The Planning Quality Framework www.qualityframework. net www.pas.gov.uk
Dec 22, 2014
The Planning Quality Framework
www.qualityframework.net www.pas.gov.uk
today
• key principles & objectives• what is it?• how does it work?• watch it in action, look at the outputs• sign up and get going• finish 3.30pm - Q&A as we go
why we need a quality framework
the focus will always be on speed until there is something better to care about
wasted time/effort
validation
conditions
big stuff / small stuff
routine / unusual
how much of what?
permitted development
do customers like us? neighbours feel ignored?
good ideas did we/do we add value?
evidence / guesses
did that work?
focused improvement
measures not targets
VFM
end-to-end
“There’s nothing new under the sun” Ecclesiates 1;9
demonstrate the value of your work
• you do this already• regular, ad-hoc, last minute• 100’s of reports, interesting stuff• confident comparison?
demonstrate the value of your work
• performance management• reporting system data (e.g. PS1/2
returns)• customer care, customer satisfaction• pre-app and post app reviews, AMR
“There’s nothing new under the sun” Ecclesiates 1;9
PQF: re-frames and enhances what you already do and applies some standards so that you can report and compare.
sector-led…thanks
• Hastings• Haringey• Ealing• Cheshire W• Liverpool• Ashford• Reading• Bracknell
Forest• Swindon
Pilot councils• Sefton• Knowsley• Northumberland• Havering• Hounslow• Nottingham City• Poole• Westminster• Wolverhampton
• C’llr Daly @ St Albans• Raymond Crawford @ Hastings • Frances Wheat @ Camden • Stephen Alexander @ W’hampton • Mark Woodward @ Westminster • Martin Vink @ Ashford • Melanie Hale @ St Helens• Steve Dennington @ Croydon• Nick Smith @ Cheshire West• Andy Bowman, Devon
What is it&
What’s involved?
in a nutshell
• data requirements similar to benchmark• less onerous (no timesheets, accountants) • new focus for cost and vfm • online customer surveys, broader audience• ongoing, modular• you get: quarterly, annual reports, free
customer survey system, free tools• commitment? 4 days a year, no £cost
Overview – no single measure of quality
The work
Agents
Neighbours
Applicants
Reviewer(s)
Organisational - (ICT, teams, headcounts etc.)
C’llrs
Amenity Groups
Staff
Outcomes
Resources
“Value”
Process
What if ?
Quantitative Qualitative
Design ?bui
ldoutcomes
Q&A
TipsPractice
OverviewThe work
Agents
Neighbours
Applicants
Reviewer(s)
C’llrs
Amenity Groups
Staff
Tips
Q&A ?
Outcomes
Resources
“Value”
Process
What if ?
Qualitative
Opinions
Design, build,
outcomesPractice helpful tools
Organisational - (ICT, teams, headcounts etc.)
Quantitative
Facts
quantitative: applications dataThe work
Outcomes
Resources
“Value”
Process
What if ?
The work
Outcomes
Resources
“Value”
Process
What if ?
Quarterly.18 month
trends.Ongoing.
quantitative; applications data
qualitative: 8 customer Surveys
Agents
Neighbours
Applicants
Reviewer(s)
C’llrs
Staff
Amenity Groups
Organisational - (ICT, teams, headcounts etc.)
Organisational - (ICT, teams, headcounts etc.)
Agents
Neighbours
Applicants
Reviewer(s)
C’llrs
Amenity Groups
Staff
Frequent. Connected
to decisions.
Annual. “State of nation”
qualitative: 8 Surveys
practice
Design ?bui
ldoutcomes
Q&A
Tips
practice
Design ?bui
ldoutcomes
Q&A
Tips
Self-serve, share, report
Benchmarked ?The work
Agents
Neighbours
Applicants
Reviewer(s)How are you
organised ?(ICT, teams, headcounts etc.)
C’llrs
Amenity Groups
Staff
Outcomes
Resources
“Value”
Process
What if ?Yes
Design ?bui
ldoutcomes
Q&A
TipsNo
It’s a frameworkThe work
Agents
Neighbours
Applicants
Reviewer(s)
How are you organised ?(ICT, teams, headcounts etc.)
C’llrs
Amenity Groups
Staff
Outcomes
Resources
“Value”
Process
What if ?
Design ?bui
ldoutcomes
Q&A
Tips
Quality
How does it work ?The work
Agents
Neighbours
Applicants
Reviewer(s)
How are you organised ?(ICT, teams, headcounts etc.)
C’llrs
Amenity Groups
Staff
Outcomes
Resources
“Value”
Process
What if ?
12-wkly back office download
+ one-off mapping
Details from decisions
issued
Details from your records
Design ?bui
ldoutcomes
Q&A
TipsSelf-serve toolkits / community
reportsThe work
Agents
Neighbours
Applicants
Reviewer(s)
C’llrs
Staff
Tips
Q&A ?
Outcomes
Resources
“Value”
Process
What if ?
Q u a r t e r l
y
Amenity Groups
Design, build,
outcomesgood practice shared
Organisational - (ICT, teams, headcounts etc.)
reportsThe work
Agents
Neighbours
Applicants
Reviewer(s)
C’llrs
Amenity Groups
Staff
Tips
Q&A ?
Outcomes
Resources
“Value”
Process
What if ?
Design, build,
outcomes
Organisational - (ICT, teams, headcounts etc.)
Annual
Questions…The work
Agents
Neighbours
Applicants
Reviewer(s)How are you
organised ?(ICT, teams, headcounts etc.)
C’llrs
Amenity Groups
Staff
Outcomes
Resources
“Value”
Process
What if ?
Design ?bui
ldoutcomes
Q&A
Tips
Reports - what do you get?
“Hitherto, philosophers have sought to understand the world; the point, however, is to change it.' – Karl Marx
…less of this35 pages of histograms ?????!
more of this…Structured ‘story’
Part 1 – The work
Part 2 – The outcomes
Part 3 – Value/non-value
Part 4 – Resources
Part 5 - Process
Part 6 - What if ?
Part 7 – Matching facts with surveys
Council Planning Quality Report
Online
Trends over time Database – DIY reports
more of this…Structured ‘story’
Part 1 – The work
Part 2 – The outcomes
Part 3 – Resources
Part 4 – Value
Part 5 - Process
Part 6 - What if ?
Council Planning Quality Report
Online
TrendsDatabase – DIY reports
the ‘rounded’ picture:
Q: how many expensive process reviews focus on speeding things up but fail to notice that the service says ‘yes’ more often than its peers, creates less waste and has happier customers?
who’d be interested in that message?
PART 1 - THE WORK1a. development categories
Big stuff
PART 1 - THE WORK1b. Application Counts/ Fee Comparator
Purpose: To understand your work and fee income and compare with your peers..
For review:• Are you very different from
your peers? • Are peers seeing more of a
particular type of development?• Something to learn? • Do the applications / fees mix
represent any risk?• Are you managing this risk
appropriately ?
work profile fee profile
PART 2 - OUTCOMES2a. Approval Rates
Purpose: What types of development are we saying 'yes' to and how often?
For review:• Granting more permissions? • Messages for stakeholders?• Is the %age of permissions always
a positive? • Do your approval rates differ
significantly from your peers?• What might be happening
elsewhere that you can learn from?
2a. Approval Rates
PART 3 – VALUE/NON VALUE3a. Withdrawn applications
Purpose: Rate of withdrawal. A 'waste' indicator. Where possible they should be reduced to near zero.
For review:• What is the overall trend ? • Are you doing anything - is it
working? • What’s the cost? Fees don’t
cover costs. Then the 'free go‘? • How many occur at the request
of the council?• What do your developer
community think ?
3b. Follow-up applicationsPurpose: Permission to start? 'follow-ups‘ – series’ of apps for same development. Often the market (EoTs, some NMA), sometimes required by us (vary/remove conditions).
For review:• These don’t cover the costs• Is there anything to be done?• Complex Vs simple • What do developers think? • Is there a positive story
here that you should share?
3b. Follow-up applications
3d. Non-heritage applications zero fee
PART 4 – RESOURCES4b. Headcount estimate
Purpose: how well matched are resources (FTEs) to the volumes of work?
For review:• How does the FTE
estimate compare to reality?
• Caseloads?
• Does the trend correspond with volumes?
• Are there opportunities to re-focus resources?
4c. Development investment
Purpose: What is the investment value that development proposals represent? For review:
• significant inward investment £sum Vs costof planning
• What do the trends (rising/falling) mean for your place?
• Significance between this and fee income (e.g. future resources available)?
• FTE estimate (e.g. can you handle a growing upward trend, or re-focus resources for a downward trend)?
PART 5 – PROCESS5a. Valid on day 1
Purpose: Shows the proportion of applications received that can be worked on straight away.
For review:• This is avoidable time and
cost • Causes. Don't assume are
the sole fault of the applicant/agent.
• Are your procedures, processes, consistency and guidance as good as it could be?
• What are your customers saying?
• Are some application more vulnerable than others?
Why do we use boxplots?
• Shows variation in a set of data – something an ‘average’ doesn’t.
• e.g. average decision 48 days. Hides fact that most are issued between 35 and 54 days.
Knowing this you can:
• be clearer to customers
• improve the process – what is stopping us making 35 days?
Quick guide to box plots
Average
Improvement opportunity
5b. Days to make valid
Purpose: Shows the number of days it takes for applications to be made valid.
5c. end-to-end decision times
Purpose: Shows the number of days between applications being received and a decision notice being issued.
avoid this
PART 6 – WHAT IF…?
• compare me to my peers (you’d expect that)
• compare me to “best of breed” (interesting)
• make me look like the best (very interesting)
PLUS, MORE TO COME …
• Cross-matching facts with customer surveys• Cross-matching the head of service survey
(e.g. what ICT system you use / how you organise validation / headcounts) with performance.
Beyond “things are different” to “this appears to be why things are different”
better for management
• multi-layered views• database is yours – climb inside the numbers• focus on the important; no more expensive
‘blanket’ improvement projects• improve, defend, protect• evidence-based change• culture shift: customer focused service
alongside timely decision making• members?
How does it all work?
1. Customer surveys
Agents
Neighbours
Applicants
Reviewer(s)
C’llrs
Staff
Amenity Groups
Organisational - (ICT, teams, headcounts etc.)
1. customer surveys
• web-based, by email• ‘Limesurvey’: asks:
– how helpful? – manage time well?– use information well? – clarity of decision?
• we set you up, train, support
‘customers’(regular, application - specific)• applicants (members of the public that
have made a planning application)• agents (a professional person or company
making a planning application) • neighbours (a person/organisation that
has commented on an application)• case review (for the council to assess how
well it did)
‘customers’(annual, planning more generally)
• councillors (what’s the community view, avoid the political)
• amenity groups (representative views from organised communities)
• staff (are we helping them to do a good job?)
using Limesurvey• we create, you run your account• customer details uploaded from excel• system emails survey, records and stores responses,
sends reminders and makes reports.
• It’s your survey:• council logo• council email address
• PAS feeds data and responses into performance report
• takes 2 hours to get to grips with it
survey results
Helpful
Use of time
Use of information
Clarity of decision -2
0
2
Applicant
Neighbour
Review
Application Ref: HA/FUL/4456/14
A quick look at the surveys
Things to think about:
implementing the surveys
May 2014 www.pas.gov.uk
Context
• Comms are important – opportunity to create a “voice”. You may struggle with corporate controls. Be a person !
• But don’t get it wrong. Looking stupid is bad.
• Legal context: respect opt-outs• Not confidential. Participants know that
you will see their answers.
Dataset• Straightforward:
– Name, email, reference, description, address, officer
– Also logo and contact point in the council– (this is your survey)
• Select all people connected to decisions between X and Y
• Data quality ? Portal ? First name / last name ?
• = list to apply to policy
Survey decisons• Repeat people
– Agents = highest quality feedback; but send them 3 x emails ?
– Repeated schemes ? Neighbour fatigue ?• Internal review
– Very helpful indeed ! Structure– 3 or 4 mins– But overwhelming. Big sudden batch into
inbox• What would you do ?
Sample survey policy
• Frequent fliers– Letter at the outset explaining– Agent forum and reporting back to forum– Prize draw !
• Review– Anything with objections -> Head– Everything else
• 50% sample randomly sent to reviewer ‘A’ or ‘B’
2. Planning applications data
2. Planning applications data The work
Outcomes
Resources
“Value”
Process
What if ?
what happens
• turns management system data into quarterly performance reports
• excel spreadsheet each quarter
• ‘translates’ council’s data labels into framework ‘standards’ (you verify)
• sector standards will eventually become adopted across the sector.
applications data input
framework data standards
data standards (1)
data standards (2)
• PS1/2• small/large scale
majors
• Q26, Q27, Q28?• works for
counties?
interim output
Councils• Tell us what you call things• Correct errors, back-to-front dates• Send spreadsheet back• Process continues until 90%
match achieved – then we’ll make your report
Self – serve toolkits
Design ?bui
ldoutcomes
Q&A
Tips
3. Self serveassessment Notes
a) Quality of planning Did we mediate well ?b) Quality of development
Has the development met its objectives?
a) quality (of planning)
• how do we collect data on quality of planning?
• toolkit based on ‘building for life’• not much point in comparison
b) quality (of development)
• how do we collect data on quality of development?
• short term: go on site visits (with committee)
• longer term goal: link planning data with completions data. Understand what actually gets built.
getting going
what’s the commitment ?• councils need:
– a chief data wrangler to set up, maintain– An audience (or why bother?) – staff /
councillors / strategic / public / others ?
• Compulsory– Applications data, mappings
• Optional (but strongly recommended)– Surveys– Enhanced data collection (eg agents,
conditions, “parent” developments)
…in terms of time ?
• applications data– initial set up (half a day)– each quarter (couple of hours)
• surveys– understand and use the web tool (half a day)– reg. surveys each week/fortnight (1.5 hours)– annual surveys (2 days per year)
• quality feedback– planning quality (a day per major application)
confidentiality
• the framework can properly present the job that planning does
• It’s a club. It has rules, data standards, confidentiality
• part of the discussion will be how the data is eventually used
call to action• we’ll email you tomorrow• sign up: [email protected]• ‘do it in a day’ support events:
• London (8th October) • Manchester (14th October)• Birmingham (16th October)• London (21 October)• Bristol (28 October)
• confident? don’t wait for us – surveys guide and applications data guide
• first report October 2014• first ‘full’ report Jan 2015
sign up
• To sign up: email [email protected]
• name of main contact and a sub• a JPEG file of your council’s logo on a white
background• the email address that you’d like the surveys
to be emailed from (this might be a person or a generic email e.g. [email protected])
• Portfolio holder (optional)
call to action• we’ll email you tomorrow• sign up: [email protected]• ‘do it in a day’ support events:
• London (8th October) • Manchester (14th October)• Birmingham (16th October)• London (21 October)• Bristol (28 October)
• confident? don’t wait for us – surveys guide and applications data guide
• first report October 2014• first ‘full’ report Jan 2015
thank youdon’t forget feedback forms& please leave badges
email [email protected] www.pas.gov.ukphone 020 7664 3000
In comparison to benchmarkBenchmark Quality frameworkYou have to do it all ModularOnce per year Just startSnapshot Ongoing & regularIndustrial strength accounting
Low hassle
Internal management tool External badge Councils only Councils, developers and
RTPIUnderstand value for money
Understand quality