Contact: Chris Bates 0208 583 2100 Mail: CMT on 27 August ......Contact: Chris Bates Tel: 0208 583 2100 Mail: [email protected] CMT on 27 August, 2009 Executive on 8 September,

Contact: Chris Bates Tel: 0208 583 2100 Mail: [email protected]

CMT on 27 August, 2009 Executive on 8 September, 2009

Raising the Council’s game on Community Engagement

Report by: Cllr Paul Fisher

Summary

1. This report constitutes the Executive’s substantive response to the Motion carried at Borough Council on 21 July about community engagement (Annex A).

2. It also implements the recommendations in the IDeA’s report into our community

engagement (CE) activities (Annex B).

1 RECOMMENDATION 1.1 That the Executive endorse the proposals in this report as the response to the Motion on community engagement carried at Borough Council on 21 July. 1.4 That CMT implement the proposals in this report. 1.3 That this report also serves as the Council’s implementation of the IDeA report’s recommendations concerning its community engagement activities. 1.4 That the statement at Annex C is endorsed by the Executive as a clear account of what it expects from officers when undertaking CE exercises. 2 BACKGROUND 2.1 This report is based closely on a discussion paper considered by CMT on 16 July. 2.2 The Motion at Annex A was passed at Borough Council on 21 July, and the Executive’s response to it is required. 2.3 At our invitation, the IDeA reviewed our CE activities in March. They applied a tough new set of tests called `the ideal Empowering Authority’. They gave us credit in some areas, but highlighted some areas where we could improve. Their report is at Annex B and the recommendations are at Annex B1. 2.4 The IDeA report gives us a timely and comprehensive basis upon which to give effect to the Motion. 2.5 The proposal is for the Executive to agree the statement at Annex C, as a clear account of what it expects from officers involved in any community engagement. The statement is based on the IDeA recommendations. It creates a new Executive definition of, and commitment to, community engagement (paragraphs 5 to 9), which could feature as a

major article in the November edition of Hounslow Matters, possibly endorsed by our partners, as well. 2.6 Annex C also sets out the inward facing processes and principles the Executive expects all officers to follow when undertaking community engagement activities. It should be read with the community engagement toolkit at Annex D. 2.7 The statement at Annex C can be reviewed by members as necessary.

2.8 The Council should be wary of raising residents’ expectations that it will be able to take decisions that reflect their views and wishes on every occasion. There are obvious limits to budgets, there are regulatory and legislative procedures to follow, and sometimes there are decisions which need to be taken in the wider interest of the borough which may not be popular in individual wards or near local sites. But, subject to that, the statement says (at paragraph 16) that there should be a general presumption that residents’ views will be reflected wherever possible when making changes to policies and service delivery.

2.8 The statement also expects officers to liaise early with the Council’s partners, and encourage them also to work to the principles and processes in this statement if they are not doing so already. 3. ARCHITECTURE AND GOVERNANCE 3.1 To help give effect to the Executive statement, the Council needs more coherent `architecture’ and governance for CE. This could be as follows: The Executive 3.2 Issues its statement on community engagement. Calls for [six monthly] progress reports on all CE exercises and their outcomes, and the adoption of best practice. CMT 3.3 CMT owns and oversees the implementation of the Executive statement, supports and empowers the corporate community engagement network (see below) and monitors progress on encouraging major partners to adopt the gist of the Executive statement if they don’t do so already. Corporate CE network 3.4 All services should be adequately represented by officers who are empowered to check that the Executive statement is being fully implemented. These officers will be `CE champions’ in their directorates. They will come together regularly to help the centre ensure a consistent and coherent approach to CE across all services; to discuss what has and hasn’t worked well; and to support the development of the Hounslow CE Centre for Ideas (paragraph in the executive statement). Corporate Policy, Performance and Communications Unit (CPPCU) 3.5 CPPCU will monitor progress across all services. It will

• Promulgate the Executive statement;

• Co-ordinate reports to CMT and the Executive;

• Undertake periodic checks to see that the statement is being adhered to consistently across the Council;

• Ensure the CE 12 month diary is working well, whereby directorates log all planned CE activities on a rolling basis;

• Ensure that CE takes place in a joined up, strategic way, looking across the annual CE diary to spot, e.g., overlapping activities and opportunities to merge CE exercises with other services or partners;

• Provide a CE service for directorates via the Residents’ Panel;

• Provide the main link to the corporate Communications team, which has an important part to play in CE (Hounslow matters, Leader’s road show, etc);

• Carry out periodic challenge to directorates to ensure proper capturing and actioning of feedback and communication back to residents; and

• Lead on the set up and running of the Centre for Ideas.

5. THE AREA COMITTEES 4.1 The Executive Statement at Annex C outlines improvements needed to the way Area Committees operate. More developed proposals will come forward as soon as possible. 4. TIMETABLE 4.1 The Executive statement at Annex C proposes deadlines for the various strands of work.

5.0 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE COMMENTS 5.1 The costs of implementing the measure outlined in this report are provided for in the Council’s approved revenue budget. There are no additional financial commitments to the Council arising from the recommendations on community engagement. 6.0 BOROUGH SOLICITOR COMMENTS 6.1 Comment were requested from legal on 11 August 2009: to date a response has not been received 7.0 EQUALITIES IMPACT ASSESSMENT

7.1 The Council is required to undertake equality impact assessments in response to legal obligations set out by the Disability Discrimination Act, Race Relations (Amendment) Act and the Gender Equality duty. The duty requires public authorities to assess its policies and services for differential or adverse impact on grounds of race, disability and gender. This requires the Council to consult and involve people who may be affected by policy changes, reviews, budget decisions, service delivery changes etc.

7.2 The equality impact assessment concludes that the proposal to improve community engagement and to develop relations with residents’ organisations and civic groups around the Borough more systematically, will have a positive impact on meeting the equalities obligations for the following reasons:

7.3 It can:

• improve the Council’s ability to undertake impact assessments because communities directly affected by decisions will now be more routinely consulted and engaged.

• promote social inclusion because it encourages local people to engage in debates about local priorities that affect them and influence decision making

• improve access and engagement in civic participation for all groups because there is a comprehensive and creative range of engagement methods developed that would suit the different needs of local people.

• encourage the Council and its partners to secure a better understanding of local communities and a better understanding of the different needs and aspirations

• enable information to be used intelligently to serve the needs of local communities more effectively

• raise awareness amongst all communities of the Council’s ambitions and priorities

• provide greater scope for local communities to influence policy and service delivery

• promote genuine community engagement to challenge the way services are delivered and identify service improvements

• contribute to local knowledge; develop local capacity, confidence and encourage community ownership of Council and partner priorities

• improve shared intelligence processes to agree joint priorities and optimise resources to provide seamless and cohesive services and reduce the likelihood of consultation fatigue

• help to improve trust and develop long term relationships between the Council, its partners and local communities

• manage expectations better by engaging communities on difficult and challenging issues and competing priorities

• improve outcomes for all customers by generating a culture within the Council and its partners to take a more purposive approach to empowering communities through public participation .

Background Papers: IDEA report into LB Hounslow’s CE activities

This report has been or is due to be considered by: CMT on 27 August and the executive on 8 September, 2009

This report is relevant to the following wards/areas: All

Annex A

Motion This Council calls to expand upon the Motion passed on 4th March 2008, which sought to improve Community Engagement and to develop relations with residents’ organisations and civic groups around the Borough. “This Council now requires that timelines be set in place for the full and final implementation of a radical and robust Community Engagement strategy, which will necessitate the buy-in and full co-operation of all employees of the organisation. “This Council therefore authorises the Lead Member for Community Engagement to draw up a six-month programme for the incorporation of an unambiguous empowerment strategy into all work undertaken by the local authority, and asserts that the programme will come into operation no later than six months from the passing of this Motion”. Proposed by Councillor Phil Andrews Seconded by Councillor Jon Hardy

Annex B

The IDeA Report

London Borough of Hounslow April 2009 Community Engagement Evaluation Project supporting local government improvement improvement and development agency for local government

Final Report: London Borough of Hounslow Issued 5/06/2009

Table of contents

Executive summary and key recommendations Key recommendations Report Background Mainstreaming: Culture Change in Councils and Partnerships Working with communities, neighbourhoods and localities The role of members in community empowerment Building the evidence and business case for community empowerment Integrating community empowerment with community cohesion, equalities and human rights


Executive summary and key recommendations Summary The London Borough of Hounslow is a high performing authority which was rated 4 star in the recent Audit Commission assessment. It has received a number of external awards and validation for good practice, including being a Beacon council for inclusive and cohesive communities. The evaluation project of community engagement provided the opportunity for the council and its partners to review good practice and to consider areas where changes could be made. This is innovative and challenging work for which the council should be commended. Community engagement is driven by the political leadership who are determined that the council should be more responsive to the needs of the community. There is strong political leadership to serve the diverse communities in the borough and to achieve improvements in key areas which matter to local people. The council and its partners in the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) are committed to new ways of working to deliver the priorities, which are set out in the community plan. However, the corporate overview and ownership of the community engagement agenda needs to be further embedded. At present there is no consistently applied corporate standard for consultation and engagement, or a process for systematically gathering and sharing information. Partnership working could be further improved and it is unclear how the delivery of Local Area Agreement (LAA) targets will be monitored. The council can be justifiably proud of the range of grant support, consultation and community engagement events across the borough. The community engagement activities around heath and social care have been praised by external inspectors and deserve a special mention. There is good demographic information on the needs of the residents, population trends and health and well being issues. Partners are starting to work together more effectively and to collaborate where appropriate. Despite this progress, the review team consider that structures could work better to engage communities, improve partnership working and build sustainable relationships. In preparing for the new challenges of Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA), there are more opportunities to undertake joint engagement activities, to share information and learning, and avoid duplication. This will further build upon the council’s and partners’ collective understanding of community needs. There is cross party support for community engagement, members are visible and active within their communities and Scrutiny is actively involving local communities and individuals in service improvement. Members are keen to ‘revolutionise community engagement’, they want a more radical approach and a faster pace of progress. CMT share these ambition to drive further improvements in community engagement and this is evident in the Chief Executive wanting to do more work on community engagement, to learn from best practice, try new ideas, and develop the notion of a Hounslow Centre for Ideas. The potential of Area Committees to engage communities and deliver improvement in services and outcomes is not currently being maximised within the council and across all the partners and stakeholders. There is evidence of service improvement resulting from engaging with a range of communities and some partners are sharing and using joint indicators, for example Police, Fire and Health.


This commitment provides the potential through better utilisation of existing resources to enhance engagement and improve outcomes. However, all stakeholders are not clear about the benefits of community engagement, sharing best practice or how to measure improved outcomes. This means it is difficult to evidence how involvement is leading to service improvements and efficiencies. There is strong political leadership for integrating community empowerment with equalities and cohesion work. Hounslow has been leading the sub-regional programme for West London since 2003. The Beacon award puts the council as one of a small number of leading practitioners in this area. This is a great achievement that recognises the long standing commitment of the borough to working with diverse communities. The council needs to clarify what is meant by treating everyone equally, as this could be open to a range of interpretations. The team were not confident that relying solely on web based information provided high quality access for all service users and the wider community.


Key recommendations The recommendations of the review team are set out under main headings of the benchmark of the ‘ideal empowering authority’ as follows:

Mainstreaming: culture change in councils and partnerships 1 Hounslow, working with it’s strategic partners, needs to develop a corporate approach to community engagement which includes;

• a clear definition of what this will mean for the borough

• an explicit commitment from all stakeholders to what it will achieve

• a corporate approach as to how it will be delivered

• a systematic method of capturing how feedback from the community

• influences priorities and service delivery

• an agreed approach for communicating this back to communities. This will ensure that community engagement informs and drives how the council and its partners work together to deliver improved outcomes for the community. 2 The council and the LSP need to review their working practices to ensure that community empowerment is at the heart of decision making, informing strategies, policies, delivery plans and commissioning processes. 2 The council should progress the creation of a Hounslow centre for ideas. This could become a repository for sharing ideas, information and knowledge with partners and help to progress a culture of joint working. It will also encourage learning and innovation and to embed new working patterns and behaviours.

Working with communities, neighbourhoods and localities 4. The council could make better use of existing structures, particularly Area Committees, to ensure that all agencies work together more effectively and that community engagement and empowerment are embedded within them. This includes more sharing of information, learning from experience, both good and not so good. This will lead to more sustainable relationships, reduced duplication and overlaps and ultimately more efficient and effective working arrangements, as well as enhanced capacity within the community.

The role of members in community empowerment 5. Maximise the benefit that the member drive for community engagement brings to the organisation. Members’ unique insights into their communities needs to be valued by all partners and stakeholders. 6. Members need to be adequately supported to undertake their community leadership role and to develop the appropriate skills to engage positively with the diverse communities in the borough.


Building the evidence and business case for community empowerment 7. The council could be more proactive in evaluating the impact on partnership outcomes as a result of community engagement activity. It needs to establish a baseline of qualitative and quantitative data that will allow comparisons over time. Cost benefit analysis needs to be undertaken where relevant, and the information from this fed into future plans and activities and communicated back.

Integrating community empowerment with community cohesion, equalities and human rights 8. Hounslow should celebrate and promote the learning and good practice that are clearly embedded in how it works with its diverse communities, internally and externally. Celebrating success helps to build confidence with partners and stakeholders to develop their capacity to integrate community empowerment work with cohesion and equalities activities. It can also help to motivate staff and develop their confidence to achieve further improvement.


Report Background 9. The London borough of Hounslow is an ambitious council that is keen to build on what has already been achieved and it recognises the benefit of learning from the wider local government sector. The authority is planning to develop a community engagement strategy that reflects what the council and its partners want to achieve, for the benefit of the whole community. In order to progress this, the IDeA were commissioned to provide a comprehensive assessment of where Hounslow are currently with community engagement, assistance with action planning and support to derive a blue print for the future. This will support the council to meet the community engagement requirements of the new CAA inspection process. 10. The administration is committed to working with partners to empower the local community and to seek out ways to involve residents in decisions about how challenges are addressed. The Hounslow Plan contains a commitment to ‘reach out and engage with community based action groups, residents’ and other local interest groups’. The political leadership has a stated commitment to invest time and resources into strengthening community cohesion, improving life opportunities for those who are genuinely disadvantaged and making the streets safe for all. Hounslow undertook this work in order to raise the profile of community engagement within the borough and should be commended for this. 11. The methodology used to deliver the work was through the tried and tested peer review process. Peer review is not inspection, it is constructive challenge delivered by ‘critical friends’. The aim is to recognise good practice and bring focus to areas where changes are required. The technique can be important in changing the way people think and feel about issues and helping to build a consensus on priorities for future action. 12. The basis for the evaluation was the new framework for an Ideal Empowering Authority. The headline themes are: Mainstreaming:Culture Change in Councils and Partnerships. Working with Communities, Neighbourhoods and Localities The Role of Members in Community Empowerment Building the Evidence and Business Case for Community Empowerment Integrating Community Empowerment with Community Cohesion, Equalities and Human Rights Changing the way organisations work and are structured in order to make them responsive to communities. How agencies and communities can work together to identify priority outcomes and address them. Members as community leaders, helping communities and agencies to work together, and strengthening democratic accountability. Evidencing that community empowerment delivers efficient and effective services and stronger, more democratic communities Community empowerment delivers cohesive and inclusive communities and addresses inequalities

Final Report: London Borough of Hounslow Issued 5/06/2009 The Framework was developed by the Network of Empowering Authorities – 18 councils from across the country who have been chosen by Communities and Local Government to be champions of community empowerment. The NEA is funded for 2 years by CLG, and supported by the IDeA. Its purpose is to support the development of good community empowerment practice in the local government sector by developing learning and tools and then cascading that learning. Most councils and partnerships will only meet some of the success factors, and can use the Framework as a tool to support further development. The Framework links to other tools and assessment frameworks, including the CAA, and has been developed with the involvement of other partners including CAA Leads. Authorities that have assessed their empowerment work using the Framework will be able to provide it as evidence for the CAA. The Framework also links closely to the Duty to Involve – meeting the Framework will help you to meet that Duty.

13. The members of the evaluation team were:

• Cllr Lynne Hillan, Cabinet member, LB Barnet

• Keith Murdoch, Director of Partnership, Performance and Policy, Leicester City Council

• Des Waters, Head of Public Realm, LB Southwark

• Sue Oppenheimer, Strategic Advisor to NEA

• Carmel Gallagher, Review manager 14. The team was onsite from 25th -27th March. The programme included activities designed to enable members of the team to meet and talk to a range of internal and external stakeholders. These activities included:

• interviews and discussions with lead members, senior officers and partners

• focus groups with middle managers, frontline staff and residents

• observation of council meetings

• reading background documents provided by the council. 15. The team was appreciative of the welcome and hospitality provided by the council and would like to thank everybody that they met during the process for their time and contributions. The way in which the needs of the team were taken care of deserves a special mention. 16. The feedback to the council on the last day of the onsite work gave an overview of the key messages. This report builds on the initial findings and gives a detailed account of the project. The report is structured around the key areas of the ideal authority benchmark listed above.


Context 17. The London Borough of Hounslow is the ninth largest London borough. It covers 22 square miles from Chiswick in the east, to Bedfont in the west. The Thames flows for 4 miles of its northern bank and the Brent, Crane, Longford and the Duke of Northumberland’s rivers as well as the Grand Union Canal run through the borough. Hounslow is a major gateway to the capital and is rich in cultural heritage. It has 1,238 hectares of public open space with 954 managed for nature conservation. There are also 74 parks and recreation grounds. 18. Hounslow's situation in West London gives it access to a number of unique factors that distinguish its economy from its neighbours and the rest of the UK. These include Heathrow Airport and a major creative industries sector. Some of the biggest blue chip businesses in the world, such as BSKYB and GlaxoSmithKline, are in the borough. There is also a significant concentration of employment within the food, transport and logistics sectors. There are strategic road, rail and air links to all parts of Britain and the rest of the world. 19. The economic prosperity of the borough is supported by freight, especially that generated by Heathrow airport. Over 11,500 residents are directly employed at the airport itself, and many more in industries in the airport supply chain, such as freight handling, logistics, security, hospitality and catering. Knowledge industries now provide about 30% of jobs in the borough compared to 24% nationally. By contrast, borough residents are typically employed in relatively low skill/low pay jobs in catering, retail or logistics. Employment rates are generally fairly high although the economic downturn will impact on this. However, average income levels are poor compared with London as a whole, and vary sharply from the east of the borough (very high levels of pay) to the west (very low levels). 20. Hounslow’s resident population is over 218,000 and growing. Over 25% of the population are children and young people. Approximately 37% of local people are from Black and Minority Ethnic communities. By 2010, statisticians predict that 50% of the population will be from Black and Minority Ethnic communities, including large numbers from the Eastern European accession states, creating additional pressures on housing and community services. The borough has areas of relative deprivation like Feltham, and areas of affluence like Chiswick in the east. Overall Hounslow ranks 102nd most deprived of the 354 councils, (source ODPM indices of deprivation 2004). 21. As a `gateway’ to London, close to Heathrow airport, Hounslow experiences a constant flow of communities from everywhere. There are more than 140 languages spoken in the borough, and 67% of school pupils are from a non-White British background (2007). The variety of people and number of languages spoken represents a challenge of communication but also a great opportunity, affecting culture, business and markets as well as international influence and relations. 22. Challenges arise from unique changes in the population, environment and economy, beyond those of London or the UK in general. The development of Heathrow’s Terminal 5 has also had an impact on cohesion. It created a large influx of Eastern European construction workers into the borough. The continuously changing population creates cohesion challenges. For example, there is evidence of an increase in inter-ethnic rivalry and resentment over employment opportunities and services. 23. Monitoring evidence shows that children from Somali communities are currently the most vulnerable group to racial harassment and bullying. They may be exclusion issues for the indigenous white and British communities, the established Asian communities or the more recent Somali and Kosovan-Albanian communities. Language problems and communication difficulties can prevent new arrivals to the borough from accessing services.

Final Report: London Borough of Hounslow Issued 5/06/2009 24. There is a high demand for affordable housing in the borough, with 11,066 households on the housing register of whom 1,107 are homeless in temporary accommodation. The London Plan sets the borough a target of 445 additional homes every year until 2017. Over the last three years, 4,000 homes have been delivered of which at least 25% were affordable and approximately 20% were student accommodation. Major housing development has focused on the borough’s town centres as

part of wider strategies for their regeneration, as well as along major arterial routes such as the Great West Road. Housing is being included as part of mixed use schemes for the redevelopment of a large number of long term vacant employment sites. 25. Life expectancy and health deprivation in Hounslow are significantly worse than the London average, and distinctly different from most other populations in North West London. High rates of teenage pregnancy and obesity are key concerns within the community. Hounslow residents have a life expectancy of about one year less than the average Londoner, and the shortest life spans in North West London. Improvement in life expectancy has been slower than other London Boroughs. Hounslow also has a significantly higher rate of tax credit claimants than even very deprived inner London boroughs, such as Hackney and Islington. 26. The local population is expected to become older and even more ethnically diverse. The demand and complexity of healthcare requirements will significantly increase, particularly as the prevalence of diabetes and hypertension is expected to increase with associated impact on acute services. There is also an urgent need to raise local skills levels in the workforce which, measured by NVQ attainment levels, are low by London standards, especially in the west of the borough. Birth rates have been rising steadily and are set to continue to 2012. 27. The council is an active member of the West London Alliance (WLA), comprising the London boroughs of Brent, Ealing, Hammersmith & Fulham, Harrow, Kensington & Chelsea, Hillingdon and Hounslow. The WLA lobbies for the interests of the sub-region, develops collaborative strategies and initiatives on key subjects such as transport and economic development, and shares knowledge, expertise and resources to improve the provision of public services in west London. The geographical area represented by these alliances is equal to that of Greater Manchester. 28. The Hounslow LSP has been in existence for several years. Its members are:

• London Borough of Hounslow (the Leader is the current Chair)

• Hounslow PCT

• Hounslow Job Centre Plus

• Hounslow Racial Equality Council

• Council for Voluntary Services, Hounslow

• London West LSC

• London Fire Brigade

• Hounslow Metropolitan Police, Hounslow

• West London Business. 29. Hounslow Primary Care Trust has its own 5 year Commissioning Strategy Plan for 2007-2012, which sets out its aspirations and direction as an organisation in its own right and complements and supports the objectives in the wider LSP Community Plan. There are approximately 800 voluntary and community sector organisations. The majority of these organisations are in small and local community groups.

Final Report: London Borough of Hounslow Issued 5/06/2009 30 The LSP has drawn together the community aspirations in its single, overarching Community Plan: building a strong, vibrant and united community. It sets out a vision that by 2017 Hounslow will be a borough that achieves the aspirations of the local community and continues to be proud of its identity. It will be a borough that thrives from a new sense of unity where the community continues to celebrate diversity and build cohesion. The overarching theme is of a growing community, which incorporates these key themes;

• A cleaner and greener community

• A safer and stronger community

• A healthy and caring community

• An economically active and skilled community

• A Children’s and young peoples community

• A creative community The partners have agreed that two principles drive the delivery of this work; community cohesion and openness and transparency. 31. The Hounslow Plan: building pride borough wide identifies the contribution of the council to the delivery of these ambitions. It lists 10 promises about the work that will be done to improve the borough over the next two years. These are; -keeping the council tax as low as possible -investing £2 million to improve parks, libraries and the environment -reducing the amount of graffiti by half and increasing the number of crews engaged in this work -planting 1000 new trees in the borough -investing £250, 000 to improve community safety with other partners -keeping Hounslow’s weekly collection and introducing a new recycling scheme -investing an extra £2 million to improve roads and pavements -putting more services on the website so that residents can access them at all times -Bringing new affordable family sized homes to the borough -Introducing CCTV to more parts of the borough 32. The council has 20 wards with 60 elected members. Following the election in May 2006 Hounslow is under No Overall Control (NOC). There are currently 24 Labour councillors, 23 Conservative, 3 Hounslow Independent Alliance, 4 Liberal Democrat and 6 Independent Community Group. The administration is formed by an alliance between the Conservative and Independent Community groups. Political leadership is provided by the leader of the Conservative group with 9 executive members, two of whom are from the Independent Community group. 33. The borough contains five distinct localities with their own unique characteristics and needs. The council has recognised the differing characteristics of these five areas by establishing an Area Committee and associated Area Plan for each. The Area Committees are responsible for monitoring the delivery of services in their area. Up to three local people can be co-opted on to the committees to help with this work. Larger developments and environmental issues of borough wide or regional importance are dealt with by the sustainable development committee. Overview and Scrutiny sets up scrutiny panels to consider issues in detail, they may co-opt 3 external people onto the panels. The results of their reviews are reported to the Executive who have responsibility for acting on the recommendations.

Final Report: London Borough of Hounslow Issued 5/06/2009 34. Managerial leadership is provided by the Chief Executive and 5 Directors. They are supported by the Head of Scrutiny and Performance and the Head of Policy and Communications who report directly to the Chief Executive. The service directors are supported by a number of Assistant directors and Heads of service. The council is operating within a tight financial structure, it has a requirement to achieve £53 million savings in 2 years and zero tax increases. 35. The Hounslow Consultation Network is representative of some council departments and was set up to ensure that officers share ideas, avoid duplication and work collaboratively.Hounslow LINK local involvement network has so far recruited over 200 members and runs an innovative website with discussion forums and e-voting on issues. The evaluation project of community engagement provided the opportunity for the council and its partners to review good practice and to consider areas where changes could be made. This is innovative and challenging work for which the council should be commended.


Mainstreaming: Culture Change in Councils and Partnerships Strengths

• The Leader and the Chief Executive provide a strong drive to improve

• community engagement

• Local pockets of good practice in information sharing

• Commitment by staff and partners to improving community engagement

• Co-terminosity of boundaries provides a strong base for improving community

• engagement.

Issues to consider

• The corporate overview and ownership of the agenda could be better embedded

• Further opportunities to embed 3rd sector engagement across the council and LSP decision making

• There are limited opportunities for front line staff to input their knowledge of community views and neighbourhood issues to inform decision making

• Partnership working could be improved. 36. The Leader and the Chief Executive provide a strong drive to improve community engagement and to ensure the council is more responsive to the community. The administration is committed to serving the needs of all the communities in the borough and there is evidence of Executive members taking difficult decisions to support this. The Leader attends a range of public meetings, including events organised by the voluntary sector, he is active in the LSP and works with a range of stakeholders to ensure improved outcomes for the people of the borough. The Community Plan and LAA targets reflect priorities agreed between the LSP partners, as a result of community consultation. The ten promises articulated in the Hounslow Plan are well known to internal and external stakeholders. Communities were involved in defining these priority outcomes through a series of engagement mechanisms. 37. There are pockets of good practice in information sharing with partners and new working patterns are emerging, including some joint working with communities, in some services. There is an Older Peoples Volunteer Panel of 32 residents which undertake service evaluations and other vulnerable adults are involved in this work. Over 400 people are members of the Carers Forum and 69 local people have become health trainers to support friends and neighbours to develop healthy lifestyles. There are examples of joint working between health and transport staff to combat obesity. Information from the Connexions service was used to inform the tendering process for service delivery and services users were involved in the procurement of the meals on wheels service. The work of the Community Safety partnership is informed by feedback from the public and service delivery targets are adjusted to take account of pockets of crime and anti social behaviour. 38. There is strong commitment by partners and staff to joint working. A history of working together has provided opportunities to develop a better understanding of a wider range of services to the community. Partners confirm they value the support they get from the council and they are keen to collaborate more. Hounslow Homes has a range of initiatives to involve tenants in the design of services. The partnership with the PCT has the potential to improve due to the appointment of a new director of Public Health. Regular newsletters, in particular ‘Hounslow Matters’ keep the community and staff informed of new developments. There is evidence of partnership with the 3rd Sector. The STAR centre and EACH, the Ethnic Alcohol Counseling in Hounslow delivers work on behalf of the council, and the Leader writes a column in the Voice magazine. The sector is represented on the LSP and feedback confirms that relationships have improved as a result of regular

Final Report: London Borough of Hounslow Issued 5/06/2009 meetings with the Leader and Chief Executive. A new officer has been appointed to lead NI 7 engagement work, improving this national indictor is one of the 35 LAA targets. The team heard positive feedback about improved communication with a range of community groups. The consultation exercise on the budget and the development of the Hounslow Plan deserve a special mention. 39. Co-terminosity of boundaries with the PCT, police and partners provides a firm foundation for joint working. The themed partnerships have a direct link with LSP members and Children’s Services are aligned with Area Committees. The structural arrangements are helping staff to develop their confidence in working with partners across a number of professional and technical areas. These have the potential to deliver improved outcomes for all stakeholders, and to improve community engagement, using existing resources more effectively. 40. The corporate overview and ownership of the community engagement agenda could be better embedded in the council. At present there is no consistently applied corporate standard for consultation and engagement, or a process for systematically gathering and sharing information. The review team found evidence which suggested the focus appears to be on consultation and information giving, rather than empowering communities to work with partners to develop new innovative ways of working and sharing service delivery. There was no evidence of aligned/pooled budgets, shared consultation and engagement activities or common performance management systems. 41. There are further opportunities to embed 3rd sector engagement across the council and LSP decision making. There are opportunities to commission voluntary sector organisations to deliver services, including consultation, involvement and building community capacity to engage on behalf of all strategic partners. Feedback to the team indicated that the voluntary sector finds contracting arrangements complex and bureaucratic, which does not encourage learning or innovation. 42. There are limited opportunities for staff to input their knowledge of community views and neighbourhood issues to inform decision making. Front line staff have no forum for giving feedback, customer input is not systematically fed into business/corporate plans and there is little sharing of customer intelligence between teams. Residents perceive that cross departmental working could be improved to resolve difficulties that cut across service areas, for example abandoned vehicles on private land. Opportunities exist to widen the membership of the existing consultation network to include the equalities team and officers from partner organisations and to broaden its remit to incorporate all engagement and empowerment activity. Outputs from this should inform strategic working across all partners. However, this needs stronger corporate leadership and active support from LSP partners to make it a reality. 43. Feedback to the review team confirmed that partnership working could be further improved. Residents perceive that some agencies do not work well together and there is a culture which does not readily accept challenge. Community information generated by commissioning bodies is not being captured or utilised by the rest of the partners. The thematic sub groups could do more to link together and where appropriate, support and challenge the LSP. Police Panels could link with Area Committees as a means of feeding in community issues and increasing community participation. The linking of community engagement into partnership working is not clear and the LSP could be more proactive in driving this agenda. 44. It is unclear how the delivery of the LAA will be scrutinised, in terms of improved outcomes for the community. At the time of the review, there was no corporate plan to improve the delivery of NI 4 which is a national indicator on the number of people who feel they can influence decisions in their locality. An action plan has now been devised which outlines the activities that will contribute to achieving targets associated with the indicator. This is an opportunity for the council to capture good practice that clearly exists, and share the learning with all stakeholders.


Working with communities, neighbourhoods and localities Strengths

• Range of successful examples of consultation, engagement, participation and

• community events

• Developing trust with partner agencies through joint projects

• Evidence that services are shaped by engagement with communities and service

• users

• Several engagement structures in place

• Good information on communities in the borough

• Some building of community capacity by service-based involvement officers Issues to consider

• Structures could work better to engage communities, improve partnership

• working and build sustainable relationships

• Need more joining-up across the council to share skills and contacts

• Information could be used more effectively at neighbourhood level and subward

• level to inform decision making

• Limited feedback to residents on the impact of their involvement 45. There are many examples of consultation, engagement, participation and community events and activities, across the borough. There are multi-agency supported community action days when staff and the community work together, for instance to clean up a community hall. A member-led community consultation exercise on an estate led to a play area being relocated and tenants are being invited to a conference to discuss priorities. The citizenship ceremony in the Civic Centre is highly regarded and is visible evidence that Hounslow is welcoming and engaging people from diverse cultures and communities. The review team were impressed by the civic recognition of local Gurkhas who were awarded the Victoria Cross, as well as a ceremony for members of the armed forces on their way to combat duties. Restoring the war memorial is another example of the council working with community groups, in response to an identified need. 46. The corporate grants scheme which provides grants to community groups is well regarded and has facilitated the delivery of a number of community based activities. This included residents organising an event to agree priorities and an estate walkabout which led to a cleaner environment. These are examples of community empowerment which enables the community to set their own agenda and influence what happens in their area. 47. Hounslow is developing trust with partner agencies through a number of joint projects. Agencies like the Fire and Police service work together with the council to address common problems with communities and identify appropriate solutions. This helps to avoid duplication and makes more effective use of resources. However, the council could be more involved in police ward panels and in estate walks involving the ALMO and the Police.


48. There is evidence that some services are shaped by engagement with communities and service users. The resident’s panel is used regularly to get feedback on a range of services. Friends of the Park group have led resident consultation on improvements and changes were made in line with residents’ views. There were a number of examples in Children’s services of changes due to feedback from service user groups. The Carers Network in Adult Social Care influenced the setting up of a voucher scheme to enable choice in respite care. 49. There are several engagement structures in place. These include the Community Involvement Advisory Panel which has a role in making grants to local organisations, neighbourhood Watch meetings, the Disability Forum and the School council which feeds into the Youth council. Children’s services have an active diverse consultative group who meet regularly and input their views into the service. Community Safety partnership held 200 + public meetings last year, ran 4 roadshows and 5 focus groups which engaged over 3000 people in the borough. The Area Committees bring discussion and problem solving to a local level. Members are involved in discussing local issues with their communities and residents value the strong social network and neighbourly contact this provides. People are encouraged to take up a range of opportunities for engagement through advertising in libraries, the website and the council newsletter. However, these structures are not sufficiently linked, so for instance, there is no formal channel for issues raised at neighbourhood Watch meetings to be fed into Area Committees. 50. There is good information on the make up of communities in the borough which provides a sound basis for community engagement, joint service planning, and working with partners. The council has a strategic overview of community demographics, Members understand the diverse needs of the communities they represent and work to empower local people to get involved. CMT share these ambitions to drive further improvements in community engagement and this is evident in the Chief Executive wanting to do more work on community engagement, to learn from best practice and try new ideas, and develop the notion of a Hounslow Centre for Ideas. Some services are building capacity in the community to reduce dependency and ensure a more proactive approach in the future. 51. Structures could work better to engage communities, improve partnership working and build sustainable relationships. Some Area Committees struggle to generate ideas on where to spend the devolved budgets. Feedback indicates that the Residents Panel is not systematically used by partners. Area Committees could be structured to make them less formal in style and more participative. This would provide more opportunities for public engagement, discussion around issues raised by community members which impact on the community and provides a forum for problem solving and exploring the implications of new initiatives. There are opportunities to join the council engagement structures with the area arrangements of the police service. The Fire service is also keen to become better coordinated with the work of other agencies, in the borough. 52. There was limited evidence of sharing information from consultation and engagement activities with other partners across the council. Stakeholders need better co-ordination across the council to share skills, contacts and the results of engagement. This will reduce duplication and enable all services to learn from worked well, or share experiences that could be replicated elsewhere. There did not appear to be a co-ordinated council-wide approach to engaging with communities. The good practice needs to be joined up into a consistent council and partnership approach. Area Committees could become the central plank of this strategy, with residents and partners to come together for genuine prioritisation and problem solving. The Police ward panels and engagement activities could be broadened to include partners and to link better into Area Committees. 53. Hounslow could use information more effectively at neighbourhood level and sub-ward level to inform decision making. Some communities have low expectations in terms of attainment or engagement and will require more support and development than others who are more articulate in expressing their needs. More support is needed to build capacity for residents to be involved. Customer access is mainly web based which can restrict opportunities for dialogue or service design and delivery. The impact of this is that service delivery is more remote for the user and the provider.


54. The review team were given a number of examples where feedback to residents could be improved. Involved residents need to be kept informed as to what happened as a result of their input, particularly if their comments were not acted upon. Closing the feedback loop helps the community to understand the impact of their involvement and builds individual motivation to contribute in the future. It should also make a positive contribution to raising the profile of the council in the community.


The role of members in community empowerment Strengths

• Cross party support for community engagement.

• Active members who know their communities.

• Scrutiny processes actively involving local communities and individuals. Issues to consider

• The potential of Area Committees to engage communities and deliver improvement

• in services and outcomes is not being maximised.

• Members are asking for clear direction and a council owned strategy on community

• engagement 55. The review team were impressed by the cross party support for community engagement. There is strong political leadership that recognises the benefits of working in this way and a clear understanding that participative democracy can strengthen representative democracy. Portfolio members are actively working with senior officers and service users to ensure good practice and feedback is used to mprove services. 56. Hounslow has active members who know their communities; they are involved in a variety of community organisations and committed to delivering what the community needs. Lead members work with partners to influence and inform outcomes, across a range of service areas. There were a number of community engagement activities linked to local democracy week, for example school debates which helped to develop young people’s understanding of local democracy and citizenship. 57. Scrutiny processes are actively involving local communities and individuals. This work has the potential to improve public services. The review team heard feedback on officers working proactively to identify community concerns and involving local people to develop solutions that were implemented locally. Scrutiny reviews which involve residents and users have impacted positively on their long-term engagement in service planning and review – for instance within the Speech Therapist service and within Special Educational Needs transport. The Leader’s Question time organised by Scrutiny, attracted over 150 people and there are plans to repeat it with more involvement of members and officers. There are examples of how the community feeds into policy work, i.e. pavement licenses for cafes were £750, and this has now been amended to £40 per square metre so that local businesses are not disadvantaged. 58. The potential of Area Committees to engage communities and deliver improvement in services and outcomes is not being maximised. There is concern as to how representative the participants are; feedback indicated when people attend they seem to be the active few, and there seemed to be no work to increase and broaden engagement. Community development staff across the council do not seem to be encouraging greater participation in Area Committees. It was not clear to the review team how local issues feed into strategic policy work that informs higher level decision making, or how the issues identified at one committee are linked to similar issues in another part of the borough. The review team consider more time should be devoted to interaction with the community, rather than what is currently perceived as council business. The agenda for meetings is long with too many presentations by officers and there are limited opportunities for the community to debate issues and develop options in partnership with members and officers.

59. Members need to have more input at the policy development stage and the Area Committees provide an appropriate mechanism to explore the implications of new emerging policies on the wider community. There is a significant resource invested in Area Committees which, with a more innovative approach, could deliver significant improvement in engagement, and as a result, improvement in outcomes.

Final Report: London Borough of Hounslow Issued 5/06/2009 60. Members would like to see a council owned strategy, setting out a clear direction, on community engagement. They are keen to ‘revolutionise community engagement’, they want a more radical approach and a faster pace of progress. This will ensure that all council systems and processes keep the community informed and involved in policies and service improvement issues that matter to local people. There are opportunities for officers to broker relationships between partners, members and the community. The council needs to ensure that community engagement work is feeding into how services are delivered to the diverse communities in the borough. 61. Members need support and appropriate development in carrying out engagement work. This includes help with case work, research and training on tools and techniques for community engagement.


Building the evidence and business case for community empowerment Strengths

• Evidence of service improvements and efficiencies resulting from engagement

• Evidence of VCS delivering cost effective services

• Some evidence of partners sharing and using joint indicators Issues to consider

• Stakeholders are unclear about the benefits of community engagement

• No measurement of costs and benefits of community engagement

• Limited evidence of impact on partnership outcomes

• No evidence of community or third sector evaluation of community engagement

• Limited sharing of best practice 62. There is evidence of service improvement resulting from engaging with a range of communities. Community services are supporting volunteer health trainers for diverse communities and working with older people to get feedback on service design and delivery, from their perspective. Scrutiny completed a review of choice based lettings which involved community representatives. This led to a better understanding within the service of community concerns and helped the community to get insights into the constraints facing the service. Scrutiny is proactive in co-opting residents and service users onto committees, in order to get a wider perspective on issues and deliver evidence based recommendations. Scrutiny makes a critical contribution to ensure the needs of vulnerable stakeholders are considered. The Children’s and Young peoples committee visited children’s centres to get on the ground experience of the service being delivered. 63. There is evidence of VCS delivering cost effective services and some evidence is emerging of partners sharing and using joint indicators. The Fire service engaged with children at risk of exclusion which helped them to go back to school. The review team was informed that arson was reduced by 45% through joint working between the council and the Fire service to report and remove abandoned cars. Feedback from consultation has improved services for Looked after Children and the joint Youth and Schools councils is a sounding board for services to young people. The Youth service organised a conference with the police which included a keynote speaker from a New York jail. 64. Stakeholders are not all clear about the benefits of community engagement or how to measure improved outcomes. Some of the difficulties being experienced during the recent change to waste collection could have been minimised through consultation, user feedback and greater involvement of local people. It appeared to the team that any enhancement of services was deemed to be ‘gold plating’ but keeping council tax low was a higher priority. However, the cost of rectifying mistakes that could have been avoided is often greater than the initial input to the design and development process. 65. There is limited evidence of the impact of community engagement on partnership outcomes. Consultation on the budget was an example quoted to the team, however there appeared to be little potential for change which meant that opportunities to make a difference were limited. The grants for community groups have followed a historical pattern and a funding increase for one particular group, resulted in a corresponding reduction elsewhere. This has now been reviewed. In the future grants will be linked to outcomes and there will be more support for organisations dealing with newly arrived communities. The review team were informed that people only attend the Area Committees if the issue being discussed is important to their street. There is no dedicated resource to build involvement or to assess the benefit corporately.


66. There is no evidence of community or third sector evaluation of community engagement. This means it is difficult to evidence how involvement is leading to service improvements over a period of time or which activities yielded the most return, either through increased customer satisfaction or cost savings. 67. There are more opportunities to share best practice internally and with strategic partners. Feedback to the team indicated that some departments are possessive about information and what is perceived as their contacts. Residents find it difficult to get a telephone response in some areas and the customer charter is not consistent across all services. In some cases, it is being used to delay resolving customer enquiries. The review team were given evidence that some officers did not reply to queries before the time limit and the response at that stage was to advise the customer that their enquiry would be dealt with. The complaints system needs to be reviewed and lessons learnt from patterns and trends which could lead to service improvements.


Integrating community empowerment with community cohesion, equalities and human rights Strengths

• Strong political leadership for community cohesion, moving forward from a sound base

• external validation of specific initiatives, at a national level

• Range of community activities with diverse groups Issues to consider

• More opportunities to broaden existing networks, e.g. Faith Forum and Consultation

• Network

• Clarify what you mean by treating everyone equally

• Is reliance on web based information curtailing access for some residents?

• Consultation overload and use of jargon 68. There is strong political leadership for integrating community empowerment with equalities and cohesion work. Hounslow is one of the most diverse boroughs in London, it has a track record of working with settled communities and helping newly arrived migrants to integrate. A new Principal Cohesion officer has been appointed to co-ordinate the work corporately and with external partners. 69. Hounslow has secured a number of awards for best practice in community cohesion and preventing violent extremism. The Beacon award puts the council as one of a small number of leading practitioners in this area. This is great achievement that recognises the long standing commitment of the borough to working with diverse communities. However the council could do more to celebrate success and promote the good practice with partners and the wider community. 70. The review team were impressed by the range of community events and activities that are a regular feature of how the council works with all stakeholders in the community. As mentioned elsewhere in this report, these range from providing facilities for mums and tots, luncheon clubs, civic events to make the Civic Centre a focal point for the whole community and other activities that are service specific. A faith conference is being planned for later this year to help identify the impact of the economic downturn through working with these communities. Despite this good practice, there are more opportunities to broaden existing networks, e.g. Faith Forum and extend the membership of the Consultation Network. 71. The scooping of scrutiny reviews is proactive in including vulnerable stakeholders. For instance, following racial tensions at Feltham Young Offenders Centre, a review was undertaken which involved interviewing white and Asian young offenders from Hounslow to ascertain the triggers and possible solutions. A partnership has been set up; the stronger and united community group brings together lead officers and partners agencies to ensure successful delivery of the Hounslow Preventing Violent Extremism, community cohesion, tension monitoring and to provide feedback to partners. Hounslow has been leading the sub-regional programme for West London since 2003.


72. The council needs to clarify what is meant by treating everyone equally. Some people are interpreting this to mean that everyone is the same which has implications for targeting services to the needs of particular groups. Funding for Black History Month was withdrawn, reductions in the funding for the school language service and the review of services to Asian elders are perceived by some as cutbacks that have a negative impact on disadvantaged groups. The rationale for these actions needs to be fully communicated to all stakeholders and it is critical to review the outcomes and benefits before difficult decision are made. 73. The team were not confident that relying solely on web based information provided high quality access for all service users and the wider community. The service assess points in libraries are of variable quality and some stakeholders are not clear who to contact within the council. There is pressure on telephone lines, staff are advised to remove their contact numbers from correspondence and substitute their email instead. Feedback from some stakeholders indicated that consultation documents are too complicated and use of jargon makes it difficult for all communities to fully engage across the range of services.


Appendix A - Some useful definitions COMMUNITIES is a term used to describe communities of place, communities of identity and communities of interest. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT is the process of building people’s skills and ability to act together on their common priorities usually through the development of independent community organisations and networks, and with the support of community development workers within statutory or third sector agencies. COMMUNITY EMPOWERMENT is the outcome of engagement and other activities. Power, influence and responsibility is shifted away from existing centres of power and into the hands of communities and individual citizens COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT is the action that agencies take to enable them to consult, involve, listen and respond to communities through ongoing relationships. CONSULTATION is the process by which agencies seek advice, information and opinions about strategies, policies and services. The existing decision makers take this into account when they make decisions. This includes many familiar activities such as surveys, research projects, public meetings, user and resident forums. INVOLVEMENT as defined in the Duty to Involve is an over-arching term that covers providing information to, consulting with and involving citizens in active ways. This can include providing people with opportunities to influence or directly participate in decision making; to provide feedback on decisions, services, policies and outcomes; to co-design/work with authorities in designing policies and services; to co-produce/carry out some aspects of services themselves; and to work with the authority in assessing services. NEIGHBOURHOOD MANAGEMENT is a process for addressing disadvantaged neighbourhoods by improving and joining up local services and making them more responsive to local needs. Usually a neighbourhood manager works with agencies and communities, using community information to improve neighbourhood services and reduce the gap in outcomes in deprived areas. PARTICIPATION is when citizens and communities are involved in issues that affect their lives. They play an active part in generating ideas as well as making the decisions alongside public sector partners. For instance: participative budgeting or participative planning. . CO-PRODUCTION is when communities or individual residents active participants rather than passive recipients. They are supported to use the skills, networks and experience they have to improve local outcomes, improve local services, or to help solve a problem. Many local problems can only be solved by supporting and using communities’ own resources


Contact details Written on behalf of the team by the IDeA’s project manager: Carmel Gallagher Improvement manager Improvement services Telephone 0774 779 1764 Email [email protected] For more information on peer reviews or the work of the Improvement and Development Agency, please see our website www.idea.gov.uk or telephone 020 7296 6600. If you would like to receive this report in large print, Braille or another format, please e-mail [email protected].

Annex B1 THE IDEA RECOMMENDATIONS

• A clear definition of what CE means for the Borough.

• An explicit commitment from all stakeholders to what it will achieve.

• A corporate approach as to how it will be delivered. A systematic method of capturing how feedback from the community, influences priorities and service delivery and an agreed approach for communicating this back to communities. The council/LSP need to review their working practices to ensure that Community engagement is at the heart of decision making, informing strategies, policies, delivery plans and commissioning processes. The council should progress the creation of a Hounslow centre for ideas. This could become a repository for sharing ideas, information and knowledge with partners and help to progress a culture of joint working. It will also encourage learning and Innovation and to embed new working patterns and behaviours. The council could make better use of existing structures, particularly Area Committees, to ensure that all agencies work together more effectively and that Community engagement and empowerment are embedded within them. This includes more sharing of information learning from experience, both good and not so good. This will lead to more sustainable relationships, reduced duplication and overlaps and ultimately more efficient and effective working arrangements, as well As enhanced capacity within the community. Maximise the benefit that the member drive for community engagement brings to the organisation. Members’ unique insight into their communities needs to be valued by all partners and stakeholders. Members need to be adequately supported to undertake their community leadership role and to develop the appropriate skills to engage positively with the diverse communities in the borough. The council could be more proactive in evaluating the impact on partnership outcomes as a result of community engagement activity. It needs to establish a baseline of qualitative and quantitative data that will allow comparisons over time. Cost benefit analysis needs to be undertaken where relevant, and the information from this fed into future plans and activities and communicated back. Hounslow should celebrate and promote the learning and good practice that are clearly embedded in how it works with its diverse communities, internally and externally. Celebrating success helps to build confidence with partners and stakeholders to develop their capacity to integrate community empowerment work with cohesion and equalities activities. It can also help to motivate staff and develop their confidence to achieve further improvement.

Annex C EXECUTIVE STATEMENT ON COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT INTRODUCTION 1. The administration is wholly committed to engagement with the residents of the borough, to give them a real opportunity to shape the policies and services of the Council. (In this document, “residents” includes people, business and groups in the borough). 2. This is affirmed in the 2008 Hounslow Plan, which emphasises that the Council’s focus “remains solidly on the needs and aspirations of all Hounslow’s communities”, and is on being “innovative in seeking out ways not only to consult residents about what they want done, but to involve them as much as possible in decisions about how it is done.” BOROUGH COUNCIL MOTION ON 21 JULY, 2009 3. This statement represents the Executive’s formal response to the Motion carried at Borough Council on 21 July, 2009 (see annex A). This statement creates the Executive’s new definition of, and commitment to, community engagement (CE), and sets out the processes and principles it expects all officers to follow when undertaking community engagement activities. It should be read with the community engagement toolkit at Annex D. DCLG CONSULTATION 4. In July DCLG launched a consultation on local democratic renewal as part of the Government's proposals for constitutional reform and to explore ways of increasing both the powers and the accountability of councils and city and sub regions. Accepting that councils are best placed to understand and respond to issues of local concern the Government propose to strengthen their capacity to do this by giving them greater powers to scrutinise other services and how they spend their money. This would allow councillors to require these service providers to account for their actions in a public forum giving some democratic oversight although not control over a wider range of public functions IMPLEMENTING THE IDEA REPORT ON CE 5. This statement also implements the recommendations in the IDeA report on community engagement in Hounslow (report at annex B, with its recommendations at annex B1). OUTWARD FACING DECLARATION ON CE Paragraphs 5 to 9 below should be our public declaration to residents of what we mean by CE, and our corporate commitment to it. They should take effect immediately. Corporate definition of CE 6. Put simply, CE means the Council involving you in decisions that affect you. 7. CE can take place for different reasons, e.g. to improve services, to build stronger local communities or to strengthen your democratic rights. It might be about -

§ giving you factual information about Council services, e.g. where and when they take place;

§ asking you what you think about the way we provide our services, and wherever possible changing what we do in the light of what you say;

§ you and your neighbours working alongside the Council to help shape the services you receive;

§ you working with the Council to monitor how well we do things, and whether our services need to change or improve;

§ the Council supporting you and your neighbours to take decisions yourselves on the services you receive; or

§ You and your neighbours taking over responsibility for some services yourselves, perhaps by maintaining a community centre or taking part in environmental conservation work.

8. The Council will always carry out community engagement for a good reason, and will explain this to you in advance. 9. It is also important that how we engage with you suits you best. The Council wants to offer you as many choices as possible for you to have your say in a way which is most convenient. So this might be by questionnaires or feedback forms, or via our website, or through our complaints system, or by you being a `mystery shopper’. There is also the Hounslow Residents’ Panel, forums for young people, or your local Area Committee. Another way to make your views known is during the `Leader Listens’ visits - Cllr Peter Thompson is currently visiting 40 community groups to hear first hand what people think about the borough. And he has also begun a series of road shows to talk to as many people as he can on things which concern them. In some cases you might join a panel of officers and councillors of the Council, to decide how a service should be run in future. Commitment to CE by the Council officers [and its partners] 10. CE lies at the heart of everything Hounslow Council does The Council will speak to you regularly, as the people who pay for and use our services, and involve you in ways to improve what we do. We will do everything we can to make it convenient for you to participate. Wherever possible, we will make changes to our services based on what you tell us. And we will always let you know the outcome. If it isn’t possible to change services the way you want, we will always tell you why. We will work hard to ensure that all our services give the best results for you and your family. We will constantly look for new and better ways of engaging with residents. INWARD FACING CE DISCIPLINES Capturing and assessing feedback from CE 11. As part of every CE exercise, residents’ views should be captured methodically and fully assessed by DMTs, and a report sent to the relevant lead member, before decisions are taken about how to act on the views gathered. Deadline: immediate Acting on CE feedback 12. There should be a general presumption that the views and preferences of residents will be implemented when shaping policies and service delivery, unless there are overriding legal, financial or other reasons for not doing so.

Deadline: immediate Reporting back to residents 13. The outcome of every CE exercise should be communicated back to affected residents, with a clear explanation of the outcome, including why it was or was not possible to implement their views, and with an explanation of what will happen next. (Care may need to be taken not to `bombard’ residents with reports back, so it needs to be done strategically.) Deadline: immediate The right CE methods 14. All CE exercises should be carried out flexibly, and in accordance with residents’ stated preferences whenever possible, and should reflect developing best practice. The objective is to enable residents to engage and respond as easily and conveniently as possible. Deadline: immediate The branding 15. Our CE exercises should carry the Building Pride Borough Wide logo (and no other.) Deadline: immediate Working with partners on CE Partners The Executive is mindful of the Council’s community leadership role. The Executive expects officers to liaise early with the Council’s partners and invite them to work with the grain of this statement if they are not doing so already, and to integrate their and our CE exercises wherever possible, to rationalise what we as a set of partners are doing. Officers should explore with partners whether they would wish to co-endorse the article on definition and commitment (based on paras 5-9 above) proposed for inclusion in Hounslow Matters in November. The LSP’s Community Plan will be reviewed in 2010. This exercise should be informed by best practice, and by a process of CE which is joined up across the partners. Deadline: initial report to the LSP on 24 September, 2009, inviting a more aligned approach to be agreed at the LSP meeting after that. Planning ahead for CE 16. As far as possible, all CE exercises should be planned ahead on a 12 month rolling basis, to create a CE calendar which any council service can consult. 17. This calendar must ensure that each CE exercise should be a logical part of the corporate set of such work, designed so as not duplicate, overlap or overload residents at any time. Deadline: end October, 2010.

Role of, and support to, members 18. Members have a key role in CE. There may be a training gap to fill. We should look at training for members on how to best utilise their contacts in the community and champion residents’ views. We could look at local or national seminars to help them play themselves in to the role. The limit on budgets is acknowledged. Work is currently underway developing training for people interested in becoming a Councillor and for newly elected Councillors. Further training needs will need to be established in conjunction with the changes in the area committees. Deadline: end February 2010 Best Practice in CE 19. The Council should set up and maintain a `Hounslow Centre for Ideas’, which should be extended to our major partners as well. This would capture best practice from across the council, from partners and from other authorities to help ensure that Hounslow’s CE activities are always leading edge. This could include

• The annual diary/calendar of CE activities for all services;

• Results of CE exercises;

• What was done to amend services as a result of CE;

• Examples of well received leaflets, questionnaires, etc; and links to other best practice sites, including examples of what did and didn’t work so well, and lessons learned.

Deadline: end January, 2010 Evaluating the impact of CE on service outcomes 20. References to this are being incorporated into the Council’s revised business planning guidance for 2010-2013. This is about evaluating services (VFM, etc) `before’ and `after’ CE has shaped delivery, to check whether the CE exercise as undertaken was worth the cost; the cost of the service before and after the CE exercise, and residents’ satisfaction rates before and after. This sort of work could also inform the Centre for Ideas database. The evaluation process should document how the CE activity produced improved outcomes for the area. and show that the event achieved the desired results. Successful evaluation will largely depend on specifying clear objectives at the outset. Deadline: February, 2010. Enhancing the role of the Area Committees 21. The 5 area committees include around 12 ward councillors, with an area co-ordinator and area clerk assigned to each. Currently there are the Area Committee (AC) (Planning) which focuses on issues in the Area and the Monitoring Area Committee which deals with any services in an area. Lead responsibility for support to the ACs is passing to the Community Services Directorate. We agree with the IDeA that more needs to be done so that ACs are a stronger part of our Community Engagement capability. Part of this will involve bringing them all up to a high standard of performance, some of currently operate more effectively than others (meeting

objectives set out in the Area Plans, consulting on objectives with local residents and providing local residents with a forum in which they can voice their views etc). Performance criteria for the Area Plans will need to be reviewed in line with the new arrangements. We also need to look at ways of making them more interesting and appealing to a wider group of local residents, through a refreshed approach to the agenda with more responsibility for the success of the ACs to residents. We will look at the full range best practice options available from other AC models. The AC dealing with Planning currently meets monthly and discusses planning issues within the area. It is felt that these meetings are not necessarily representative of the area as a whole and that planning issues may be better decided in a different forum. The AC(Monitoring) dealing with the other issues are held 6 – 8 times a year. They have Area Plans and the focus is on improvements in these areas. Each AC has a revenue budget allocated to it for expenses such as hiring halls. In addition, they have a say in the allocation of Section 106 monies and have a budget of £7000 for allocation to community groups for small projects. The maximum award for a project is £500. The intention is to revamp these committees to be more resident driven. We will consult with local residents on how they think ACs can be more relevant and interesting. Members are keen that these committees should focus on local issues and be resident lead. The current team of Area Co-ordinators has been in place for some time. While they have done an important job, we believe it is time for a fresh intake as part of these proposals. We also need to improve arrangements for ensuring that the dialogue between the Executive and the ACs is genuinely two - way.

Deadline: end February 2010 Celebrate learning, good practice and success 22. We could do more to celebrate success in CE activities by promoting particularly good work done. This could be good for morale and give staff a sense of pride in their work. Examples could go on the Council intranet and website, feature in the Centre for Ideas and be shared with the Executive in the 6 monthly progress reports on CE. Deadline: ongoing LB HOUNSLOW EXECUTIVE 8 SEPTEMBER, 2009

Annex D COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT TOOLKIT FOR LB HOUNSLOW (To be read alongside the Executive Statement on Community Engagement endorsed on 8 September, 2009)

Questions to ask before you begin

To help you think about what could work best, consider the following:

• Why are you engaging and what outcomes are you hoping for? • What type of engagement are you planning? Is it about consultation? Or getting new

ideas for some difficult problem? Getting the community voice heard for a campaign? Making decisions about how to spend a budget? Building the capacity of communities to take action themselves?

• Has there already been consultation on this issue? • How much influence will the community be able to have – what can and can’t change? • Does the method engage people from the bottom up, or is it council or partnership

driven? • Is it ‘engagement friendly’? How will it appeal to those whose voices are not often

heard? How will it reach beyond the active few? Will it involve a really good representative cross-section of the community?

• What information do we need to provide to participants to enable them to participate effectively?

• What degree of expert facilitation do you need to make it work properly? • Do you have a budget for using the method to greatest effect? • What is the ‘good result’ you are looking for, and what is the most effective way of

getting there? • How will the data be analysed and presented? • How will the information be fed back to the participants and community? • How will the consultation be evaluated?

Planning how you will use community empowerment tools

The organisation People and Participation have put together a process planner that helps you structure how you will use your community empowerment method or tool and in what stage of your project. Before you begin, you should make sure that you have consulted this planner and mapped out exactly how you intend to use your chosen tool or method.

Community empowerment process planner – On the People and Participation website.

Community Empowerment Methods

The list below gives an introduction to some community empowerment methods that have proved useful in different situations. You can follow the links from each to more information about how they work and when to use them.

There are many more methods than these and a good selection can be found on the People and Participation website.

Area forums and community forums

Area forums are meetings held in a locality, often facilitated by the local council. They may be formed for one-off purposes, or take place on a regular basis to keep people and communities involved. They may debate key topics, answer residents’ questions on a face-to-face basis or have open agendas. Meetings may be attended by local councillors, together with senior representatives from local authorities, the police; primary care trusts (PCTs) and other local organisations

Find out more about area forums and community forums – On the People and Participation website

Design charrettes

A 'design charrette' is an intensive, participative workshop that brings people from different disciplines and backgrounds together to explore options for a particular area or site. This method is especially useful for getting people involved in shaping or changing planning, transport, landscape or other major projects affecting their communities.

Find out more about design charettes – On the People and Participation website

Focus groups

Focus groups are guided discussions of a small group of citizens. They are normally one-off sessions although several may be run simultaneously in different locations.

Find out more about focus groups – On the People and Participation website

Online consultations

Online consultations seek people’s opinions and expertise about important proposals or changes being made. They are especially useful when trying to make sure that the right people who know most about the issue concerned have the chance to comment. By using the internet, an unlimited number of participants can be involved.

Find out more about online consultations – On the People and Participation website

Online forums

Online forums are internet-based discussion areas where participants can post their views about topics and respond to other people’s comments.

Find out more about online forums – On the People and Participation website

Opinion polls

A form of survey that measures the opinion of a selected sample of people and counts their ‘votes’.

Find out more about opinion polls – On the People and Participation website

World cafe

A world cafe uses an informal 'cafe setting' for participants to explore an issue in small groups. Discussions on particular aspects are held in rounds of 20 to 30 minutes, after which participants move on to new groups and new discussions. The method is good at generating new ideas about the issue, sharing experience and exploring action in real life situations. The event ends with a summary of all discussions that have taken place.

Find out more about world cafes – On the People and Participation website

Participatory appraisal

Participatory appraisal (PA) is a 'family' of approaches that enable local people to identify their own priorities and make their own decisions about the future. The techniques were originally developed for use in rural areas and in developing countries, but because PA is very flexible and inclusive it is now used in many situations. It emphasises local knowledge and enables local people to do their own assessment, analysis, and planning, which makes it very effective in empowering communities.

Find out more about participatory appraisals – On the People and Participation website

Participatory budgeting

Participatory budgeting (PB) is one member of the PA family. PB directly involves local people in making decisions about how to spend a defined public budget. Local people discuss and vote on spending priorities, and they also have a role in overseeing the process. In its national strategy, the government expects all councils to have PB in place by 2012.

Find out more about participatory budgeting – On the Participatory Budgeting Unit website

Participatory strategic planning

Participatory strategic planning (PSP) is another of the PA family. It is a way of bringing a community together to help them jointly explain and agree with each other how they want their community or organisation to develop over the next few years.

Find out more about participatory strategic planning – On the People and Participation website

Co-production

Co-production refers to a way of working whereby decision makers and citizens, or service providers and users, work together to create a decision or a service which works for them all. The approach is based on the principle that the people most affected by a service are in the best position to help design it.

Find out more about co-production – On the People and Participation website

User panels

User panels are regular meetings of service users about the quality of a service or other related topics. They help to identify concerns and priorities they and others may have and can lead to the early identification of problems or ideas for improvements.

A variation on this method is the citizens’ panel, where large numbers of residents regularly complete questionnaires about the quality of local services.

Find out more about user panels – On the People and Participation website

Citizens' jury

Citizens' juries consist of a small panel of non-specialists, modelled on the structure of a criminal jury. The group sets out to examine in detail something that local people have identified as being very important, and at the end they deliver a 'verdict'.

Find out more about citizens' juries – On the People and Participation website

Consensus conference

A consensus conference is made up of a panel of citizens who question expert witnesses on a particular topic at a public conference. Their recommendations are then circulated widely.

Find out more about consensus conferences – On the People and Participation website

Asset management and transfer

Councils are being encouraged to revitalise localities by passing derelict or unused buildings over to community control. This follows recommendations by the Quirk Review that showed the risks were worth it; that it empowered communities and that when all interested parties – from communities, council, local councillors, and so on – working well together much can be gained.

Find out more about asset management and transfer

Petitions and e-petitions

Petitions help local people get their voices heard are seen as important to stimulating debate. Something like one in five of us is likely to sign at least one petition during any given year. Under new proposals, local councils will have a duty to respond to petitions to encourage more local influence in council decisions.

Find out more about petitions and e-petitions – On the People and Participation website

Local charters

Voluntary agreements between local people in a community, the local authority and other interested bodies about how best to meet the needs of the community. They help clarify relationships by writing down what has been decided, who does what. Also how decisions are made and what happens when things go wrong. They are not the same as contracts.

Find out more about local charters

Providing Information for Participants

• Does a climate of trust exist between the service provider and its users, or does it need to be built up?

• Are consultative and representative networks available or do they need to be established?

• How experienced are employees in consulting and involving users? All involved in Community Engagement should be clear about what they are doing, but they should also communicate this to participants. Participants should be informed about what is going on from the start of the project which will help avoid cynicism or lack of interest. People are usually happy to take part in consultation so long as they are kept informed. It is important to stress the non-negotiable issues and stress what can be influenced. However, people are only likely to take part if they believe that things can change. Feedback Providing feedback is vital. Good feedback tells participants what the overall findings of the engagement were how these influenced decisions made and the reasons behind the final decision. It needs to be honest especially when the participants have been critical or when you have decided to do something that the majority did not support. Telling people about how the information they provided will be or is being used shows people that their involvement is worthwhile and actually counts. It helps avoid the ‘what’s the point’ attitude and encourages future engagement. You also need to consider what the best method of feedback will be. It may be useful to ask the participants how they would like to receive the feedback. They also need to be told how and when they will receive feedback. Evaluation of the Activity It is good practice to evaluate community engagement work to measure the effectiveness against the original objective. At the end you want to be able to measure whether:

• You got views from those you wanted

• You were successful in consulting minority, disadvantaged our under-represented groups

• Different groups responded to different methods

• The participants felt that the activity was worthwhile

• You gave feedback to the participants You also need to be able to measure whether

• You got views you could use

• You have used those views

• The activity has lead to some identifiable change

Documents

Contact: Chris Bates 0208 583 2100 Mail: CMT on 27 August ......Contact: Chris Bates Tel: 0208 583 2100 Mail: [email protected] CMT on 27 August, 2009 Executive on 8 September,