On this page:

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE EFFICIENCY TECHNICAL NOTES: MARCH 2005: page 36

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Listen

SCOTTISH EXECUTIVE EFFICIENCY TECHNICAL NOTES: MARCH 2005

1. Portfolio/Number/Name:J/C2 Community Justice Services

2. Programme/Activity: Please include a short description

Delivery of offender services, specifically criminal justice social work. The service is responsible for delivery of reports to courts (Social Enquiry Reports), community disposals, and statutory and voluntary throughcare to ex-prisoners on release from custody.

3. Planned Savings

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

Cash (m)

0

4

4

Time Releasing (m)

0

0

0

4. Accountable Officer for delivery

Robert Gordon

5. Project Manager

Brian Cole

6. EGDG account manager

Carolyn Girvan

7. Quality Impact

Describe any impact on the quality of service delivery. Be specific and explain if the expectation is positive, negative or neutral.

Impossible to determine at this stage. Will in part be an outcome of the volume of services to be delivered, which is very much in the hands of the courts and therefore outwith the control of local authorities. Volume of court orders and reports in recent years has increased year on year and this is expected to be a continuing trend, although should the service become overstretched with consequences for quality of service delivery, courts could decide to impose fewer numbers of orders.

8. Dependencies

Explain if your savings are dependant on legislation or other structural changes being achieved.

Efficiencies will require to be achieved through local authorities delivering services at lower cost than might otherwise have been the case.

9. Description of efficiency and actions to be taken

9.1 How will the saving be made? Be specific about number/size of contracts, staff, posts dates etc.

Will lie with individual local authorities and with relevant criminal justice social work groupings. The vast majority of spend is in relation to staff costs, where efficiency savings will need to be found. Specific measures could, for example, include assessment of the scope for greater use, subject to compliance with National Standards, of non-qualified as opposed to qualified staff undertaking certain tasks. At a national level, a working group (due to report in Spring 2005) is currently reviewing the opportunities for reducing the current level of activity devoted to preparation of reports for courts. The annual planning process will provide the opportunity to identify weaker performing programmes. This would allow scope for resources to be directed into more effective programmes.

9.2 What action is critically needed to secure delivery of this saving? Be specific, and name the key action managers if they are outwith your immediate management chain (e.g. in an NDPB.)

Local authorities will require to take specific actions by March 2006 to ensure that they will be able to live within future funding allocations.

10. Impact on Staffing to achieve the efficiency gain

If there are to be any changes in staff numbers (at activity level) to achieve the efficiency gain, please indicate how many full time equivalents and how far you expect savings to be achieved by natural wastage (show additions as + and reductions as -).

Impossible to indicate.

11. Benefits

In general, the benefits of the Scottish Executive Efficiency Plan are the enhanced outputs from the resources Ministers have been able to allocate in SR04. But if there is a direct connection between this efficiency saving and the enhancement of a particular service please describe it here.

N/A

12. Gross/Net Cash Savings

12.1 Please set out the gross recurring saving and any offsetting recurring expenditure.

2005-06 0m
2006-07 4m
2007-08 4m

12.2 Against what budget does this expenditure and saving fall?

Justice Department - Offender Services

12.3 Has this saving been built into your budget?

Yes

12.4 If so, what is the maximum allowable expenditure against the budget data, in each year, for that saving to be delivered?

Baseline for offender services for:

2005-06 - 87.18m
2006-07 - 95.18m
2007-08 - 97.18m

12.5 If not, how do you propose to invest the additional cash back into public services?

No surplus cash will be generated.

12.6 What plans do you have to exceed the required saving? Explain by how much in each year.

No such plans.

13. Time - release savings

13.1 Please explain any time-releasing savings indicated at question 3.

N/A

13.2 Please describe the method you plan to use to calculate the cash equivalent of those time release savings.

N/A

14. Measurement and Monitoring

14.1 How are you proposing to measure the expected efficiency benefits (e.g. in terms of costs, level of output or quality of service)?

Data on a range of output measures including workload and performance against a range of statutory performance indicators is collected routinely. Quality of service delivery is monitored by Social Work Inspection Authority through a programme of inspections of criminal justice social work.

14.2 What monitoring & reporting procedures will be put in place to measure the efficiency savings (How often will progress towards the target be monitored? Who will have lead responsibility for reporting progress and what procedures will be in place?)

As indicated, it will be possible to measure delivery from a quantitative perspective in terms of output data, which is published annually approximately 9 months after completion of the financial year. The lead for this statistical exercise lies with the Justice Statistics Unit. Performance of criminal justice social work against key statutory performance indicators is published annually by Audit Scotland. Authorities require to prepare audited financial statements of their spend on criminal justice social work services. Policy responsibility for oversight of financial statements lies with Community Justice Services Division/Audit Scotland.

14.3 Monitoring Data: Sources, Validation and risks

  • What data will be used to measure progress? Is all the required information quantifiable and readily available? If not what action will be taken to rectify this?

  • What measures will be in place to validate the accuracy of the data. Who will take responsibility for this?

  • Are there any issues or risks relating to how you plan to use the data? (e.g. accuracy, difficulties in collection)

    See 14.2 above.

    Annual output data. There are established methods for the collection of this data. Professional statisticians are responsible for verifying the accuracy of the data.

    Risks. In an era of constrained financial resources, authorities could attach lower priority to data collection with consequent monitoring difficulties. Existing practice is for workload data to be made available in the form of an annual statistical bulletin. Audit Scotland issue annual performance data.

« Previous | Contents | Next »

Page updated: Thursday, March 31, 2005