on a shelf.

Key ingredients to effective communications

• Lead communications from the very top, politically and managerially.
• Have a corporate communications strategy in place.
• Develop a strong and consistent brand.
• Know its key stakeholders, audiences and how best to reach them.
• Put special emphasis on communicating with 'hard to reach' groups.
• Have a clear set of messages to communicate.
• Communicate in a consistent, relevant and frequent way.
• Be proactive and creative.
• Engender a 'pride of place' about the locality as well as promote the authority.
• Have one or two personalities as key spokespeople.
• Foster internal communications and encourage all staff to be good communicators.
• Have a good website and use electronic communications to target information and create a dialogue with local residents.
• Work with the media as partners not adversaries.
• Be innovative, engaging and relevant.
• Consult meaningfully.
• Be brave about communicating the 'hard stuff'.

Further information from the project, documents and a communications toolkit are accessible on the I&DeA website - www.idea.gov.uk/knowledge

ANNEX C
RESEARCH FROM SCOTTISH CONSUMER COUNCIL AND MORI, ON WHAT STKEHOLDERS WANT

Extracts From 'How Do You Rate Your Council?: A Study Of The Use And Relevance Of Local Government Performance Information' by the Scottish Consumer Council

The report examined how Scottish local authorities are meeting their responsibility to inform the public about their activities. Although councils are obliged to publish information on their performance, the Scottish Consumer Council found that too often the type of information produced can be difficult to understand and does not match what the public wants to know.

In general they found people want to know:

• how the authority is taking into account their needs and views in service delivery
• that they are receiving, or have access to, the same levels and quality of service, regardless of where they live
• how the authority is spending its money, whether they are achieving value for money and whether quality is being considered
• information which provides a balanced view of local authority performance
• what progress is being made against achieving specified service targets
• where they can find out further performance information if required
• where to go and what to do if things are going wrong
• how they can feed back their views about any aspect of the performance information

Extracts from 'Understanding Public Perceptions of Service Delivery - March/April 2003': MORI Research Commissioned by APSE

Particular trends in local authority service user expectations, which are consistent with their expectations of other 'consumer products', include:

• speed of service response
• simplicity of information
• services built around working lives
• evidence of a commitment to keeping service users informed about 'their' services
• evidence of a commitment to getting things right first time
• honesty

Footnotes

1 There are many guides available on Balance scorecard, e.g. The measures of success - Developing a balanced scorecard to measure performance, The Accounts Commission for Scotland, 1998, DTI fact sheet on balanced scorecard can be found on the DTI website at: http://www.dti.gov.uk/bestpractice/assets/balance.pdf

2 Community Planning Guidance can be found on the Scottish Executive website at: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/library5/localgov/cpsg-00.asp

3 Understanding Public Perceptions of Service Delivery (March/April 2003) - prepared by MORI on behalf of APSE

4 For more information please refer to www.saifscotland.org.uk/publications/standrds/0stndrs.htm

5 Produced by the Connecting with Communities project, funded by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister with the Local Government Association, Improvement & Development Agency and Audit Commission.