Title

David Prince looks at what benefits the new Comprehensive Area Assessment could bring to council taxpayers. Due credit to the Audit Commission. The latest joint inspectorates' consultation provides a much clearer sense of what the streamlined CAA will give the general public in plain English. A narrative on how successfully local bodies are working together, over time, to improve what matters for the quality of life in each place feels a big step forward from previous proposals. The same is true of simpler organisational assessments for each body which sharpen accountability and end the blame-game. CPA has triggered big improvements since 2002, but the public never noticed. If CAA resonates better, their main interest will be on value for money, and whether services justify future taxation levels. CAA outputs may inform service-users, although for many, in the wake of government policy announcements, their top priority goes beyond involvement. They want to design and control their own personal care and welfare budgets, and they want funding streams joined up to meet whole family needs within their community. While CAA will flag exceptional success and innovation, the challenge for those who commission or lead care services is to stimulate innovation and good practice everywhere. CAA must encourage taking managed risks, not just nervously following ‘approved' examples. Chief executives who turned round single organisations need support in deploying a different repertoire of skills to meet individuals' needs and aspirations through effective partnership working. Although the proposed key lines of enquiry (KLOE) are outcome-focused, the assessments must be sufficiently subtle to recognise that the easier-to-measure hard management processes and metrics can't deliver without the soft skills – relationships and trust built over time, and based on the shared values and lived-out behaviours essential to good governance across partnerships. Will CAA re-engage the workforce in all the partner bodies? There is much concern about the sapping of energy by perverse targets, top-down initiatives, and demoralising inspections. And that's before the present pay unrest. Mirroring a changing public mood, all political parties are competitively promising professionals – from police commanders to primary teachers – greater freedom to get on with their jobs in their local settings, with less external interference. For hard-pressed managers, nothing is as stimulating and developmental as entering another working environment, so senior officers and peer members should seize the commission's invitation to become more actively engaged in the CAA process beyond reference groups and score moderation. Given the commission's recent findings on succession planning, there are golden opportunities for those aspiring to turn around CAA poor performers. Apart from brief references to councils' leadership and decision-making roles, there are surprisingly-few mentions of members. The document averts its gaze from the rough old political trade of representation and opposition. Behind the illustrative red flagging of new housing provision in Barshire will, in real life, be vehement political differences, councillors elected on protest tickets, and passionate local opposition to such large expansion. The 10 CAA trials need to test that the methodology can distinguish failure in political leadership from legitimate political choice when responding to genuine local involvement. Councils, rightly, provide the democratically-accountable leadership in partnerships, but they should not be held disproportionately responsible for other partners' poor performance. While the commission has given welcome assurances that this won't happen, apportioning blame for failure across organisational assessments will seldom prove straightforward – and requires seasoned judgment, if it is to be credible. CAA aims to be the catalyst for better outcomes, more effective partnerships, more responsive services, better value for money, and innovation. The consultation and trials give those at the sharp end the chance to test the robustness of the methodology. But ultimate success depends more on the hearts and minds of politicians, managers and frontline staff than on the mechanics. They all need to be confident that CAA is not another burden but is a worthwhile process adding increased value over time. The best test is how far independent evaluation proves CAA beneficial to users of services, taxpayers and the active citizens on whom democracy critically depends. David Prince is former chief executive of the Standards Board for England, and ex-director of strategy and resources at the Audit Commission

Title

WHITEHALL

Will CAA deliver the goods?

SUBSCRIBE TO CONTINUE READING