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: admin@qualityframework.net• ‘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 admin@qualityframework.net

• 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. planning@council.gov.uk)

• Portfolio holder (optional)

call to action• we’ll email you tomorrow• sign up: admin@qualityframework.net• ‘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 martin.hutchings@local.gov.ukweb 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