| 24th November 2005
Andrew Hudson Chief Executive
David Park Director - Local Taxation & Technology
Alan Sherriff Director – Finance and Planning
Steve Hartnell Director - Human Resources
Paul Sanderson Director – Data & Special Projects
John Wilkinson Director - District Valuer Services
Mary Morrison-Paton Head of Communications
Ann Grinstead Non Executive Director
Margaret Devlin Non Executive Director
Brian McCormick Director - IT
Craig Lester Director – DVS Client Development
Keith Skirving District Valuer Central
Rob Hughes District Valuer North West
Andrew Mouland Secretary
This item was a regular update on operational performance, the purpose of which was to address operational issues by monitoring performance in 2005/6 and to review the lessons learned from 2004/5.
The productivity target was vulnerable to postponements at VT hearings. A plan was in place and meetings were being held with agents and VTS.
There was concern about some agents making appeals without obtaining instructions from the ratepayer. The VOA had to accept these as valid appeals which meant that if the ratepayers legitimate agent tried to make an appeal it would automatically be treated as invalid. This wastes VOA time and causes problems for ratepayers.
Customer satisfaction was at 82%. There had only been a 10% response rate so far where the normal response rate was 20%.
There didn’t seem to be anything new in the issues that people were concerned about but it was difficult to provide a more detailed analysis, for example geographically, as the sample was so small.
In terms of NDR reports settled, the work was flowing through and cases were being cleared within the timeliness targets.
The result for CT appeals to be ready for a VT hearing in 3 months from date of receipt had fallen by 1% since last month. A note had been issued to the network and the Field Directors were looking at the Groups where this result had deteriorated.
There was still a significant amount of work to do before the new performance management system was rolled out. The GMs confirmed that the network wanted a high level of HR involvement to launch and communicate the changes in order to ensure buy in from all staff, including line managers. The Board agreed that this was particularly important to get right and would fully support any action required.
Most Groups had now confirmed dates for the workshops to deal with a targeted approach to capability. HR would ensure that all Groups had planned workshops.
Groups and Units were identifying some posts that required filling. HR were looking at whether these posts needed to be filled immediately or whether they could be kept vacant for CTR staff moving out of CT in 2006.
There had been an 82% pass rate for VOA graduates sitting the APC. Meetings were taking place to agree allocations across business streams but there was not expected to be a large surplus in Band 3 posts.
There would not be a staff attitude survey (SAS) in 2005 although some questions would need to be answered to provide results for the scorecard. The surveys would be held in June each year from 2006.
There had been no significant shifts from the last report to the Management Board. The financial position was resilient and there was nothing to raise at this stage.
This item was a detailed discussion on operational performance, the purpose of which was to address operational issues by monitoring performance in 2005/6. The purpose of the discussion was to help deliver objectives rather than apportioning blame.
HMRC spend was broadly on target with overall timeliness targets being met. The number of cases had increased 7% from last year and the budget had been reduced by 2%.
There was some variation between DV units on timeliness, spend and performance. These were being addressed.
The LS income growth was on track although the second half of the year would be challenging.
The income earned this year is within 5% of the profile although DVS were still £1m short of the profiled target at the end of October. The work in progress (WIP) was not entirely accurate but it was hoped this would be improved through the introduction of the Time recording and Control System (TRACS).
Costs were approximately £2m over income at this stage. There is considerable variation between units due to the type of work undertaken but DVS were looking at interim billing to reduce the gap between WIP and receipts. The WIP adjustments would be critical to covering costs.
The result for the primary timeliness target of 90% of correspondence being dealt with in 15 working days was at amber (89.36%). There was a significant difference between the units with 3 at green, 3 at amber and 3 at red. Although DVS were confident that the national target would be achieved more advice was required to ensure that all correspondence was being dealt with effectively.
The customer survey results were being run now and would be undertaken on an annual basis from now on to enable alignment with the LT customer survey.
The Board agreed that it would be useful to compare absence statistics in the two work streams to see if the differences were as a result of differences in the make-up of the workforces or of management issues.
All DV units had been tasked with closing the WIP gap and it was expected that TRACS would help with this. The nature of the work meant that invoices weren’t issued until the client had received the report but DVS needed to tighten this up and look at other ways of smoothing the income flow.
DVs and unit heads would keep a tight grip on HMRC budgets and timeliness, drive chargeable hours to meet the LS target and cover costs and win local repeat and new business. The DVS team in CEO would provide guidance and support, develop repeat and new business and provide forward strategy and business improvement support.
The Management Board were asked in the short term to take all opportunities to support the DVS drive to improve chargeable hours and to provide a quick and cost-effective redeployment of resources.
DVS senior managers would provide the MB with an updated strategy for DVS so that it was clear what they were aiming to achieve. This would make it easier for the Board to provide support where necessary.
Progress Report Regarding Initial Appraisal Unit (IAU), Nottingham
Keith Skirving presented a paper updating the Management Board on the progress made to date in the IAU, Nottingham.
The unit was set up in July 2004 to risk appraise cases from HMRC (CT) involving domestic properties with a returned figure of £300,000 or less. The unit had been dealing with around 70 cases per day.
They were meeting the KPI comfortably but would have difficulty in achieving the 10-day time limit target due to staff shortages. FTA’s were lost following the CTR postponement and the unit was below complement on Band 6 and Band 7. The West Midlands group had been helping with resource but this was temporary and there was a concern that morale would fall due to the lack of resource. HR Resourcing were assisting with this problem.
There was no doubt that the team would get back on track quickly once the resource had been put in place.
The Management Board agreed that the IAU had been a success and expressed their thanks to all involved.
Progress Report on Improvement Project on SDS/ECOPS Work for HMRC
Rob Hughes presented a paper updating the Management Board on the progress made to date in implementing the recommendations made in his report of 30 June.
The objective of the project was to formulate new protocols for the management of ECOPS workflow to permit the necessary focus on high-significance casework within budget and timeliness requirements.
There was a genuine enthusiasm for the changes proposed with involvement from the CT Inspectorate. The changes would be fully up and running with the timescale specified in the report.
The purpose of the paper presented by Brian McCormick was to seek approval to the deployment of World Wide Web access from every desktop in the VOA for use by all members of staff.
The HR Acceptable Use Policy must be clearly made to all staff to ensure that the boundaries for use of the Internet were clear.
The Board also discussed the restriction on forwarding e-mails to home addresses. This was seen as a security risk but would be of benefit particularly to senior managers.
The Management Board approved the adoption of desktop access to the World Wide Web. Implementation would be on a location-by location basis and access would be provided to all staff by 31 May 2006.
|
