One of the key themes of the Shepway Plan (1) concentrates on easing the financial pressures on the Council through a combination of sound financial planning and working towards more effective and diversified procurement. One of the Council's stated Corporate Aims is to continuously seek to improve services. Value for Money has also previously been key to the Council's plans (2) e.g. the Core Values and Priority Areas for Action included Continuous Improvement and Efficient and Effective Working. Looking further ahead the plans recognise the procurement agenda for delivering business efficiencies and looking at new ways of doing things.

The Council has challenged value for money within its Quality Improvement Projects (QIP) (3) which critically examined issues of comparative cost and quality of service. Examples of reviews that have led to improved value for money through cost savings and/or improvements in service quality include Housing and Public Space (4) (5). In 2002 the Audit Commission conducted a best value inspection of the housing benefit service and rated the service with no star, but with good prospects for improvement. Following this the service was placed under special measures and close monitoring of its performance by the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) ensued - http://www.bfi.gov.uk/reports/2002/bvr/shepway/ . The special measures were relinquished as the DWP were satisfied with improved performance, and the Audit Commission re-inspection carried out in 2004 rated the service as fair towards good (6).

The Council also challenged value for money through its Business Efficiency Board created in October 2004 (7). Following reorganisation to streamline the process, Corporate Management Team (CMT) became the efficiency board from 31 March 2005 and, as detailed in 5.2.1 a new post responsible for business efficiency was created. Projects commissioned through the Business Efficiency Board that have led to efficiencies being achieved include the re-negotiation of the photocopier contracts, E-Billing, the Telecommunications project, E-Citizen and the Housing Options Team System.

The Council monitors national and local performance indicators, and a report is submitted quarterly to the Corporate Management Team, the Performance Management Overview Committee (Scrutiny) and Cabinet (8). Where performance is not in line with expectations compared to other councils or targets, these are explored, and where appropriate, actions and recommendations are implemented (9) (10). For example, historically strong performance on the average time to re-let a Council dwelling (BVPI 212) dipped significantly in 2004/05 to 33 days (20 days in 2003/04). The reasons for this were reviewed and as a result new streamlined processes for the ordering and payment for works were introduced. As a result average void turn-around for the first quarter of 2005/06 was reduced by one week for each property. This has resulted in an additional 67 weeks rental income compared to 2004/05. Local Land Charges are also a good example of sustained performance improvement through re-engineering the process and delivering efficiencies and turn around times (11). The partnership with Shepway Care and Repair was reengineered to remove duplication of effort, and working procedures were rationalized to deliver the desired outcomes, whilst still maintaining governance and improving efficiency. This has freed up officer resources, which are now directed towards delivering other aspects of the service targeting the Council's key priorities of Regeneration through the Private Sector Housing Team and Clean, Green and Safe through the Pollution Team (12). The overall trend of improvements in services for 2002/03 has continued to improve in 2003/2004 with 57 per cent of key performance indicators improving (13). The progress on performance in 2004/2005 is currently being audited, but the un-audited results show improvement in 44% of BVPIs and a fall in performance in 30% which will be reviewed in the current year.

The Council also challenges costs through the annual budget setting process. The budget review process allows time to consider budget options (14). For 2005/2006 the service plans followed a framework that brought the budget and service plan information together for the first time. During 2005/2006 the system has been refined to further align financial and service planning and thus ensuring that known service changes are accommodated within the budget (15), (16), (17) and (18). The service planning process now informs the Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) and the draft framework for this is currently being developed. The existing MTFP 2004-2008 was reported to Cabinet in report C/03/79 (19) in December 2003, however this was superseded after two months due to capping. In the following period the Council responded to capping and focussed on a realistic plan for the short term, and is now looking to the long term and developing the appropriate financial plans. Consequently, the MTFP has been updated for approved revenue reductions, capital growth and limited revenue growth between 2005-06 - 2008-09, as set out in report C/04/76 (20) reported to Cabinet in December 2004.

Council tax increases have always been set in order to respond to local needs. The Council's proposed council tax increase for 2004/2005 of 28.9 per cent was part of a deliberate strategy to provide a sound financial base and to deliver effectively on the Council's key priorities. However this was capped by the Secretary of State which meant that the Council had to reduce the level of spending for the year. The budget requirement for 2005/2006 (excluding town/parish council expenditure) is £16.2 million and the council tax increase was 4.95 per cent. The fluctuations in council tax levels reflects the Council's response to delivering its key priorities with limited resource. The recovery plans key theme of Setting Shepway Free aims to ease future pressures.

Generally the Council's services compare well with other districts. The Council's total spend on services per head falls in the highest ranges of the Authority Group, and ranks highest in the Nearest Neighbour group, which further acknowledges the Council's commitment to spend on services.

(1) Shepway Plan 2005 - 2006

(2) Shepway Plan 2004 - 2005 (446.18 KB)

(3) QIP Methodology (1.68 MB)

(4) Housing QIP (710.66 KB)

(5) Public Space QIP (476.83 KB)

(6) Benefits CPA Report - March 2004 (162.67 KB)

(7) Evidence from BEP Intranet Site (84.13 KB)

(8) Performance Management Overview Committee (339.34 KB)

(9) Performance Management Overview Committee Meeting on 05/09/05 Minute (120.97 KB)

(10) Decision Notice 05/33 on 07/09/05 (112.57 KB)

(11) PI Data for land charges and council voids (40.42 KB)

(12) PI Data for unfit and empty properties showing move to top quartile in 2 years (38.68 KB)

(13) Audit Commission CPA Progress Assessment (101.02 KB)

(14) Budget Programme 06/07 (73.16 KB)

(15) Service Plan Timetable for 06/07 (94.60 KB)

(16) Service Plan Template for 06/07 (71.27 KB)

(17) Service Plan Guide for 06/07 (96.59 KB)

(18) Service Plan Budget Working Paper for 06/07 (60.47 KB)

(19) Cabinet Report C/03/79 (294.84 KB)

(20) Cabinet Report C/04/76 (384.04 KB)

The VFM Profiles Summary Report (21) shows that the Council's spending on all services per head of population is high compared to other districts. This reflects a strategy of high council tax and high net spend on services per head linked to a high level of satisfaction in key priority areas such as housing (22).

As it is a Key Priority for the Council, the VFM Profiles Summary Report shows that the Council is in the highest spend ranges for the Authority Group and highest or second highest in the Nearest Neighbour group for several of the housing indicators, including Management & Supervision, Repairs & Maintenance per Dwelling and Other Housing per Head (23). Whilst spending is high in these areas, output satisfaction is also high with the percentage of Responsive Repairs Jobs for which the Council made and kept an appointment at 98.4%, and Urgent Repairs Completed in Government Time Limits at 98%.

In addition to increasing tenant satisfaction levels, investment in the Council’s housing stock has led to significant improvement in the number of homes achieving the decent homes standard - Paragraph 36 of (13) and has reduced the cost of ongoing maintenance.

For this priority area the only indicator to appear in the lowest ranges for the Authority Group, or below the lowest five in the Nearest Neighbour group is the Average Time to re-let Vacant Property of twenty days which illustrates good turnaround of voids, and this target is monitored closely.

In complete contrast, the indicator for Tourism per Head is in the lower spend range for the Authority Group and is the lowest spend in the Nearest Neighbour group, this comparatively low spend is part of the Council's policy currently not to market the district but to concentrate on core services. However, in response to low satisfaction levels with BV119a Sports and Leisure Facilities at 48%, the Council commissioned a review of its service provision and produced sports strategies (24) (25) with plans to develop two new facilities in the district through PFI attracting £10m value of government credits and contributions from Hythe Town Council and private investors.

The Medium Term Financial Plan is under development and when complete will reflect the plans to meet key priorities over the next four years, in particular to meet our waste and recycling targets whilst at the same time recognising the external financial pressures the Council will be facing. This strategy will also set out how the Council intends to achieve efficiency savings and balance these factors to overall assess the impact of likely council tax levels in the future (see section 5.1 for further documentary evidence).

The VFM Profiles Summary Report shows that the Council's spend on central services and overheads is comparatively high compared to other districts. This is attributed to the treatment of pensions and back-funding. The Council's policy is to write pension costs off over five years as a maximum, not over the life of the pensioner. This, together with the impact of the organisational structure review, causes this comparative result. The Council accounts for central service costs in accordance with CIPFA recommended practice, with all possible overheads being allocated to services (26). The Council's accounting practice is judged to be substantially sound, although improvements are recommended regarding budgetary control in the last two annual audit and inspection letters (27) and (28).

(21) VFM spreadsheet from Audit Commission (4.52 MB)

(22) Summary sheet showing Best Value Satisfaction with services (48.47 KB)

(23) VFM Analysis spreadsheet (35.53 KB)

(24) Sports and Physical Activity Strategy (836.02 KB)

(25) Playing Pitch Strategy (661.41 KB)

(26) Cabinet Report C/04/83 Appendix 1 (5.04 MB)

(27) Audit Letter 2003 (242.61 KB)

(28) Audit Letter 2004 (243.82 KB)

The shape of the Shepway district and the location of the main administrative base being to the North-East of the district, affects the costs of delivering services throughout the profile of the towns and villages. A twenty-three mile stretch of the district is coastline, and being a coastal authority places unique demands on our resources. Whilst funding is secured for all or part of capital projects, the Council must plan for the ongoing revenue implications for improving and maintaining the coastline. Total population is mid range compared to the Authority Group, however, twenty-two per cent of the population of the district is aged 65 or over, compared with eighteen per cent nationally. The impact of the age structure of the local population on the Council's services is reflected in the high spend per head of population.

A particularly striking feature of Shepway's economic profile is the geographical disparity of affluence and quality of life across the district. The Index of Deprivation 2004 average score put Shepway well within the middle range for both the Authority Group and the Nearest Neighbour group. This does not reflect the fact that the four adjoining wards in central and east Folkestone are amongst the 20% most deprived wards in England based on the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2000 (29), with one ward Folkestone Harvey Central being among the 5% most deprived. Other wards in Shepway that fall within the 20% most deprived, based on the 2000 data, include St Mary in the Marsh, Hawkinge and Lydd illustrating that areas of deprivation in Shepway exist in both the urban and rural parts of the District. This localised pattern of deprivation is also reflected in the 2004 Index that is based on super output areas rather than electoral wards. In response to this pattern the District Council has developed a range of programmes aimed at tackling deprivation in Shepway including the “Believing in Folkestone”and Community Action in South Kent Single Regeneration Budget programmes which together have secured £14m funding for schemes with a total value of £43m, the Guildhall North Neighbourhood Renewal Area and the Hawkinge Neighbourhood Management Programme. Supply and demand for services is affected by where the population resides with 32,500 people living within the 20% most deprived wards, based on the 2000 Index, and over 20,000 living in the central and eastern wards of Folkestone. In addition to the Index of Deprivation a range of other indicators are used by the Council to determine priorities. For example, the Shepway Household Condition Survey 2002 highlighted that 40% of properties within the Folkestone Harvey Central Ward were potentially unfit. This information was then used by the Council to determine its approach to private sector housing renewal resulting in the declaration of the Guildhall North Neighbourhood Renewal Area in 2004. This exhibits a particularly difficult range of social and economic problems, for example, 53% of all crime committed in Shepway takes place in 6 wards in central and east Folkestone (30).

(29) Indices of Multiple Deprivation 2000 (158.64 KB)

(30) Crime and Disorder Strategy 2002-2005 (2.06 MB)

Through regular performance monitoring the Council has been able to identify low performing services and been able to take corrective action where resources have permitted this. This has included increased investment in some services, particularly Homelessness which was assessed as poor with poor prospects for improvement when inspected in March 2002 (31). Within twelve months the Best Value re-inspection found that the service had improved to a fair rating (32). Since then more fundamental improvements to the service have been introduced as the Council has driven forward its Homelessness Strategy (33). This has resulted in a significant improvement in performance indicators in the last two years and a number of service enhancements. The VFM Profiles web tool was used to extract comparative indicators for Homelessness, this information shows, that whilst spend is in the higher range for the Authority Group and 2nd highest in the Nearest Neighbour group, the numbers of households accepted as priority homeless is also in the higher range. However, performance is improving and the average length of stay for homeless households in Bed and Breakfast, Hostel, Lease and Other Accomodation and BV183b Average Length of Stay in Hostel are all in the mid ranges, except for Other which is in the lower range of all authorities (34).

One of the Council's priorities is Clean, Green and Safe. Consequently the increased investment the Council has made in its waste and recycling services is part of a long term strategy to meet it's corporate aims and the Government recycling targets. Results of previous community surveys made it clear that there was an un-favourable view of the black sack collection system. There were only 65% satisfied with the collection system in 2000/2001. By investing in a wheeled bin service across the district, the Council has been able to increase the level of satisfaction with the collection method dramatically with 87.5% Satisfied or Very Satisfied in 2003. Recent changes to integrate doorstep refuse and recycling services have served to disrupt well established collection routines and may lead to an initial fall in satisfaction while the Council works to rectify problems that the new service has thrown up. However, the Council recognises the need to be ambitious in its plans to achieve the Government’s long term targets and improve the quality and levels of recycling. Early indications are that the new service has already increased recycling in the District from 32% to 48% and the tonnage of waste being sent to landfill has reduced by 150 tonnes each week.

Another example of success is where investment over a number of years is meeting the Council’s priorities of Regeneration in the Coastal Park. Approximately £2m external funding has been won from the Single Regeneration Budget, European Community, Home Office, Private Sector and the Heritage Lottery Fund to further enhance the area. This is a regionally important visitor attraction attracting some 500,000 users per annum as well as an excellent leisure amenity for local people. In addition, the development of a major new conference centre at the Leas Cliff Hall delivered through a £4m public/private partnership as part of the Council's overall regeneration initiatives has been completed.

The Council’s community alarm system Shepway Lifeline, has a record of achievement going back more than twenty years. During this time it has grown from a service solely provided to sheltered housing tenants to a network linking residential and commercial clients across the public and private sectors. Lifeline is quality assured under the BS EN ISO 9001:2000 and is externally assessed to maintain this quality. The service also directly helps achieve crime and disorder targets as well as welfare support objectives through the Shopwatch, bogus caller, domestic violence and homophobic incidents schemes.

All five East Kent districts have formed a Crime Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP) and have pooled their external funding to commission an external method for reporting racial crime (35). The reporting line offers a translation service for ten different languages, something difficult for individual authorities to achieve, but the economies of scale through collaborative working have made this possible. There is a service level agreement to which all parties operate. The supplier provides management information in order to monitor usage of the line and the feedback on usage is used to plan improvements to the service. For example, management information regarding the number of phone hang-ups due to a lengthy message at the start of the call has been responded to by planning to introduce a different telephone number for each different language offered, these changes to the publicity and phone numbers will be rolled out in the next six months as part of continuous improvement of the service.

Another area where outcomes have been maximized is through the Cubit Plus funding. The initial grant from Kent Fire and Rescue Service to work in partnership on regeneration of areas impacted by fire damage of abandoned vehicles, rubbish etc. was for £7,000. Applying for this grant, led to other grants that were available and total external funding for related projects of £40,500 was secured. Through targeting priority areas, such as East Folkestone, through crime and disorder initiatives, additional outcomes have been achieved. This has delivered additional efficiencies as one area has been targeted, coordinating a number of works carried out at one time, reducing the number of trades required to carry out the work, the number of call backs or repetitive journeys for contractors and engaging the community in clean up operations at the same time. This project contributes to the Council’s key priorities of Clean, Green and Safe and Regeneration, when the initial driver was reducing the impact and perception of crime. As a consequence the improvements from the pooled resources have led to improvements of lighting, clean up, regeneration and to enforcement issues through provision of CCTV. As well as engaging the community through before and after surveys and involving them with the clean up, partners such as the Town Centre Management were also used to distribute the leaflets and get the business community involved (36) (37) (38) (39).

(31) Homelessness and Housing Inspection Report May 2002 (523.98 KB)

(32) Homelessness and Housing Re-inspection Report August 2003 (499.24 KB)

(33) Homeless Strategy (1.03 MB)

(34) PI Data for Homelessness (43.55 KB)

(35) Racial Crime Reporting Line Poster (277.49 KB)

(36) Community Clean-up Leaflet (281.22 KB)

(37) Community Clean-up Womble Poster (352.93 KB)

(38) Cubitt Plus Evaluation Report (2.26 MB)

(39) Cubitt Plus Guildhall North Evaluation Report (906.79 KB)

The annual budget process considers the short and long-term costs of its actions when making decisions. The Council is in the process of formalising its MTFP to cover the next four years. The growth proposals and capital requirements for 2004-2008 were considered along with known performance and service pressures as part of a process that approved the Medium Term Financial Plan and budget Strategy in December 2003, C/03/79 (19). The Council prioritises these pressures in line with it’s key priorities of Clean, Green and Safe, Housing and Regeneration.

The Council balances the level of performance with the relatively higher costs of providing services to a community spread across its district. High spend on a priority area is deliberate and considered in line with policy, for example the higher spend on the Council’s waste collection service is planned to achieve a high level of satisfaction and high recycling targets. In addition, the Council has, and will continue, to invest in its integrated refuse and recycling service to ensure that one of the Council’s priorities –a clean, green and safe district –is delivered through a step change in the percentage of household waste which is recycled and a reduction in the volume and cost of waste sent to landfill.

The financial implications of key decisions are summarised in committee reports. An example where policy was considered in line with budget implications is report C/05/20 Cesspool Emptying (40), where all options including virement and the long-term implications were considered.

Within its priority area of Housing the Council has identified improving private sector housing conditions and bringing all of its own homes up to the decent homes standard as a minimum, as priorities. As a result additional resources have been directed to private sector housing assistance and the Council is also progressing strongly its plans to meet the decent homes standard in its own housing stock, achieving a 30% reduction in the proportion of non-decent homes in 2004/05 (BVPI 184 (b). Following an Options Appraisal the Council has decided to retain its housing stock and has agreed with its tenants a sustainable programme of stock investment that goes beyond the minimum decent homes standard.

This year the Council invested in the creation of a team of two employees, with vehicles and a range of equipment to deal with urgent cleansing, repair and maintenance works around the District to ensure that the Council is able to respond quickly to problems which affect the cleanliness or safety of public spaces. In addition the Council is considering further investment to expand the team and equip it to deal urgently with graffiti as part of the Council’s commitment, both to its Clean, Green and Safe priorities and to its Crime Reduction Partnership.

(40) Cabinet Report C/05/20 (133.36 KB)

Having set the budget for the year the Council closely monitors actual income and expenditure against budgets as the year progresses and takes action to investigate variations where required. A quarterly Budget Monitoring Report is submitted to Cabinet (41) and monthly variance reports for Corporate Management Team and the Strategic Management Board are being developed. The Corporate Management Team will also start to receive a salaries and income monitoring statement.

Following the restructure of the organisation, each budget is being assigned to a budget holder, who has access to the financial management system that provides up to date information on income and expenditure, this information is supplemented by a dedicated accountancy resource to assist in extracting and interpreting financial information.

The Council has employed consultants who are carrying out a survey and establishing a Citizen's Panel. This panel will be consulted on priorities for the district, and the results of the consultation will assist the Council in setting its priorities and also feed into a new Community Strategy being developed with our partners.

The results of consultation through community surveys and citizen panels are therefore used to influence the process behind setting corporate priorities and service delivery objectives.

As well as survey work being undertaken by consultants, surveys are also conducted in-house with regard to national BVPI satisfaction surveys, key issues and staff expectations.

Since the Summer 2004, regular staff briefings have been held allowing the Chief Executive to lead discussions on activities of the Council and to share good practice and learning (e.g. why the Council participated in the Kent County Council Partnership Agreement and Homelessness Service success).

The Council produces a quarterly Management Information Report (MIR) that analyses and compares performance with other councils. Reports are submitted to the Corporate Management Team, Performance Management Overview Scrutiny Committee and Cabinet. Further details regarding this process are at 5.1.

The Council also developed a Management Information System (MIS) in-house to assist performance management across the Authority. The development of the MIS in-house saved the Council having to buy-in external software packages and support. The MIS is a performance management tool that provides officers with information on national performance indicators, local indicators and service plan tasks.

The Council has worked closely with its contractor, Cleanaway, to introduce an integrated refuse and recycling scheme which delivers a significant improvement in recycling performance for a modest increase in cost of service per household. The scheme has been designed to deliver high quality/high value recyclates in order to maximise income and keep down the net cost of the service. If initial performance levels are sustained, Shepway can expect to be amongst the top 10% of councils for recycling performance. Outturn figures for the new service, which was launched in July 2005, have yet to be finalised. However they are unlikely to show a significant increase in the cost of the service at £28.60 per household compared with £61.34 and £61.84 per household for the top two performing authorities (Strategic Waste Management Study, ENVIRON for Kent Waste Forum, 2005).

The Council is able to obtain good value for some supplies through combining its purchasing power with other districts and the County Council through the Kent Buying Consortium and for Energy and Fuel through the Lazer Group. Similarly, the Council has exploited the excellent value for mobile phone services by procurement through the Office of Government Commerce contract.

(41) Cabinet Report 05/43 (133.36 KB)

Business Efficiency has been monitored and managed through a Business Efficiency Board which for six months strategically considered potential projects, prioritised them in line with Council key priorities and allocated resources for their completion. The Business Efficiency Board no longer meets and the Council has changed its approach to delivering these improvements. This new approach will be set out in a Value for Money Strategy. The past was the Business Efficiency Board, the future is a framework based on themes delivered by highly skilled managers trained in efficiency. The Value for Money Strategy, once developed, will be embedded through a process set out in the Human Resources Strategy (42). This includes a commitment to corporate competencies from every manager. Through the organisational restructure the Council has recognised the need for a dedicated resource to support value for money projects and as such has created the post of Audit and Business Efficiency Manager within the Organisational Development Directorate (43).

Business efficiences delivered through harnessing the benefits of technologies is managed through the allocation and use of Implementing Electronic Government (IEG) grant monies. The Council is currently reviewing the resources it has available, the Government's priority outcomes and Shepway's own key priorities to make best use of these resources to deliver sustainable efficiencies.

The changes to the service planning framework for 2006/2007 also take into account service efficiency targets(18). The early consideration of both service and finance issues is a key factor in the new framework for improving value for money and to delivering a robust MTFP.

(42) Draft HR Strategy (286.58 KB)

(43) Job Description (69.65 KB)

As part of the Council’s revised service planning process each service manager is required to identify efficiency savings, and targets will be agreed. The targets may be achieved through cost savings or increased output. However, they must be clearly measurable and consistent with Council priorities. This is the first year that service managers have been asked to separately identify efficiency targets as part of their service planning. This is a step towards ensuring an increased focus on value for money across the Council and achieving the efficiency savings required under Gershon.

Over the last three years the Council has identified efficiency savings through considering new ways of working including developing partnerships. For example, the partnership with Kent County Council has achieved efficiency savings of £615,000.

In 2004/2005 the Council’s General Fund outturn resulted in an under-spend of £760,000 compared to revised estimates and where sustainable savings have been made the money released has been targeted towards one off recovery improvements such as to improve the Council’s financial standing and to support the CPA Recovery Plan.

Major efficiency gains have been achieved in 2004/05 by increasing the number of homes improved to meet the decent homes standard from 137 in 2003/04 to 416 homes 2004/05. This significant increase has been achieved without a corresponding increase in costs.

The Council is working towards implementing recommendations made in the Management Overview of Procurement 2002/2003 Review (44) conducted by the Audit commission. The review identified a lack of a corporate and co-ordinated approach to the way the Council procured its services. The Council has been working through the action plan and progress to date includes:

• Adopting a procurement strategy in 2002, which is due to be revised by December 2005;
• Setting up a Central Procurement Unit in April 2005;
• Appointing a member procurement champion, Councillor Monk.

Furthermore, the Council has invited the IDeA to perform a procurement fitness check at the end of September 2005 to summarise the Council’s position and determine the focus for the Central Procurement Unit. Regular meetings of the Corporate Procurement Group, made up of representatives from each main service area and strategic management have been put on hold due to the organisational restructure, and will be reconvened following the results of the IDeA fitness check review. This forum will provide the mechanism to share procurement experiences and identify opportunities for savings and new ways of procuring goods and services. This group will also monitor progress made against the successful development of the Central Procurement Unit and the agreed actions in external review reports.

The Council is currently reviewing its contract database to develop management information and the How to do Business with Shepway web page that is currently under development.

The Council achieved efficiency gains in 2004/2005 of £3,104,166 of which £2,619,294 were cashable savings. For 2005/2006 efficiency was calculated for the Council as a whole, however it will be considered in future on a service by service basis by being incorporated into the service planning process for 2006/2007.

The Council entered into two partnering contracts for Responsive & Cyclical Maintenance (including voids repairs), from 1 April 2004. These partnerships include an annual price per property agreement for responsive repairs and electrical maintenance. Efficiency gains have been achieved through service improvement by enabling tenants to report repairs directly to the contractor. This has resulted in improved response times for repairs, increased tenant satisfaction, more appointments being kept, increased validity and quality of invoices, improved quality of workmanship and a reduction in the number of complaints. (45) Overall satisfaction has increased from 89% at the start of the contract to 95.5% at the end of the first year.

Earlier this year the Council sold one of its car parks in Folkestone Town Centre to enable the development of a major new shopping centre creating space for 24 new businesses and creating 600 new jobs. The sale required the new owner to invest approximately £1m of improvement works to the car park relieving the Council of long-term commitments that would be difficult to maintain. The creation of new businesses should assist the Council in attracting support from the Local Authority Business Grant Initiative Scheme.

The Council entered into a service delivery partnership with Kent County Council for street cleansing , grounds maintenance, sports pitch management and residual highways services from 1 August 2004. The partnership draws on Kent County Councils expertise and efficiencies are derived from economies of scale. The partnership is on the basis of service standards being equivalent to or better that the standards that were being achieved at the date of the transfer. The Kent County Council partnership was used to develop new supplier arrangements for the procurement of goods and services.

The Council has a structured approach to seeking external funding opportunities. Any potential external funding must be seen to be contributing to one or more of the corporate priorities and the desired outcomes. The Council has been very successful in attracting funding from various sources for many years with many millions of pounds secured and match funded over the period. Examples of external funding levered in include;

• Single Regeneration Budget - Believing in Folkestone £11m for a £33m scheme
• Single Regeneration Budget - CASK £2.7m for a £10m scheme
• CPP Area Investment Framework £830k from year 1 allocation
• Interreg £230k
• Hawkinge Neighbourhood Management Partnership £249k for 2005/2006
• Heritage Lottery Fund Coastal Park £1.4m.

(44) Audit Commission Report (8.99 MB)

(45) Coast and Countrysider Magazine (677.08 KB)

Copies of the Council’s Backward (46) and Forward (47) Look Annual Efficiency Statements are provided for information.