So, if we were to give a direction of travel verdict on the Audit Commission's inspection progress, what would it be? Improving well? Improving adequately? Certainly, in the past decade, the pattern of inspection has changed enormously. While best value was a process-driven, tick-boxing exercise largely ignored by the people who mattered, namely the councillors, even the fiercest critics of CPA have to admit it has made an impact. In particular, the CPA has provided Whitehall's supporters of local government with ammunition to prove that local authorities have improved. CPA has also been valuable for individual councils' own internal and external public relations, showing staff, local partners and potential job applicants that their organisations are going places. And, while the general public may not have the same degree of interest in CPA ratings as they do with Ofsted scores, local government itself takes a keen, even competitive, interest. The latest phase of inspection, the CAA, takes on board the current priorities of partnership, joint working and place-shaping, with its emphasis on ‘telling a story' rather than on the performance of individual authorities. It is right that the new regime should focus on the public's priorities now that the organisations themselves have shown constant improvement. But there are immediate implications for councils which have built up strong brands with the help of CPA ratings. Plainly, the council will now be part of a bigger picture, albeit a leading part, and therefore, less able to boast of its own organisational achievements. For example, Middlesbrough, the council, is four stars, yet the town comes out near the bottom of quality-of-life league tables. Councils will be relieved that the star ratings are being dropped. There is already concern that hard-won reputations, evidenced through CPA scores, could be tarnished by the performance of local partners. And, there will be inevitable tensions for the CAA in identifying, in cases where national priorities clash with local ones, which should be judged. Michael Burton, Editor, The MJ
