HIGH MEDIUM LOW PRIORITY NATIONAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ... · PDF fileNil 05-06/ 06-07 Nil +1.52 % point 06-07/ 07-08 Nil 07-08/ 08-09 Nil COMMENTARY ... This is a Corporate Indicator

APPENDIX B

HIGH, MEDIUM & LOW PRIORITY NATIONAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS 2006/2007 :

BY PORTFOLIO AND PRIORITY

APRIL 2006 TO MARCH 2007 COMPARED TO APRIL 2005 TO MARCH 2006

HIGH PRIORITY INDICATORS - A WELL MANAGED COUNCIL 2

MEDIUM PRIORITY INDICATORS - A WELL MANAGED COUNCIL 4

LOW PRIORITY INDICATORS - A WELL MANAGED COUNCIL 6

HIGH PRIORITY INDICATORS - BALANCING HOUSING NEEDS 18

MEDIUM PRIORITY INDICATORS - BALANCING HOUSING NEEDS 24

HIGH PRIORITY INDICATORS - IMPROVING PROSPERITY 35

HIGH PRIORITY INDICATORS - IMPROVING THE ENVIRONMENT 36

MEDIUM PRIORITY INDICATORS - IMPROVING THE ENVIRONMENT 45

LOW PRIORITY INDICATORS - IMPROVING THE ENVIRONMENT 60

MEDIUM PRIORITY INDICATORS - SUPPORTING THE COMMUNITY 63

LOW PRIORITY INDICATORS - SUPPORTING THE COMMUNITY 67

High Priority Indicators - A Well Managed Council

HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage of invoices for commercial goods and services that were paid by the authority within 30 days of such invoices being received.

Christchurch

National (All District councils)

Family Group

Year PI

Ref Target Outturn Ta

rget

A

chie

ved

Yr o

n Y

r Tr

end

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median

CBC Position (1=best;

11=worst)

00/01 8 95% 75% No - 84% 90% 94% Worst 25% 95% 11

01/02 8 97½% 88% No �� 87% 92% 95% 3rd Quartile 93% 10

02/03 8 100% 88% No �� 90% 93% 96% Worst 25% 95% 9

03/04 8 100% 92% No �� 91% 94% 97% 3rd Quartile 95% 8

04/05 8 100% 96% No �� 91.06% 94.69% 97.00% 2nd Quartile 96.35% 7

05/06 8 100% 95.25% No �� 92.20% 95.00% 97.30% 2nd Quartile 95.65% 7 (from 10)

06/07 8 100% 96.77% No ��

07/08 8 100% �

08/09 8 100% � Change Change Change

00-01/ 01-02 +2½

% point +13

% point +3 % point

+2 % point

+1 % point -2

% point +1

01-02/ 02-03 +2½

% point Nil +3 % point

+1 % point

+1 % point +2

% point +1

02-03/ 03-04 Nil +4

% point +1 % point

+1 % point

+1 % point Nil +1

03-04/ 04-05 Nil +4

% point +0.06 % point

+0.69 % point Nil +1.35

% point +1

04-05/ 05-06 Nil -0.75

% point +1.14 %p point

+0.31 % point.

+0.30 % point -0.70

% point Nil

05-06/ 06-07 Nil +1.52

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Although not achieving the Government target or internally set target of 97.5% the 2006/07 performance shows a steady improvement on previous years. This is a Corporate Indicator covering all sections of the Council – Outturns are dependent on all sections passing invoices to Financial Services on time. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target - Target is set by the Government.

BV 8 - % of invoices paid by the Council in 30 days

80

82

84

86

88

90

92

94

96

98

100

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07

Outturn Target Best 25% Family Median

HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The % of authority buildings open to the public in which all public areas are suitable for and accessible to disabled people.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year PI

Ref Target Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d

Yr o

n Y

r Tr

end

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 01/02 156 - 0% - - 12% 29% 53% Worst 25% 33.9% 11= 02/03 156 - 6% - - 18% 38% 60% Worst 25% 44.0% 10 03/04 156 12% 12% Yes - 27% 47% 67% Worst 25% 43.5% 10

04/05 156 29% 19% No �� Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail 47.06% 11

05/06 156 29% 50% Yes �� 53.81% 72.87% 87.50% Worst 25% 57.00% 8=

06/07 156 86% 70% No ��

07/08 156 90% �

08/09 156 100% �

Change Change Change 01-02/ 02-03 Nil +6

% point +6 % point

+9 % point

+7 % point +10.1

% point +1

02-03/ 03-04 Nil +6

% point +9 % point

+9 % point

+7 % point -0.5

% point Nil

03-04/ 04-05 +17

%point +7

% point Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail +3.56 % point -1

04-05/ 05-06 Nil +31

% Point Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail +10.06 % point +3

05-06/ 06-07 + 57

% point +20% point

06-07/ 07-08 + 4

% point

07-08/ 08-09 + 10

% point

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Progress still slow due to resources tied up with One Stop Shop scheme. Access improvements to Civic Offices virtually complete. Improvement works to Kings Arms Pavilion are in progress (inc toilets) and will be completed shortly. Though not include within BVPI, access improvements have been started to the remaining public toilets, and these are expected to be completed by the end of April 2007

BV 156 - % authority buildings open to the public that are suitable for disabled people

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


Medium Priority Indicators - A Well Managed Council

MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of Council Tax Collected (over the financial year).

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 9 98.8% 98.7% No - 96.4% 97½ % 98.2% Best 25% 98.1% 3=

01/02 9 98.8% 98.6% Yes �� 96.8% 97.6% 98.3% Best 25% 98.0% 4=

02/03 9 98.8% 98.8% Yes �� 97.0% 97.0% 98.0% Best 25% 98.3% 4

03/04 9 98.8% 98.8% Yes �� 97.2% 98.0% 98.5% Best 25% 98.4% 4

04/05 9 98.8% 98.8% Yes �� 97.31% 98.10% 98.50% Best 25% 98.12% 4

05/06 9 98.8% 98.8% Yes �� 97.40% 98.11% 98.53% Best 25% 98.39% 3

06/07 9 98.8% 98.6% No ��

07/08 9 98.8% 08/09 9 98.8%

Change Change Change 00-01/ 01-02 Nil -0.1


+0.1 % point

+0.1 % point -0.1

% point -1

01-02/ 02-03 Nil +0.2


-0.6 % point

-0.3 % point +0.3

% point Nil

02-03/ 03-04 Nil Nil +0.2

% point +1.0

% point +0.5

% point +0.1 % point Nil

03-04/ 04-05 Nil Nil +0.11

% point +0.10

% point Nil -0.28 % point Nil

04-05/ 05-06 +0.2

%point Nil +0.09 % point

+0.01 % point

+0.03 % point +0.27

% point +1

05-06/ 06-07 Nil -0.2

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN £55k shortfall off target of gross debt of £24.5M Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target To achieve upper quartile status

BV 9 - % of Council Tax collected by the Council

97.497.697.8

9898.298.498.698.8

99

99.299.499.6

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage of non-domestic rates due for the financial year which were received by the local authority.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r Tr

end

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 10 98½ % 98.7% Yes - 97.2% 98.0% 98.7% Best 25% 98½% 6

01/02 10 98.6% 99.3% Yes �� 97.7% 98.3% 98.9% Best 25% 98½% 2

02/03 10 99.0% 99.0% Yes �� 98.0% 98.0% 99.0% Best 25% 98.8% 5

03/04 10 99.0% 99.0% Yes �� 98.0% 98.8% 99.1% 2nd Quartile 99.0% 5=

04/05 10 99.0% 99.0% Yes �� 98.22% 98.81% 99.20% 2nd Quartile 99.0% 5=

05/06 10 99.12% 99.0% No �� 98.40% 99.00% 99.30% Median 98.90% 5

06/07 10 99.2% 98.7% No ��

07/08 10 99.2% 08/09 10 99.2%

Change Change Change 00-01/ 01-02 +0.1

% point +0.6

% point +½ % point

+0.3 % point

+0.2 % point Nil +4

01-02/ 02-03 +0.4

% point -0.3


-0.3 % point

+0.1 % point +0.3

% point -3

02-03/ 03-04 Nil Nil Nil +0.8

% point +0.1


03-04/ 04-05 Nil Nil +0.22

% point +0.01

% point +0.1

% point Nil Nil

04-05/ 05-06 Nil Nil +0.18

%point +0.19

% point +0.10

% point -0.10 % point Nil

05-06/ 06-07 +0.12

% point -0.3

% point

06-07/ 07-08 +0.08

% point

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN 38k shortfall off target of gross debt of £14M Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target To achieve upper quartile status

BV 10 - % of Non-Domestic Rates collected by the Council

98

98.2

98.4

98.6

98.8

99

99.2

99.4

99.6

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


Low Priority Indicators - A Well Managed Council

LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: a) The level (if any) of the Equality Standard for Local Government to which the authority conforms

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r Tr

end

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst)

02/03 2a 1 1 Yes - 0 0 1 Best 25% 1 1=

03/04 2a 1 1 Yes �� 0 0 1 Best 25% 1 1=

04/05 2a 1 1 Yes �� 0 0 1 Best 25% 1 1=

05/06 2a 1 1 Yes �� No Quartiles provided 1 1=

06/07 2a 1 1 Yes ��

07/08 2a 2 08/09 2a 2

Change Change Change 02-03/ 03-04 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

03-04/ 04-05 Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil Nil

04-05/ 05-06 Nil Nil No Quartiles provided Nil Nil

05-06/ 06-07 Nil Nil

06-07/ 07-08 +1

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Although we continue to progress our equality agenda we did not reach level 2 this year. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target We will review our standing based upon the completion of our impact assessment programme and other equality actions. It is hoped that this will see us achieve level 2 by the end of 07/08.

Outturn values all 1 (one) – insufficient data to show trend

LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: b) The duty to promote race equality (Note: Outturn is expressed as a %)

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nds

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 03/04 2b 39% 50% Yes - 26% 42% 55% 2nd Quartile 37% 5

04/05 2b 50% 53% Yes �� 37% 50% 63% 2nd Quartile 47% 4=

05/06 2b 53% 53% Yes �� 42% 58% 73% 3RD Quartile 53% 6=

06/07 2b 53% 53% Yes �

07/08 2b 53% 08/09 2b 53%

Change Change Change 03-04/ 04-05 +11

%point +3

%point +11% +8% +8% +10% +1

04-05/ 05-06 +3

%point Nil +5% +8% +10% +6% -2

05-06/ 06-07 Nil Nil

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN No change from last year. Rationale/Justification for 2006/07 Target No change is anticipated.

BV 2b - Promotion of the Council's Race Equality Scheme

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

75

2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage of top 5% of earners that are women.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 02/03 11a 7.6% 0.0% No - 13% 19% 25% Worst 25% 12% 8=

03/04 11a 0% 4.7% Yes �� 15% 20% 27% Worst 25% 15% 10

04/05 11a 4.7% 7.14% Yes �� 16% 23% 29% Worst 25% 16% 10

05/06 11a 7.14% 14.29% Yes �� 18.75% 25.00% 31.25% Worst 25% 14.64% 7

06/07 11a 14.29% 7.69% No ��

07/08 11a 14.29% 08/09 11a 14.29%

Change Change Change 02-03/ 03-04 -7.6

% point +4.7

% point +2 % point

+1 % point

+2 % point +3

% point -2

03-04/ 04-05 +4.7

%point +2.44

% point +1 % point

+3 % point

+2 % point +1

%Point Nil

04-05/ 05-06 +2.44

%point +7.15


+2 % point

+2.25 % point -1.36

% point +3

05-06/ 06-07 +7.14

% point -6.60

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN A significant decrease has been caused due to one of the 2 female officers in top 5% of employees leaving. This will be rectified in 2007/08 as a new female Head of Service has been appointed w.e.f. 01-Apr-2007 Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Appointment of new female Head of Service w.e.f. 01-Apr-2007

BV 11a - % of top 5% of earners in the Council that are women

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage of top 5% of earners from black and minority ethnic communities.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d

Yr o

n Y

r Tr

end

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 02/03 11b 7.6% 0.0% No - 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% - 0.0% 3=

03/04 11b 0.0% 0.0% Yes �� 0.0% 0.0% 2.2% Median 0.0% 3=

04/05 11b 0.0% 0.0% Yes �� 0.0% 0.0% 1.9% Median 0.0% 2=

05/06 11b 7.14% 7.14% Yes �� 0.0% 0.0% 3.37% Best 25% 0.0% 1

06/07 11b 7.14% 0.0% No ��

07/08 11b 7.14% 08/09 11b 7.14%


% point Nil Nil Nil +2.2 % point Nil Nil

03-04/ 04-05 Nil Nil Nil Nil -0.3

% point Nil +1

04-05/ 05-06 +7.14

%point +7.14

% point Nil Nil +1.38 % point Nil +1

05-06/ 06-07 Nil -7.14

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN The decrease in due to one officer who declared they were from an ethnic minority leaving during 2006/07. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target No plans in place to recruit new staff who would fall into this top 5% category in 2007/08.

BV 11b - % of top 5% of earners in the Council who are from an ethnic minority

0

2

4

6

8

10

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage of top 5% of earners in the Council that are disabled. : New in 2005/06.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 11c 0% 0% Yes - 0.0% 2.09% 5.91% Worst 25% 0.0% 5=

06/07 11c 0% 0% Yes ��

07/08 11c 0% 08/09 11c 0%

Change Change Change 05-06/ 06-07 Nil

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN We do not have any member of staff, within the top 5% of earners who has declared themselves as having a disability. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target No plans in place to recruit new staff who would fall into this top 5% category in 2007/08.

New indicator in 2005/2006 – insufficient data to show trend

LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The number of working days/shifts lost due to sickness absence. (Calculated as average number of days per average number of employees).

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 12 6.8 6.5 Yes - 11.3 9.5 8.2 Best 25% 8.1 3

01/02 12 6.8 7.1 No �� 11.8 9.9 8.0 Best 25% 9.5 4

02/03 12 6.8 6.0 Yes �� 12.0 10.0 8.0 Best 25% 8.5 2

03/04 12 6.8 6.9 No �� 11.8 10.3 8.9 Best 25% 9.3 1

04/05 12 6.8 6.5 Yes �� 11.1 9.5 8.4 Best 25% 9.5 1

05/06 12 6.8 8.44 No �� 10.92 9.54 8.29 2nd Quartile 8.40 8

06/07 12 8.40 9.18 No ��

07/08 12 8.40 08/09 12 8.40

Change Change Change 00-01/ 01-02 Nil +0.6

(+9%) +0.5 +0.4 -0.2 +1.4 -1

01-02/ 02-03 Nil -1.1

(-15%) +0.2 +0.1 Nil -1.0 +2

02-03/ 03-04 Nil +0.9

(+15%) -0.2 +0.3 +0.9 +0.8 +1

03-04/ 04-05 Nil -0.4

(-6%) -0.7 -0.8 -0.5 +0.2 Nil

04-05/ 05-06 Nil +1.94

(+30%) -0.18 +0.4 -0.11 -1.1 -7

05-06/ 06-07 +1.6

% point +0.7

(+9%)

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN This year has seen an increase in our sickness levels due to a number of staff on certified long term sickness absence, Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target The target relates to the national District Council top quartile performers, i.e. we aim to be among such.

BV 12 - Number of working days lost in the Council due tosickness absence

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage of employees retiring early (excluding ill-health retirements) as a percentage of the total workforce

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 14 0.45% 0.42% Yes - 0.89% 0.43% 0.19% 2nd Quartile 0.18% 9

01/02 14 0.45% 0.44% Yes �� 1.08% 0.48% 0.19% 2nd Quartile 0.19% 9

02/03 14 0.45% 0.00% Yes �� 1.07% 0.47% 0.00% Best 25% 0.19% 1=

03/04 14 0.60% 0.60% Yes �� 1.02% 0.48% 0.14% 3rd Quartile 0.53% 7

04/05 14 0.60% 1.57% No �� 1.04% 0.41% 0.00% Worst 25% 1.07% 7

05/06 14 0.52% 0.00% Yes �� 0.83% 0.40% 0.00% Best 25% 0.18% 1=

06/07 14 0.52% 0.00% Yes ��

07/08 14 0.52% 08/09 14 0.52%


% points +0.19 % point

+0.05 % point Nil +0.01

% point 0

01-02/ 02-03 Nil -0.44

% point -0.01 % point

-0.01 % point

-0.19 % point Nil +8

02-03/ 03-04 +0.15

%point +0.60


+0.01 % point

+0.14 % point +0.34

% point -6

03-04/ 04-05 Nil +0.97


-0.07 % point

-0.14 % point +0.54

% point Nil

04-05/ 05-06 -0.08

%point -1.57


-0.01 % point Nil -0.89

% point +6

05-06/ 06-07 Nil Nil

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN No retirees in this category. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target No future knowledge of 2007/08 retirements of staff in this category

BV 14 - % of employees retiring early (excluding ill-health retirements) from the Council

-

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage of employees retiring on grounds of ill health as a percentage of the total workforce.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 15 0.35% 0.42% No - 0.78% 0.47% 0.22% 2nd Quartile 0.42% 6

01/02 15 0.35% 0.44% No �� 0.81% 0.49% 0.24% 2nd Quartile 0.66% 4

02/03 15 0.35% 0.00% Yes �� 0.66% 0.34% 0.14% Best 25% 0.33% 1=

03/04 15 0.60% 0.00% Yes �� 0.61% 0.34% 0.00% Best 25% 0.00% 1=

04/05 15 0.60% 0.00% Yes �� 0.50% 0.28% 0.00% Best 25% 0.19% 1=

05/06 15 0.52% 0.00% Yes �� 0.42% 0.25% 0.00% Best 25% 0.29% 1=

06/07 15 0.52% 0.00% Yes ��

07/08 15 0.52% 08/09 15 0.52%



+0.02 % point

+0.02 % point +0.24

% point +2

01-02/ 02-03 Nil -0.44


-0.15 % point

-0.10 % point -0.33

% point +3

02-03/ 03-04 +0.25

%point Nil -0.05 % point Nil -0.14

% point -0.33 % point Nil

03-04/ 04-05 Nil Nil -0.11

%Point -0.6

%Point

Nil +0.19 % point Nil

04-05/ 05-06 -0.08

%point Nil -0.08 % point

-0.03 % point Nil +0.10

% point Nil

05-06/ 06-07 Nil Nil

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN No ill-health retirees. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target No future knowledge of 2007/08 retirements of staff in this category

BV 15 - % of employees retiring early on the grounds of ill-health from the Council

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage of local authority employees declaring that they meet the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 definition compared with the percentage of the economically active disabled people in the authority area. a = Number of disabled employees multiplied by 100 divided by total number of authority employees

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 16a 1.00% 1.27% Yes - 1.00% 1.90% 3.00% 3rd Quartile 1.07% 5

01/02 16a 3.29% 1.31% No � 1.00% 1.93% 3.52% 3rd Quartile 1.33% 6

02/03 16a 5.34% 1.12% No �� 1.50% 2.50% 3.80% Worst 25% 1.58% 9

03/04 16a 7.4% 2.34% No � 1.72% 2.76% 4.11% 3rd Quartile 2.00% 11

04/05 16a 9.4% 2.80% No �� 1.86% 2.80% 4.10% Median 2.52% 4

05/06 16a 1.00% 1.87% Yes �� 2.13% 3.11% 4.37% Worst 25% 2.90% 10

06/07 16a 1.00% 1.91% Yes ��

07/08 16a 1.00% 08/09 16a 1.00%


%point +0.04

% point Nil +0.03 % point

+0.52 % point +0.26

% point -1

01-02/ 02-03 +2.05

%point -0.19


+0.57 % point

+0.28 % point +0.25

% point -3

02-03/ 03-04 +2.06

%point -0.10


+0.26 % point

+0.31 % point +0.42

% point -2

03-04/ 04-05 +2.0

%point -0.03


+0.04 % point

+0.01 % point +0.52

% point +7

04-05/ 05-06 -8.4

%point -0.93


+0.31 % point

+0.27 % point +0.38

% point -6

05-06/ 06-07 Nil +0.04

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Staff turnover has reduced the denominator, although we still have 4 disabled staff causing a slight increase. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target No reason for change.

BV 16a - % of employees at the Council who are disabled

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage of the economically active population in the local authority area who have a disability

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 02/03 16b 12.4% 14.6% Yes - 12.0% 20.0% 29.0% 3rd Quartile 13.29% 2

03/04 16b 14.6% 14.6% Yes �� 10.44% 12.61% 15.09% 2nd Quartile 13.00% 2

04/05 16b 14.6% 14.60% Yes �� 14.27% 22.73% 34.77% 3rd Quartile 13.00% 2

05/06 16b 14.60% 14.60% Yes �� No Quartiles provided 13.00% 2

06/07 16b 14.60% 14.60% Yes ��

07/08 16b 14.60% 08/09 16b 14.60%


%point Nil

-1.56 % point

-7.39 % point

-13.91 % point -0.29

% point Nil

03-04/ 04-05 Nil Nil -3.72


+19.66 % point Nil Nil

04-05/ 05-06 Nil Nil No Quartiles Provided Nil Nil

05-06/ 06-07 Nil Nil

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Figure based upon last census. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Last census outcome

BV 16b - % of economically active disabled people in the Borough

101214161820222426283032343638

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage of local authority employees from ethnic minority communities

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 17a 1.66% 0.85% No - 0.40% 0.90% 1.70% 3rd Quartile 0.87% 6

01/02 17a 0.40% 1.31% Yes �� 0.40% 1.00% 1.80% 2nd Quartile 0.62% 4

02/03 17a 1.10% 1.12% Yes �� 0.60% 1.10% 2.10% 2nd Quartile 1.0% 5

03/04 17a 1.16% 1.98% Yes �� 0.60% 1.20% 2.40% 2nd Quartile 1.0% 6

04/05 17a 1.16% 2.43% Yes �� 0.70% 1.40% 2.50% 2nd Quartile 1.2% 3

05/06 17a 1.16% 2.69% Yes �� 0.8% 1.4% 2.7% Best 25% 1.4% 3

06/07 17a 1.16% 2.30% Yes ��

07/08 17a 1.16% 08/09 17a 1.16%


%point +0.46


+0.10 % point -0.25

% point +2

01-02/ 02-03 +0.70

%point -0.19


+0.10 % point

+0.30 % point +38

% point -1

02-03/ 03-04 +0.06

%point -0.10


+0.30 % point Nil

-1

03-04/ 04-05 Nil +0.95


+0.20 % point

+0.10 %point +0.2

% point +3

04-05/ 05-06 Nil +0.26

% point +0.1 % point Nil +0.2


05-06/ 06-07 Nil -0.39

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Decrease caused by staff turnover. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target No reason for change as there are not specific plans to recruit.

BV 17a - % of ethnic minority employees

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage of the economically active (persons aged 18-65) population from ethnic minority communities in the local authority area.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 02/03 17b 0.40% 1.16% Yes - 1.0% 2.0% 3.0% 3rd Quartile 1.4% 7=

03/04 17b 1.16% 1.16% Yes �� 1.1% 1.8% 3.4% 3rd Quartile 1.4% 7=

04/05 17b 1.16% 1.16% Yes �� Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail 1.4% 7=

05/06 17b 1.16% 1.16% Yes �� Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail 1.4% 7=

06/07 17b 1.16% 1.16% Yes ��



-0.2 % point

+0.4 % point Nil Nil

03-04/ 04-05 Nil Nil Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail Nil Nil


05-06/ 06-07 Nil Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Figure based upon last census. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target This indicators has been deleted from 1st April 2007 by DCLG (Department for Communities and Local Government).

BV 17b - % of economically active ethic minority people in area

0

1

2

3

4

5

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


High Priority Indicators - Balancing Housing Needs

HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Speed of processing: Average time for processing new [Housing Benefit and Council tax Benefit] claims (calendar days).

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 78a - 25 - - 61 44 33 Best 25% 45 3

01/02 78a 26 26 Yes �� 58 44 32 Best 25% 38 4

02/03 78a 26 21 Yes �� 50 40 30 Best 25% 32 2=

03/04 78a 26 36 No �� 46 38 31 2nd Quartile 36 6

04/05 78a 30 31 No �� 41 33 28 2nd Quartile 31 5=

05/06 78a 30 24 Yes �� 37.8 31.0 25.5 Best 25% 30.00 2

06/07 78a 30 26 Yes ��

07/08 78a 30 08/09 78a 30

Change Change Change 00-01/ 01-02 - +1

(+4%) -3 (-5%) Nil -1

(-3%) -7 (-16%) -1

01-02/ 02-03 Nil -5

(-19%) -8 (-14%)

-4 (-9%)

-2 (-6%) -6

(-16%) +2

02-03/ 03-04 Nil +15

(+71%) -4 (-8%)

-2 (-5%)

+1 (+3%) +4

(+13%) -4

03-04/ 04-05 +4

(+15%) -5

(-14%) -5 (-12%)

-5 (-15%)

-3 (-10%) -5

(-16%) +1

04-05/ 05-06 Nil -7

(-22%) -3.2 (8%)

-2 (6%)

-2.5 (10%) -1

(-3%) +3

05-06/ 06-07 Nil +2

(+8%)

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Despite a sickness problem in November and December as previously reported, the average was within target. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target In accordance with the Performance Standards which forms part of the Council's CPA process, the Authority would score 4 out of 4 for an average of less than 30 days.

BV 78a -Speed of processing: Average time for processing NEW benefit claims

18

20

22

24

26

28

30

32

34

36

38

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Speed of processing: Average time (calendar days) for processing notifications of changes of circumstances (for Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit)

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 78b - 11 - - 21 14 8 2nd Quartile 13 5

01/02 78b 12 13 No �� 17 12 8 3rd Quartile 12 6

02/03 78b 9 6 Yes �� 14 10 7 Best 25% 9 2

03/04 78b 8 11 No �� 13 10 7 3rd Quartile 11 8=

04/05 78b 9 12 No �� 12 9 7 Worst 25% 13 5

05/06 78b 9 8 Yes �� 16.7 11.9 8.5 Best 25% 15.30 4

06/07 78b 9 8 Yes ��

07/08 78b 9 08/09 78b 9


(+18%) -4 (-19%)

-2 (-14%) Nil -1

(-8%) -1

01-02/ 02-03 -3

(-25%) -7

(-54%) -3 (-18%)

-2 (-17%)

-1 (-13%) -3

(-25%) +4

02-03/ 03-04 -1

(-11%) +5

(+83%) -1 (-7%) Nil Nil +2

(+22%) -6

03-04/ 04-05 +1

(+13%) +1

(+9%) -1 (-8%)

-1 (-11%) Nil +2

(+15%) +3

04-05/ 05-06 Nil -4

(-33%) +4.7 (+28%)

+2.9 (+24%)

+1.5 (+17%) +2.30

(+15%) +1

05-06/ 06-07 Nil Nil

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Despite a sickness problem in November and December as previously reported, the average was within target. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target In accordance with the Performance Standards which forms part of the Council's CPA process, the Authority would score 4 out of 4 for an average of less than 9 days.

BV 78b -Speed of processing: Average time for processing change in circumstances

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of new homes built on previously developed land.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 106 90% 69% No - 35% 54% 75% 2nd Quartile 72% 6

01/02 106 90% 92% Yes �� 35% 57% 79% Best 25% 64% 4

02/03 106 90% 93% Yes �� 42% 62% 82% Best 25% 68% 3

03/04 106 90% 97% Yes �� 45% 66% 86% Best 25% 78% 4

04/05 106 90% 93% Yes �� 52% 72% 90% Best 25% 92% 5

05/06 106 90% 89.44% No �� 57.36% 75.00% 89.36% Best 25% 89.44% 6

06/07 106 90% �

07/08 106 90% 08/09 106 90%



+4 % point -8

% point +2

01-02/ 02-03 Nil +1

% point +7 % point

+5 % point

+3 % point +4

% point +1

02-03/ 03-04 Nil +4

% point +3 % point

+4 % point

+4 % point +10

% point -1

03-04/ 04-05 Nil -4%

% point +7 % point

+6 % point

+4 % point +14

% point -1

04-05/ 05-06 Nil -3.6

% point +5.36 (+9%)

+3 (+4%)

-64 (-0.7%) -2.56

(-3%) +1

05-06/ 06-07 Nil

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2005/2006 OUTTURN This year it is 89.4% brownfield, 10.6% greenfield,, the brownfield/greenfield split depends on how many units are completed in any particular year, in our last remaining "greenfield" housing site at Hoburne Farm as of 31.March 05 there were 163 units still outstanding for the final phases. This year's greenfield completions were made up of units at Hoburne Farm and land at former Ashtree Riding Stables, Purewell which is a site at the edge of the built up area, but "greenfield" in that it has not been built on before. The total number of units completed on greenfield sites this year is 17

BV 106 - % of new homes built on previously developed land

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06


HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The average length of stay in (i) bed and breakfast accommodation

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst)

02/03 183a 9 Weeks

13 weeks No - 8

weeks 4 weeks 0.6 weeks Worst 25% 8.8

weeks 10=

03/04 183a 6 Weeks

14 weeks No ��

9 weeks 5 weeks 1

week Worst 25% 9.3 weeks

8 (from 10)

04/05 183a 3 Weeks

12.5 Weeks No ��

5 Weeks

3 Weeks

1 Weeks Worst 25% 4

Weeks 10

05/06 183a 3 Weeks

3.59 Weeks No ��

4.95 weeks

3.0 weeks

1.35 weeks 3rd Quartile 3.60 6

06/07 183a 6 Weeks

3.68 Weeks Yes ��

Change Change Change 02-03/ 03-04

-3 weeks

+1 week

+ 1 week +1 week +0.4

weeks +0.5 weeks +2

03-04/ 04-05

-3 weeks

-1.5 weeks

-4 Weeks

-2 Weeks Nil -5.3

Weeks -2

04-05/ 05-06

Nil -8.9 weeks

-0.5 weeks Nil +0.35

weeks -0.40 weeks +4

05-06/ 06-07

Nil +0.9 weeks

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN The Outturn of 3.68 weeks represents the average time spent in bed & breakfast accommodation for those households for whom the housing duty was discharged between 1 April 2006 and 31 March 2007. The duty was discharged between these dates but the stay in B and B may be for any time back to 1 April 2004. Households may have also been placed into alternative temporary accommodation after they left B and B until the duty was discharged. This indicator reflects only those in B and B who had or who were expecting children. Members may wish to know that we discharged duty to 39 households in 2006/2007, of which 10 are relevant to BV183a. Of the 10 households where we discharged duty relevant to BV183a, the following applied - 7 were given permanent housing in RSL (Registered Social Landlords) accommodation, 2 were evicted from temporary accommodation due to rent arrears and 1 purchased their own home. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target This indicators has been deleted from 1st April 2007 by DCLG (Department for Communities and Local Government).

BV 183a -Average length of stay in Bed and Breakfast accommodationfor applicable people

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage change in the average number of families, which include dependent children or pregnant women, placed in temporary accommodation under the homelessness legislation compared with the average from the previous year.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst)

03/04 203 - -17% - -

04/05 203 12.5% 5.6% Yes �� Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail 3 6

05/06 203 10% 2.96% Yes �� 22.22 1.05 -17.82 3rd Quartile 4 3

06/07 203 -10% -35% Yes ��

Change Change Change 03-04/ 04-05 - +11.3

%point Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail

04-05/ 05-06 -2.5

%point -2.64

% point Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail +3

05-06/ 06-07 Nil -37.96

% point

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN This years target was exceeded due to the detailed work carried out over the past 2 years in reducing the number of households accepted as homeless through a prevention culture, which means we are reducing the cases to whom we owe a duty to provide temporary accommodation and also as we are actively working to discharge duty to those whom we have in temporary accommodation. This has also been achieved by closer monitoring of the work of Twynham Housing Association in that period. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target This indicators has been deleted from 1st April 2007 by DCLG (Department for Communities and Local Government).

BV 203 - % change in the average number of families placed in temporary accommodation

-40

-35

-30

-25

-20

-15

-10

-5

0

5

2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07

Outturn Target Best 25% Family

HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Number of Households for whom housing advice casework intervention worked.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 213 - 4 - - 1 2 5 2nd Quartile 4 6=

06/07 213 4 4.1 Yes ��

07/08 213 5 08/09 213 5

Change Change Change 05-06/ 06-07 +4 +0.1

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN This indicator is calculated by working out how many cases per thousand households are prevented from becoming homeless through detailed case work for a minimum of 6 months. It may assist members to know that during 2006/2007 we assisted 93 households in this way against a target of 80 due to our continuing prevention work. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Prevention work must continue to expand and so a target of 5 is set.


Medium Priority Indicators - Balancing Housing Needs

MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The number of non-local authority-owned vacant dwellings returned to occupation or demolished during the financial year as a direct result of action by the local authority.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median

CBC Position (1=best; 11=worst

) 00/01 64 0 0 - - 0 1.0 2.5 Worst 25% 1.80 11= 01/02 64 0 0 - - 0 0.9 2.8 Worst 25% 0.65 11= 02/03 64 0 0 - - 1.0 5.0 18.0 Worst 25% 6.0 8= 03/04 64 0 1 Yes - 1 7 20 Worst 25% 2.0 7=

04/05 64 10 10 Yes �� 2 9.5 25 2nd Quartile 10 6

05/06 64 10 3 No �� 4 13 38 Worst 25% 9 8

06/07 64 5 11 Yes ��

07/08 64 5 08/09 64 5

Change Change Change 00-01/ 01-02 Nil Nil Nil -0.1 +0.3 -1.15 Nil

01-02/ 02-03 Nil Nil +1 +4.1 +15.2 +5.35 +3

02-03/ 03-04 Nil +1 Nil +2 +2 -4.0 +1

03-04/ 04-05 +10 +9 +1 +2.5 +5 +8.0 +1

04-05/ 05-06 Nil -7 +2 -3.5 +13 -1 -2

05-06/ 06-07 Nil +8

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN This year's success has been through 9 units being brought back into use through Landlords Assistance Grants and 2 through leasing schemes with Bournemouth Churches Housing Association. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target As the 2 senior officers within Housing Services have left /are leaving there will be no one on post for some time to take empty property initiatives forward.

BV 64 - No of non-LA owned vacant dwellings returned tooccupation or demolished

02468

10121416182022242628303234363840

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Housing Benefit Security: a) The number of claimants visited, per 1000 caseload )

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 03/04 76a 260 343 Yes - 64 200 304 Best 25% 202 3

04/05 76a 350 227 No �� 173.06 222 296 2nd Quartile 227 6

05/06 76a 325 341 Yes �� No Quartiles provided 277.32 4

06/07 76a 325 307 No ��


(+35%) -116

(-33%) +109.06 +22 -8 +25 -3

04-05/ 05-06 Nil +114

(+50%) No Quartiles provided +50.32 +2

05-06/ 06-07 Nil -34

(-10%)

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN The previous practice of Interventions was suspended in January to enable the Authority to introduce new procedures in preparation for 'Volume of change' from April 2007. This indicator has been deleted from 1st April 2007 by DCLG i)Department for Communities and Local Government)

BV 76a - Number of Benefit claimants visited per 1000 caseload

190

210

230

250

270

290

310

330

350

370

2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Housing Benefit Security: b) The number of fraud investigators employed, per 1000 caseload

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 03/04 76b 0.3 0.3 Yes - 0.3 0.4 0.5 Worst 25% 0.4 8=

04/05 76b 0.3 0.3 Yes �� No Quartiles provided 0.3 3=

05/06 76b 0.3 0.3 Yes �� No Quartiles provided 0.3 7=

06/07 76b 0.3 0.3 Yes ��

07/08 76b 0.3 08/09 76b 0.3

Change Change Change 03-04/ 04-05 Nil Nil No Quartiles provided -0.1 +5

04-05/ 05-06 Nil Nil No Quartiles provided Nil +4

05-06/ 06-07 Nil Nil

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN During May we had no investigator as our previous investigator took up a new post at Poole BC and as well as a gap in employment, our new investigator required some compassionate leave.

Outturn values all 0.3 - insufficient data to show trend

MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Housing Benefit Security: c) The number of fraud investigations, per 1000 caseload

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 03/04 76c 13 12 No - 33 41 62 Worst 25% 59 11

04/05 76c 12 18 Yes �� 29 41.20 59.53 Worst 25% 35 11

05/06 76c 20 17.12 No �� No Quartiles provided 39.79 10

06/07 76c 20 16 No ��

07/08 76c 20 08/09 76c 20

Change Change Change 03-04/ 04-05 -1

(-8%) +6

(+50%) -4 % point

+0.20 % point

-2.27 % point -24 Nil

04-05/ 05-06 +8

(+67%) -1

(-5%) No Quartiles provided +4.79 % point +1

05-06/ 06-07 Nil -0.88

(-5%)

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN As explained our performance in the first quarter was only 4 investigations. The last three quarters averaged 18 per quarter. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target There is no national target for this indicator.

BV 76c - Number of fraud investigations per 1000 Benefit caseload

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Housing Benefit Security: d) The number of prosecutions and sanctions, per 1000 caseload

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 03/04 76d 6.5 4.0 No - 1.8 3.4 5.8 2nd Quartile 4.8 9

04/05 76d 4.2 5.7 Yes �� 2.52 4.0 6.25 2nd Quartile 4.8 5

05/06 76d 4.9 5.2 Yes �� No Quartiles provided 5.20 6

06/07 76d 4.9 3.2 No ��

07/08 76d 4.9 08/09 76d 4.9

Change Change Change 03-04/ 04-05 -2.3 +1.7

(+43%) +0.72 % point

+0.6 % point

+0.45 % point Nil +4

04-05/ 05-06 +0.7

(+17%) -0.5

(-8%) No Quartiles provided +0.40 -1

05-06/ 06-07 Nil -2.0

(-38%)

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN As explained our performance in the first quarter was only 2 sanctions. The last three quarters averaged 3.3 per quarter. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target In accordance with the Performance Standards which forms part of the Council's CPA process, the Authority would score 4 out of 4 for a score of 4.2 or above and a score of 3 for 2.9 to 4.1.

BV 76d - Number of fraud prosecutions and sanctions per 1000 Benefit caseload

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Accuracy of processing [Housing Benefit and Council Tax benefit] claims: Percentage of cases for which the calculation of the amount of benefit due was correct on the basis of the information available for the decision for a sample of cases checked post-decision.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 79a - 93% - - 94% 96% 98% Worst 25% 97% 10

01/02 79a 92% 95% Yes �� 96% 97% 98% Worst 25% 97% 9

02/03 79a 95% 96% Yes �� 96% 98% 99% Worst 25% 98% 10

03/04 79a 96% 98% Yes �� 97% 98% 99% Median 98% 6

04/05 79a 97% 94% No �� 96.80% 98% 99% Worst 25% 97.80% 9

05/06 79a 95% 94% No �� 96.80% 98.20% 99.00% Worst 25% 97.48% 11

06/07 79a 95% 94% No ��

07/08 79a 95% 08/09 79a 95%


% point +2 % point

+1 % point Nil Nil +1

01-02/ 02-03 +3

%point +1


+1 % point +1

% point -1

02-03/ 03-04 +1

%point +2

% point +1 % point Nil Nil Nil +4

03-04/ 04-05 +1

%point -4

% point -0.20 % point Nil Nil -0.20

% point -3

04-05/ 05-06 -2

%point Nil Nil +0.20 % point Nil -0.32

% point -2

05-06/ 06-07 Nil Nil

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target In accordance with the Performance Standards which forms part of the Council's CPA process, the Authority would score 4 out of 4 for an average of above 99%, a score 3 of 98 - 99%, a score 2 for 96-97% and a score 1 for less than 96%..

BV 79a -Accuracy of processing: % of claims whose benefit was correct

90

92

94

96

98

100

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of Recoverable Overpayments Recovered (HB): The amount of Housing Benefit overpayments (HB) recovered as a percentage of all HB overpayments in the year. (not just deemed recoverable) – amended 2005/06 – BVPI 79b split into 3 parts..

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n yr

tren

d

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 79b(i) - 74% - - 48% 59% 71% Best 25% 60% 6

01/02 79b(i) 90% 75% No �� 42% 50% 64% Best 25% 61% 3

02/03 79b(i) 90% 71% No �� 43% 53% 61% Best 25% 60% 3=

03/04 79b(i) 70% 50% No �� 39% 47% 56% 2nd Quartile 50% 6

04/05 79b(i) 50% 44% No �� 35% 43% 54% 2nd Quartile 50% 7

05/06 79b(i) 50% 84.9 % No �� 59.37% 70.35% 79.46% Best 25% 81.67% 5

06/07 79b(i) 76% 71.22% No ��

07/08 79b(i) 70% 08/09 79b(i) 70%


% point -6 % point

-9 % point

-7 % point +1

% point +3

01-02/ 02-03 Nil -4

% point +1 % point

+3 % point

-3 % point -1

% point 0

02-03/ 03-04 -20

%point -21

% point -4 % point

-6 % point

-5 % point -10

% point -3

03-04/ 04-05 -20

%point -6

% point -4 % point

-4 % point

-2 % point Nil -1

04-05/ 05-06 +26

%point +40.9


+27.35 % point

+25.46 % point +31.67

% point +2

05-06/ 06-07 -4

% point -13.68% (-16%) +24.37


+25.46 % point +31.67

% point +2

06-07/ 07-08 Nil +24.37


+25.46 % point +31.67

% point +2

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN From April 2006 the legislation was changed so that overpayments could no longer be automatically recovered from landlords even if they had been paid direct. Recovering from ongoing benefit claims takes longer for overpayments to be recovered. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target In 2005-2006 between 70.35 and 79.46 would have put the Local Authority in the second quartile.

BV 79b(i) -Amount of benefit overpayments recovered as a% of benefit deemed recoverable

40

45

50

55

60

6570

75

80

85

90

95

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of Recoverable Overpayments Recovered (HB): HB overpayments recovered during the year as a percentage of the total amount of HB overpayment debt outstanding at the start of the year plus amount of HB overpayments identified during the year. Amended 2005/06 – BVPI 79b split into 3 parts..

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 79b(ii) - 36.9 % - - 28.35% 34.11% 41.22% 2nd Quartile 37.50% 7

06/07 79b(ii) 32% 34.95% Yes ��

07/08 79b(ii) 35% 08/09 79b(ii) 35%


% point -1.9

% point

06-07/ 07-08

COMMENTARY ON 2005/2006 OUTTURN From April 2006 the legislation was changed so that overpayments could no longer be automatically recovered from landlords even if they had been paid direct. Recovering from ongoing benefit claims takes longer for overpayments to be recovered. Rationale/Justification for 2006/07 Target In 2005-2006 between 31.11 and 41.22 would have put the Local Authority in the second quartile. Target for 2006/07 has been set in line with legislation changes from April 2006.


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of Recoverable Overpayments Recovered (HB): HB overpayments written off during the year as a percentage of the total amount of HB overpayments debt outstanding at the start of the year plus amount of HB overpayments identified during the year. Amended 2005/06 – BVPI 79b split into 3 parts..

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 79b(iii) - 4% - - No Quartiles provided 4.20 6

06/07 79b(iii) 3% 3.79% Yes ��

07/08 79b(iii) 4% 08/09 79b(iii) 4%


%point -0.21

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN BVPI 79b was amended from 2005/2006 and split into 3 parts. Rationale/Justification for 2006/07 Target Target for 2006/07 has been set in line with legislation changes from April 2006.


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The number of people sleeping rough on a single night within the area of the authority. (not reported if <10 - )

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


) 04/05 202 - - - - 05/06 202 - 4 N/A N/A <10 – not applicable 4 5=

06/07 202 4 1 Yes ��

07/08 202 4 08/09 202 4


05-06/ 06-07 +4 -3

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN After consultation with Police, CAB (Citizens Advice Bureau) and other organisations it was confirmed that there was only 1 person who regularly slept rough in Christchurch and most rough sleepers migrate towards the conurbation of Bournemouth.

Introduced in 2004/2005 - insufficient data to show trend

MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Proportion of homeless households that were also homeless within last 2 years

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 214 - 0 - - 4.19 1.82 0 Best 25% 1.20 1=

06/07 214 0 0 Yes ��

Change Change Change 05-06/ 06-07 Nil Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN There have been no cases of repeat homelessness where a duty was accepted by us in the past two years. In fact there have only been 4 homeless acceptances in the whole of 2006/2007 due to prevention work. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target This indicator has been deleted from 1st April 2007 by DCLG (Department for Communities and Local Government)


High Priority Indicators - Improving Prosperity

HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Plan-making: a) Do you have a development plan (or alterations to it) that has been adopted in the last 5 years and the end date of which has not expired? b) If ‘No’, are there proposals on deposit for an alteration or replacement, with a published timetable for adopting those alterations or the replacement plan within three years?

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Achieved? Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 03/04 200 a) Yes Yes Yes 04/05 200 a) Yes Yes Yes 05/06 200 a) Yes- Yes Yes 06/07 200 a) Yes- Yes Yes

COMMENTARY The Council adopted its Development Plan in March 2001. Note: this indicator is discontinued from 2005/2006 and is replaced by: BVPI 200a: Did the local authority submit the Local Development Scheme (LDS) by 28th March 2005 and thereafter maintain a 3-year rolling programme? BVPI 200b: Has the local planning authority met the milestones which the current Local Development Scheme (LDS) sets out? BVPI 200c: Did the Local Planning Authority publish an annual monitoring report by December of the last year? BVPI 200c – This part of the indicator has been deleted from 1st April 2007 by DCLG (Department for Communities and Local Government)

Dichotomous indicator – no trend data available

No Quartile Provided

High Priority Indicators - Improving the Environment

HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of planning applications determined in line with the Government’s development control targets to determine: a) 60% of major applications in 13 weeks

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst)

02/03 109a 60% 60% Yes - 34% 45% 56% Best 25% 54% 4

03/04 109a 60% 100% Yes �� 40% 52% 64% Best 25% 54% 1

04/05 109a 65% 67% Yes �� 46.8% 59% 71% 2nd Quartile 67% 6

05/06 109a 65% 91.6% Yes �� 58.05% 66.67% 74.75% Best 25% 73.91 1

06/07 109a 65% 83.33% Yes ��

07/08 109a 65%

08/09 109a 65% Change Change Change

02-03/ 03-04 Nil +40

% point +6 % point

+7 % point

+8 % point Nil +3

03-04/ 04-05 +5

%point -33

% point +46.8 % Point

+7 % point

+7 % point +13

% point -5

04-05/ 05-06 Nil +24.6


+7.67 % point

+3.75 % point +9.91

% point +5

05-06/ 06-07 Nil -8.27

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08/09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN

BV 109a - % of Planning applications determined in line w ith : 60% of major in 13 weeks

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of planning applications determined in line with the Government’s new development control targets to determine: b) 65% of minor applications in 8 weeks

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 02/03 109b 50% 50% Yes - 46% 55% 64% 3rd Quartile 54% 7=

03/04 109b 55% 64% Yes �� 52% 61% 71% 2nd Quartile 58% 4

04/05 109b 60% 77% Yes �� 61% 69% 75% Best 25% 72% 5

05/06 109b 65% 78.4% Yes �� 68.60% 74.01% 80.39% 2nd Quartile 74.00 4

06/07 109b 65% 81.94% Yes ��

07/08 109b 65%

08/09 109b 65% Change Change Change

02-03/ 03-04 +5

% point +14

% point +6 % point

+6 % point

+7 % point +4

% point +3

03-04/ 04-05 +5

% point +13

% point +9 % point

+8 % point

+4 % point +14

% point -1

04-05/ 05-06 +5

% point +1.4


+5.01 % point

+5.39 % point +2

% point -1

05-06/ 06-07 Nil +3.54

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Once again a good performance despite changes in staffing and the higher number of applications (155 in 2006/2007)

BV 109b - % of Planning applications determined in line with : 65% of minor in 8 weeks

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of planning applications determined in line with the Government’s new development control targets to determine: c) 80% of other applications in 8 weeks

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 02/03 109c 65% 70% Yes 68% 75% 82% 3rd Quartile 67% 5

03/04 109c 75% 85% Yes �� 74% 80% 86% 2nd Quartile 79% 4

04/05 109c 80% 86.46% Yes �� 80% 85% 88% 2nd Quartile 86% 6

05/06 109c 85% 87.05% Yes �� 83.85% 88.23% 91.61% 3rd Quartile 87.00% 5

06/07 109c 85% 88.83% Yes ��

07/08 109c 85% 08/09 109c 85%


%point +15

% point +6 % point

+5 % point

+4 % point +12

% point +1

03-04/ 04-05 +5

%point +1.46

% point +6 % point

+5 % point

+2 % point +7

% point -2

04-05/ 05-06 +5

%point +0.59


+3.23 % point

+3.61 % point +1

% point +1

05-06/ 06-07 Nil +1.78

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2005/2006 OUTTURN Good performance despite the increasing number of applications (591 in 2006/2007)

BV 109c - % of Planning applications determined in line with : 80% of other in 8 weeks

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The proportion of relevant land and highways (expressed as a percentage) that is assessed as having combined deposits of litter and detritus that fall below an acceptable level.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst)

04/05 199a 25% 30% No - 21.5% 15% 10% Worst 25% 6.1% 10

05/06 199a 25% 27% No �� 19.0% 12.0% 8.0% Worst 25% 8.10% 11

06/07 199a 20% 15% Yes ��

07/08 199a 20%

08/09 199a 20%

Change Change Change 04-05/ 05-06 Nil -3


-3 % point

-2 % point +2

% point +1

05-06/ 06-07 -5

% point -12

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN A significant and welcome decrease has occurred in this performance indicator.

BV 199a -% of relevant land that is assessed as having deposits of litter and detritus

0

10

20

30

40

2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The proportion of relevant land and highways (expressed as a percentage) from which unacceptable levels of graffiti are visible.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst)

05/06 199b 0% 0% Yes - 4% 1% 0% Best 25% 0% 1=

06/07 199b 0.5% 0% No ��

07/08 199b 0.5%

08/09 199b 0.5% Change Change Change

05-06/ 06-07 +0.5% Nil

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Target set based on first year’s performance and service operation.


HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The proportion of relevant land and highways (expressed as a percentage) from which unacceptable levels of fly-posting are visible.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst)

05/06 199c 0% 0% Yes - 1% 0% 0% Best 25% 0% 1=

06/07 199c 0.5% 0% Yes ��

07/08 199c 0.5%

08/09 199c 0.5%

Change Change Change 05-06/ 06-07 +0.5% Nil

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil



HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The local authority’s score against a ‘quality of service checklist’. (The score will reflect the quality of planning service as they stand at the end of the financial year. Score is shown as a percentage against the maximum possible: 18. Actual target score out of 18 is shown in brackets.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst)

04/05 205 56% (10)

94% (17) Yes - 72% 83% 89% Best 25% 78% 1=

05/06 205 78% (14)

94% (17) Yes �� 83.3% 94.0% 94.4% Median 86.5% 2

06/07 205 94% (17)

94.4% (17) Yes ��

07/08 205 94% (17)

08/09 205 94% (17)



+11 % point

+5.4 % point +8.5

% point -1

05-06/ 06-07 +22

%point Nil

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil


BV 205 - Quality of service checklist (planning)

50

5560

6570

75

8085

90

95

100

2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of new reports of abandoned vehicles investigated within 24 hours of notification.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 218a 97% - - 71.58% 87.00% 96.12% Best 25% 89.82% 4

06/07 218a 97 99% Yes ��

07/08 218a 97 �

08/09 218a 97 Change Change Change

05-06/ 06-07 Nil +2

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil



HIGH PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of abandoned vehicles removed within 24 hours from the point at which the Authority is legally entitled to remove the vehicle.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst)

05/06 218b - 76% - - 56.53% 77.50% 93.95% 3rd Quartile 79.95% 8

06/07 218b 100 86% NO ��

07/08 218b 100 �

08/09 218b 100 Change Change Change

05-06/ 06-07 +100

% point +10

% point

06-07/ 07-08 +100

% point

07-08/ 08-09 +100

% point

Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Target set based on Reputation Agenda, aiming to achieve 100%.


Medium Priority Indicators - Improving the Environment

MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of household waste arisings which have been sent by the Authority for recycling.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 82a(i) 11% 12% Yes - 6% 9% 12% Best 25% 12% 5

01/02 82a(i) 12% 12% Yes �� 7% 9% 13% 2nd Quartile 12% 5

02/03 82a(i) 12% 13% Yes �� 8% 11% 14% 2nd Quartile 13% 4=

03/04 82a(i) 15% 20% Yes �� 11% 14% 17% Best 25% 16% 1

04/05 82a(i) 30.00% 20.55% No �� 12% 16% 19% Best 25% 18% 4

05/06 82a(i) 30.00% 20.75%* No �� 14.79% 18.15% 21.72% Best 25% 21.71% 4

06/07 82a(i) 30.00% 21.23% No ��

07/08 82a(i) 30.00% �

08/09 82a(i) 30.00% �


%point Nil +1 % point Nil +1

% point Nil Nil

01-02/ 02-03 Nil +1

% point +1 % point

+2 % point

+1 % point +1

% point +1

02-03/ 03-04 +3

%point +7

% point +3 % point

+3 % point

+3 % point +3

% point +3

03-04/ 04-05 +15

%point +0.55

% point +1 % point

+2 % point

+2 % point +2

% point -3

04-05/ 05-06 Nil +0.25


+2.15 % point

+2.72 % point +3.71

%point Nil

05-06/ 06-07 Nil +0.48

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Government set target. Although our 2006/2007 outturn of 21.57% show continuous improvement, we strongly contend that the true rate was much higher – if the Council was allowed to include the waste recycled from the Wilverley Road Civic Amenity Site.

BV 82a(i) - % of houshold w aste that is recycled

10

1214

16182022242628303234

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Total tonnage of household waste arisings which have been sent by the Authority for recycling

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 82a (ii) 4000 3636 No - 5279 6839 9083 Worst 25% 6049 10

06/07 82a (ii) 4400 3781 No ��

07/08 82a (ii) 4800 �

08/09 82a (ii) 5200 Change Change Change

05-06/ 06-07 +400

(+10%) +145 (+4%)

06-07/ 07-08 +400

(+9%

07-08/ 08-09 +400

(+8%)

Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target It is extremely difficult to set any meaningful target for this indicator given that the Council has little control over how much waste is generated. The target for 2007/2008 represents an approximate increase of 11% from the previous year outturn.


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Number of kilograms of household waste collected per head of the population

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


) 00/01 84a - 287 - - 417 387 351 Best 25% 339 1

01/02 84a 279 348 No �� 426 395 356 Best 25% 339 7

02/03 84a 373 303 Yes �� 438 401 367 Best 25% 352 2

03/04 84a 300 358 No �� 430 401 372 Best 25% 368 4

04/05 84a 360 392 No �� 443 411 380 2nd Quartile 378 4

05/06 84a 392 388* Yes �� 443 410 381 2nd Quartile 375 7

06/07 84a 392 395 Yes ��

07/08 84a 392 08/09 84a 392


(+21%) +9 (+2%)

+8 (+2%)

+5 (+1%) Nil -6

01-02/ 02-03 +94

(+33%) -45

(-13%) +8 (+2%)

+6 (+2%)

+11 (+3%) +13

(+4%) +5

02-03/ 03-04 -73

(-20%) +55

(+18%) -8 (-2%) Nil +5

(+1%) +14 (+5%) -2

03-04/ 04-05 +60

(+20%) +34

(+9%) +13 (+3%)

+10 (+2%)

+8 (+2%) +10

(+2% Nil

04-05/ 05-06 +32

(+9%) -4

(-1.05%) Nil -1 (-0.2%)

+1 (-0.2%) -3

(-0.8%) -3

05-06/ 06-07 Nil +7

(+1.5%)

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Not all households have recycling collection, we don’t generally collect recycling from flats, only collect three material streams of waste from kerbside. Household waste rate of increase of 3% is in line with national trend of waste arising growth

BV 84a - Number of kilograms of household waste collected per head of population

290

300

310320

330

340

350

360

370

380

390

400

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage change from the previous financial year in the number of kilograms of household waste collected per head of the population

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 04/05 84b - +9% - -

05/06 84b 9% -1.02% Yes �� 2.51% -0.44% -3.22% 2nd Quartile -2.00 5

06/07 84b 9% +1.54% Yes ��

07/08 84b 1% 08/09 84b 0%

Change Change Change 04-05/ 05-06

-10 % point

Not avail Not avail Not avail - -

05-06/ 06-07

+9 % point

+2.5 % point

06-07/ 07-08

Nil

07-08/ 08-09

Nil

Rationale/Justification for 2007/2008 Target New indicator from 2004/2005. Target set a 1% though it should be noted that we have very little control on the amount of waste that residents dispose of. It should also be noted that wasted collected for recycling is included in the outturn for BVPI84a, which means that actions designed to increase recycling may increase the amount of waste collected and thus increase the Outturn for this indicator, the national increase in around 3%.


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Cost of waste collection per household (£).

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 86 £17.58 £18.71 No - £33.76 £30.52 £25.47 Best 25% £27.38 1

01/02 86 £17.04 £18.53 No �� £36.32 £32.20 £27.90 Best 25% £30.32 1

02/03 86 £18.85 £18.57 Yes �� £38.66 £34.02 £29.64 Best 25% £31.73 1

03/04 86 £18.84 £18.35 Yes �� £42.90 £38.00 £33.20 Best 25% £33.91 1

04/05 86 £28.00 £27.32 Yes �� £48.13 £42.01 £35.62 Best 25% £38.50 2

05/06 86 £28.00 £29.22 No �� £52.61 £46.25 £40.28 Best 25% £42.79 2

06/07 86 £33.05 £32.73 Yes ��

07/08 86 £34.33 08/09 86 £34.33

Change Change Change 00-01/ 01-02 -£0.54

(-3%) -£0.18 (-1%) +£2.56

(+8%) +£1.68 (+6%)

+£2.43 (+10%) +£2.94

(+11%) Nil

01-02/ 02-03 +£1.81

(+11%) +£0.04 (+0.2%) +£2.34

(+6%) +£1.82 (+6%)

+£1.74 (+6%) +£1.41

(+5%) Nil

02-03/ 03-04 -£0.01

(0%) -£0.22 (-1%) +£4.24

(11%) +£3.98 (+12%)

+£3.56 (12%) +£2.18

(+7%) Nil

03-04/ 04-05 +£8.16

(+43%) +£8.97 (+48%) +£5.23

(10%) +£4.01 (9%)

+£2.42 (6%) +£4.59

(11%) -1

04-05/ 05-06 Nil +£1.90

(+6%) +£4.48) (+8.5%)(

+£4.24 (+9%)

+£4.66 (+11%) +£4.29

(+10%) Nil

05-06/ 06-07 £5.05

(+15%) +£3.51 (+12%)

06-07/ 07-08 £1.28

(+4%)

07-08/ 08-09 Nil


BV 86 - Cost of waste collection per household (£)

£10.00

£15.00

£20.00

£25.00

£30.00

£35.00

£40.00

£45.00

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of the population resident in the authority’s area served by a kerbside collection of recyclables – updated 2005/06.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 01/02 91a - 14% - - - - - - - -

02/03 91a 14% 14% Yes �� 67% 92% 100% Worst 25% 71% 8

03/04 91a 95% 95% Yes �� 85% 96% 100% 3rd Quartile 85% 4

04/05 91a 95% 95% Yes �� 88% 97% 100% 3rd Quartile 89% 3

05/06 91a 95% 95% Yes �� 94% 99% 100% 3rd Quartile 96% 7

06/07 91a 96% 96% Yes ��

07/08 91a 96% 08/09 91a 96%

Change Change Change 01-02/ 02-03 - Nil - - - - -

02-03/ 03-04 +81

%point +81

% point +18 % point

+4 % point Nil +14

% point +4

03-04/ 04-05 +1

%point Nil +3 % point

+1 % point Nil +4

% point +1

04-05/ 05-06 +1

%point Nil +6 % point

+2 % point Nil +7

% point -4

05-06/ 06-07 Nil +1

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target

BV 91a - % of Households served by kerbside recycling

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of households resident in the authority’s area served by a kerbside collection of at least two recyclables.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 91b 95% 95% Yes - 92% 98% 100% 3rd Quartile 95% 6

06/07 91b 96% 96% Yes ��

07/08 91b 96% �


05-06/ 06-07 Nil +1

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN New indicator from 2005/2006 – BVPI 91 was split into 2 parts.

New indicator in 2005/2006 – no sufficient data to show trend

MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Score against a checklist of enforcement best practice for environmental health (range = 0% - 100%)

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 01/02 166a 75% 75% Yes - 39.0% 59.9% 74.1% Best 25% 63% 2

02/03 166a 75% 80% Yes �� 55.0% 70.0% 84.0% 2nd Quartile 79% 4=

03/04 166a 75% 82% Yes �� 68.4% 80.0% 90.0% 2nd Quartile 80% 4

04/05 166a 82% 82% Yes ��Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail 80% 4

05/06 166a 82.0% 85% Yes �� 80.0% 90.0% 98.7% 3rd Quartile 85.0% 6=

06/07 166a 82.0% 85% Yes ��

07/08 166a 82.0% 08/09 166a 82.0%


% point +16 % point

+10.1 % point

+9.9 % point +16

% point -2

02-03/ 03-04 Nil +2


+10.0 % point

+6.0 % point +1

% point Nil

03-04/ 04-05 +7

%point Nil Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail Nil Nil

04-05/ 05-06 Nil +3

% point Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail +5 % point -2

05-06/ 06-07 Nil Nil

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Educational program to be monitored and reported allowing score for this criteria

BV 166a -Score against checklist of enforcement best practise for environment health

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage of appeals allowed against the authority’s decision to refuse on planning applications.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 03/04 204 - 30% - -

04/05 204 25% 44% No �� 37% 29% 24% Worst 25% 27% 11

05/06 204 25% 36.5% No �� No Quartiles provided 28.65% 9 (from 10)

06/07 204 25% 42.42% No ��

07/08 204 25%

08/09 204 25% Change Change Change

03-04/ 04-05 - +14

% point

04-05/ 05-06 Nil -7.5

% point No Quartiles provided +1.65 % point +2

05-06/ 06-07 Nil -5.9

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil


BV 204 - % of appeals allowed against the authority's decision to refuse planning applications

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Number of ‘sites of potential concern’ with respect to land contamination.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 216a - 324 - - 323 697 1198 3rd Quartile 592 8

06/07 216a 300 316 Yes ��

07/08 216a 273 �

08/09 216a 273 Change Change Change

05-06/ 06-07 - +8

06-07/ 07-08 -40

07-08/ 08-09 -30

Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Investigation of high priority sites will continue in accordance with the Contaminated Land Strategy


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Number of sites for which information is available for remediation as a percentage of sites of concern..

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 216b 8% 8% Yes - 1 3 8 Best 25% 6 3

06/07 216b 8% 9.5% Yes ��

07/08 216b 8% �


05-06/ 06-07 - +1.5

% point

06-07/ 07-08 +8

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Investigation of high priority sites will continue in accordance with the Contaminated Land Strategy


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of pollution control improvements to existing installations completed on time..

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 217 50% 50% Yes - 85 94 100 Worst 25% 100 11

06/07 217 100% 100% Yes ��

07/08 217 100% �

08/09 217 100% Change Change Change

05-06/ 06-07 +50

% point +50

% point

06-07/ 07-08 +50

% point

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Premises required to upgrade will reach full compliance during the year


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Total number of conservation areas in the local authority area.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r ten

d

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 219a 12 12 Yes - No Quartiles provided 24 7

06/07 219a 12 12 Yes ��

Change Change Change 05-06/ 06-07 Nil Nil -

Rationale/Justification for 2006/07 Target Justification in extending or reducing the area covered by existing conservation areas may come from the appraisal process. Conservation areas are required to meet certain standards and cannot be designated unless these standards are met. This indicator has been deleted from 1st April 2007 by DCLG (Department for Communities and Local Government)

New indicator in 2005/2006 – insufficient data to show trend,

No quartile data provided

MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of conservation areas with an up-to date character appraisal..

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 219b 16.66% 8.33% No - 0.00% 7.69% 26.00% 2nd Quartile 25.25% 7

06/07 219b 25% 25% Yes ��

07/08 219b 41.66% �

08/09 219b 58.33% Change Change Change

05-06/ 06-07 +8.34


06-07/ 07-08 +16.66

% Point

07-08/ 08-09 +16.66

%point

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Two new Conservation Area Appraisals produced; Burton and Winkton. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Two appraisals planned for 2007/08; Stanpit and Fisherman's Bank and Mudeford Quay.


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of conservation areas with published management proposals.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n yr

tren

d

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 219c 16.66% 0% No - 0.00% 0.00% 5.50% Median 4.15% 11=

06/07 219c 25% 25% Yes ��


% point +25

% point

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Two new Conservation Area Appraisals produced; Burton and Winkton. This indicator has been deleted from 1st April 2007 by DCLG (Department for Communities and Local Government)


Low Priority Indicators - Improving the Environment

LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of household waste arisings which have been sent for composting or for treatment by anaerobic digestion.(Note: amended definition from 2004/2005 to include italicised)-Amended 2005/06.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 82b(i) - 0% - - 0.0% 0.0% 0.3% Worst 25% 0.0% - 01/02 82b(i) - 0% - - 0.0% 0.0% 1.0% Worst 25% 0.0% - 02/03 82b(i) - 0% - - 0.0% 0.2% 2.2% Worst 25% 0.0% 2= 03/04 82b(i) - 0% - - 0.0% 1.8% 5.1% Worst 25% 0.0% 5=

04/05 82b(i) 0% 0% Yes �� Not avail Not avail Not avail Not avail 0.0% 5=

05/06 82b(i) 0% 1.63% Yes �� 2.68% 8.29% 14.67% Worst 25% 1.38% 5

06/07 82b(i) 1% 1.58% Yes ��

07/08 82b(i) 1% �

Change Change Change 01-02/ 02-03 - Nil Nil Nil +0.7

% point Nil -

02-03/ 03-04 - Nil Nil +0.2

% point +1.2

% point Nil -3

03-04/ 04-05 - Nil Nil +1.6

% point +2.9

% point Nil Nil

04-05/ 05-06 Nil +1.63

% point Not avail Not avail Not avail +1.38 % point Nil

05-06/ 06-07 + 1 -0.05

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Rationale/Justification for 2006/07 Target

Amended in 2005/2006 – insufficient data to show trend

LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Total tonnage of household waste arisings which have been sent by the LA for composting or treatment by anaerobic digestion.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 82b(ii) 0 287 Yes - 934 3158 6049 Worst 25% 292 6

06/07 82b(ii) 200 282 Yes ��

07/08 82b(ii) 220 �

08/09 82b(ii) 240 Change Change Change

05-06/ 06-07 +200 -5

06-07/ 07-08 +20

07-08/ 08-09 +20

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN The brown bin scheme and the new organics trial collections were extended from 300 households to 700 from July 06. The street sweeping trial which ran for 7 months (Sept 05 to Mar 06) in 2005/06 ran for 4 months (Dec 06 to Mar 07) in 2006/07, street sweeping tonnage sent for composting is nearly 3 times greater than the amount of composting waste collected from households (ie: Feb 07 14 tonnes were collected from households and 37 tonnes from street sweeping). Hence performance is down as the tonnages for street sweepings are high, in addition in 2005/06 the street sweeping trial took place during autumn, the heaviest leaf drop period.


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The year on year reduction in total number of incidents and increases in total number of enforcement actions taken to deal with ‘fly-tipping’

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst)

05/06 199d Baseline year

06/07 199d 3 2 Yes -

07/08 199d 2 �

08/09 199d 2


06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN New indicator in 2005/06. First year for reporting data is 2006/07 via the national ‘Fly-Capture’ data system (Environment Agency). Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Target set based on first year’s performance and service operation.


Medium Priority Indicators - Supporting the Community

MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Domestic burglaries per 1000 households.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 126 - 8.3 - - 12.8 9.8 6.8 2nd Quartile 10.0 5

01/02 126 9.6 8.0 Yes �� 14.4 10.3 7.3 2nd Quartile 8.4 5

02/03 126 8.0 4.1 Yes �� 14.0 10.0 8.0 Best 25% 8.2 1

03/04 126 4.1 8.0 No �� 13.6 10.0 7.3 2nd Quartile 8.3 5

04/05 126 4.1 7.3 No �� 10.81 8.18 6.17 2nd Quartile 7.3 6=

05/06 126 7.13 6.13 Yes �� 9.6 7.4 5.7 2nd Quartile 6.1 6

06/07 126 6.96 4.45 Yes ��

07/08 126 6.80 08/09 126 6.80

Change Change Change 00-01/ 01-02 - -0.3

(-4%) +1.6 (13%) +0.5 +0.5 -1.6 Nil

01-02/ 02-03 -1.6 -3.9

(-49%) -0.4 (-3%)

-0.3 (-3%)

+0.7 (+10%) -0.2

+4

02-03/ 03-04 -3.9 +3.9

(+95%) -0.4 (-3%) Nil -0.7

(-9%) +0.1 -4

03-04/ 04-05 Nil -0.7

(-9%) -2.25 (-25%)

-1.81 (-22%)

-1.23 (-18%) -1

(-13%) -1

04-05/ 05-06 Nil -1.4

(-19%) -1.21 (-13%)

-0.78 (-10%)

-0.47 (-8.25%) -1.2

(-20%) Nil

05-06/ 06-07 Nil -1.68

(-27%)

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Following the development of the 2005-08 Crime and Drugs Strategy, CDRPs across Dorset have committed to a PSA target of a 15% reduction in all recorded crime over this period using 2003/04 as the baseline year. It should be noted that the Council is of the opinion that the Outturn of 4.1 in 2002/03 was a blip, which then distorted the subsequent 2 years targets. Data for the other years suggests there is a downward trend for this type of crime which the Council and partners will endeavour to maintain

BV 126 - Domestic burglaries per 1000 households

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description:

Violent crimes (ALL) per 1000 population (definition changed 2005/06-previously violent crime was split into 3 categories)

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst)

05/06 127a 12.04 14.04 No - 18.6 14.5 11.1 2nd Quartile 13.10 7

06/07 127a 10.18 11.31 No ��

07/08 127a 8.33 �

08/09 127a 8.33 Change Change Change

05-06/ 06-07 Nil -2.73

(-19%)

06-07/ 07-08

07-08/ 08-09

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target The targets for this indicator reflect the requirement to return to the baseline year minus 15% by 2007/08. COMMENTARY ON 2005/2006 OUTTURN This indicator now includes all violent crime (inc: breaches of ASBOs, domestic violence, drunken behaviour, stabbings (minor to major)), previously violent crime was split into different categories (offences committed by a stranger/connect to license premises/under the influence) . In addition successful pro-active campaigns were ran encouraging victims to report crimes, along with a high profile partnership approach during the summer and Christmas with the introduction of the new licensing act.

Constitutes a new indicator in 2005/2006 – insufficient data to show trend. In 2005/2006 the 3 crime indicators became 2. (Data is

recorded by the Police.)

MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Robbery per 1000 population in the local area

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 127b 0.26 0.25 Yes - 0.7 0.3 0.2 Best 25% 0.3 4=

06/07 127b 0.21 0.24 No ��

07/08 127b 0.17 �

08/09 127b 0.17 �

Change Change Change 05-06/ 06-07 -0.0.5

(-19%) -0.01 (-4%)

06-07/ 07-08 -0.04

(-19%)

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Rationale/Justification for 2007/2008 Target The targets for this indicator reflect the requirement to return to the baseline year minus 15% by 2007/08.

New indicator in 2005/2006 – no trend data available

(major change in definition)

MEDIUM PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Vehicle crimes per 1000 population.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 128 - 11.2 - - 14.6 11.0 8.3 3rd Quartile 10.0 5

01/02 128 10.2 11.2 No �� 14.8 11.4 8.1 2nd Quartile 8.4 5

02/03 128 10.2 7.6 Yes �� 15.0 11.0 9.0 Best 25% 10.3 2

03/04 128 6.7 8.4 No �� 14.3 10.4 8.0 2nd Quartile 8.8 5

04/05 128 6.6 7.5 No �� 11.5 8.84 6.8 2nd Quartile 8.2 4

05/06 128 6.5 8.07 No �� 10.5 8.3 6.4 2nd Quartile 7.6 8

06/07 128 6.5 4.53 Yes ��

07/08 128 6.5

08/09 128 6.5 Change Change Change

00-01/ 01-02 - Nil +0.2

(+1%) +0.4

(+4%) -0.2 -2%) -1.6 Nil

01-02/ 02-03 Nil -3.6

(-32%) +0.2 (+1%)

-0.4 (-4%)

+0.9 (+11%) +1.9 +3

02-03/ 03-04 -3.5

(-34%) +0.8

(+11%) -0.7 (-5%)

-0.6 (-6%)

-1.0 (-11%) -1.5 -3

03-04/ 04-05 -0.1

(-1%) -0.9

(-11%) -2.8 (-24%)

-1.56 (-17%)

-1.2 (-17%) -0.6 +1

04-05/ 05-06 -0.1

(-1%) +0.57 (+7.%) -1.0

(-10%) -0.54 (-6%)

-0.4 (-6%) -0.6 -4

05-06/ 06-07 Nil -3.54

(-44%)

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Following the development of the 2005-08 Crime and Drugs Strategy, CDRPs across Dorset have committed to the PSA Target of a 15% reduction in all recorded crime over this three year period using the baseline year of 2003/04.

BV 128 - Vehicle crimes per 1000 population

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


Low Priority Indicators - Supporting the Community

LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: a) The number of visits to/usage’s of museums per 1000 population

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 170a 167 158 No - 107 232 557 3rd Quartile 405 6 (from 8)

01/02 170a 188 164 No �� 0 57 331 2nd Quartile 206 6 (from 8)

02/03 170a 154 171 Yes �� 111 311 697 3rd Quartile 320 6 (from 8)

03/04 170a 171 159 No �� 71 243 670 3rd Quartile 336 6 (from 9)

04/05 170a 174 326 Yes �� 98 322 811 2nd Quartile 386 5 (from 8)

05/06 170a 450 611 Yes �� 77 312 861 2nd Quartile 611 5 (from 9)

06/07 170a 460 641 Yes ��

07/08 170a 460 08/09 170a 460


(+13%) +6

(+4%) -107 -175 -226 -199 0

01-02/ 02-03 -34

(-18%) +7

(+4%) +111 +254 +366 +114 0

02-03/ 03-04 +17

(+11%) -12

(-7%) -40 -68 -27 -11 0

03-04/ 04-05 +3

(+2%) +167

(+105%) +27 +79 +141 +50 +1

04-05/ 05-06 +276

(+158%) +285

(+87%) -21 -10 +50 +225 Nil

05-06/ 06-07 +10

(+2%) +30 (5%)

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil


BV 170a - Number of visits to museums per 1000 population(definition change in 2005/06)

145195245295345395445495545595645695745795845

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The number of visits to/usage’s of museums: b) The number of those visits that were in person per 1000 population

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 00/01 170b 152 139 No - 87 191 492 3rd Quartile 263 6 (from 8)

01/02 170b 170 141 No �� 83 196 481 3rd Quartile 267 6 (from 8)



04/05 170b 134 151 Yes �� 71 234 466 3rd Quartile 248 6 (from 8)

05/06 170b 210 502 Yes �� 53 178 460 Best 25% 287 2 (from 9)

06/07 170b 220 504 Yes ��

07/08 170b 220 08/09 170b 220


(+12%) +2

(+1%) -4 (-5%)

+5 (+3%)

-11 (-2%) +4

(+2%) Nil

01-02/ 02-03 -23

(-14%) -7

(-5%) +6 (+7%)

+48 (+24%)

+25 (+5%) -27

(-10%) Nil

02-03/ 03-04 -13

(-9%) -25

(-19%) -39 (-44%)

-97 (-40%)

-79 (-16%) +7

(+3%) -1

03-04/ 04-05 Nil +42

(+39%) +21 (+29%)

+87 (+37%)

+39 (+8%) +1

(+0.4%) +1

04-05/ 05-06 +76

(+56%) +351

(+232%) -18 (-33%)

-56 (-31%)

-6 (-1.3%) +39

(+13%) +4

05-06/ 06-07 +10

(+5%)

+2 (+0.3%)

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target Definition changed in 2005/2006, now includes museums and galleries. Target reduced as anticipated rise in virtual visits anticipated at expense of actual visits in person.

BV 170b - Number of those [museum] visits that were in person per 1000 population (defintion change in 2005/06)

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The number of visits to/usage’s of museums: c) The number of pupils visiting museums and galleries in organised school trips

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 02/03 170c 302 384 Yes - - - - - 825 6 (from 8)

03/04 170c 383 247 No �� 187 1122 2754 3rd Quartile 1061 7 (from 7)

04/05 170c 383 312 No �� 300 1179 3181 3rd Quartile 1441 6 (from 8)

05/06 170c 100 1383 Yes �� 260 1279 3302 2nd Quartile 1878 7 (from 9)

06/07 170c 110 1665 Yes ��

07/08 170c 120 08/09 170c 120


(+27%) -137

(-36%) - - - +236 (29%) -1

03-04/ 04-05 Nil +65

(+26%) +113 (37%)

+57 (4.8%)

+427 (13%) +380

(26%) +1

04-05/ 05-06 -283

(-283) +1071

(+343%) -40 (-15%)

+100 (+7%)

+121 (+3%) +437

(+33%) -1

05-06/ 06-07 +10

(+10%) +282

(+20%)

06-07/ 07-08 +10

(+9%)

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Definition change in 2005/2006 now includes museums and galleries.

BV 170c - Number of pupils visiting museums and galleries in organised school trips (defintion change in 2005/06)

100350600850

1100135016001850210023502600285031003350

2002/03 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06 2006/07


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The number of racial incidents recorded by the authority per 100,000 of population.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 01/02 174 - - - - 2.6 0.0 0.0 - 0 - 02/03 174 0 0 Yes - 3.0 0.0 0.0 Best 25% 0 -

03/04 174 2 0 Yes �� 3.5 0.9 0.0 Best 25% 0 1=

04/05 174 2 0 Yes �� Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail 0 1=

05/06 174 2 0 Yes �� Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail 0 1=

06/07 174 2 2.2 Yes ��

07/08 174 2 08/09 174 2

Change Change Change 01-02/ 02-03 - - +0.4

(+15%) Nil Nil Nil -

02-03/ 03-04 +2 Nil +0.5

(+16%) +0.9

(+90%) Nil Nil -



05-06/ 06-07 Nil +2.2

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Only one incident reported to the Borough Council. Population of the Borough is below 100,000 Rationale/Justification for 2006/07 Target Most racial incidents are reported directly to the Police.

Outturn data predominantly ‘zero’ - insufficient data to show trend

LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: The percentage of racial incidents that resulted in further action.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 01/02 175 - Not Collected 78% 100% 100% - 0% - 02/03 175 - Not Collected 100% 100% 100% - 100% - 03/04 175 100% N/A N/A - 0% 100% 100% - 100% -

04/05 175 100% N/A N/A ��Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail 100% -

05/06 175 100% N/A N/A �� 100% 100% 100% - 66% -

06/07 175 100% 100% Yes ��

07/08 175 100% 08/09 175 100%

Change Change Change 01-02/ 02-03 - N/A +22

% point Nil Nil +100 % point -

02-03/ 03-04 - N/A -100

% point Nil Nil Nil -

03-04/ 04-05 Nil N/A Not Avail Not Avail Not Avail Nil -

04-05/ 05-06 Nil N/A +100% Nil Nil -34% -

05-06/ 06-07 Nil +100

% point

06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN Incident reported to the Police who acted upon our information to the satisfaction of the complainant. Rationale/Justification for 2006/07 Target Any incidents reported to the Council will be reported to the police if that is the wish of the complainant.


Indicator dependent on BVPI 174 –

Outturn data predominantly ‘N/A’ - insufficient data to show trend

LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Actions Against Domestic Violence: The percentage of overall provision and effectiveness of LA services designed to help victims of domestic violence and prevent further domestic violence..

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 225 - 45.5% n/a - No Quartile provided 45.45 5

06/07 225 72.7% 54.5% No ��

07/08 225 72.7% �

08/09 225 72.7% Change Change Change

05-06/ 06-07

+72.7 % point

+9 % point

06-07/ 07-08

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN The target for 2006/2007 was not met due to 2 factors. The indicator is made up of 11 elements and you score a % for each action completed. We anticipated 2 elements being completed which were not met due to the following - a) a directory of services for victims was being compiled by the Dorset DV Strategic Officer but this was not achieved due to work pressures but will be complete during 2007/2008. b) Tenancy agreements for Twynham Housing Association as our LSVT Association need to include an eviction clause for perpetrators of Domestic Violence which was due to be in place by 31 March 2007, however, this is now anticipated for 1 April 2007 so will be relevant to the Outturn for 2007/2008. Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target It is not possible to achieve a 100% Outturn for this indicator as some of the actions within it are not possible or likely i.e one element refers to the provision of a refuge but we do not have a refuge in our area and would not recommend one being provided. However, we do jointly fund an outreach service with EDDC but this does not count anywhere in the indicator. It is likely that this indicator will be reviewed.


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Total amount spent (£) by the Local Authority on Advice and Guidance services provided by external organisations.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n yr

tren

d

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst)

05/06 226a £0 £0 Yes - No Quartile provided 147,074 -

06/07 226a £0 £0 Yes ��

07/08 226a £0 �

08/09 226a £0 �


06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN New indicator in 2005/2006.


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Percentage of monies spent on advice and guidance services provision which was given to organisations holding the CLS Quality Mark at ‘General Help’ level and above.

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 226b 100% 100% Yes No Quartile provided 61.34 -

06/07 226b 100% 100% Yes ��

07/08 226b 100% �

08/09 226b 100% �


06-07/ 07-08 Nil

07-08/ 08-09 Nil

COMMENTARY ON 2006/2007 OUTTURN New indicator in 2005/2006.


LOW PRIORITY Performance Indicator Description: Amount spent on advice & guidance on housing, Benefits, and consumer matters

Christchurch


Family Group

Year

PI Ref

Target

Outturn

Targ

et

Ach

ieve

d?

Yr o

n Y

r tre

nd

Worst 25% Median

Best 25%

CBC Position Median


11=worst) 05/06 226c £50,000 £50,000 Yes - No Quartile provided 125,982 -

06/07 226c £52,500 £53,398 Yes ��

07/08 226c £55,125 �

08/09 226c £57,881 �

Change Change Change 05-06/ 06-07 +£2500 +£3,398

06-07/ 07-08 +£2625

07-08 08-09 +£2756

Rationale/Justification for 2007/08 Target) Future targets are based on a 5% annual increase, however in April 2007 the housing advice service at Twynham Housing Association returned in-house and this could have a substantial impact, therefore targets may need to revised as part of the service planning process.


Documents

HIGH MEDIUM LOW PRIORITY NATIONAL PERFORMANCE INDICATORS ... · PDF fileNil 05-06/ 06-07 Nil +1.52 % point 06-07/ 07-08 Nil 07-08/ 08-09 Nil COMMENTARY ... This is a Corporate Indicator