SLCC/ILCM Peer review process Process Guidance and Status Update

1. SLCC/ILCM Peer review processProcess Guidanceand Status Update Issue 1 September 2011

2. Peer Review Process - Purpose • SLCC/ILCM Larger Councils Network ‘Peer Review’ scheme • Facilitates • information exchange • sharing of best practice • Between the councils in England and Wales. • A structured form of networking • Allows Councils to get focussed advice on selected areas • Raising professional standards

3. The scheme • A process or service of one council reviewed by individual (usually the Clerk) from another council • Reviewer provides opinions advice and recommendations • Reviewer may be • an expert/practitioner • Someone with experience • more likely, just a ‘fresh pair of eyes’ • Typical scenario for review • A single service or limited group of related services • Council Structures/Processes • Eg Committee Structure/Meeting Management etc • Operational Structures/Processes • Eg Staffing Structure/Organisational Processes/Policies & Procedures (inc accounting policies etc.) • NOT everything at once – impractical • Reviewer is ‘Critical Friend’ • Reviewee manages presentation to his/her council

4. Scheme Status • Project Team established • List members here • Three peer reviews held amongst members • Finance, Cemetery, Events • Very positive experience • Rewarding for both reviewers and reviewees • Less threatening than feared • Three more planned, round robin basis • Material prepared • Launch – 15 September 2011

5. The Toolkit - Material to help you • This presentation • A pre-review Questionnaire • A report template and example report (style guide to follow) • Terms and Conditions • Members of the project team who designed this • Available for limited telephone & email consultation • Training sessions quarterly (web based) • Meeting of participants to be arranged

6. Process outline • Reviewee identifies a need • Identify reviewer (administrative activity to be developed) • Reviewee completes pre-review questionnaire • Basic details about the Council • What he wants reviewing • What he wants to get out of it • Key documents • Reviewer prepares, reads documents • Site visit (one day including travel) • Report written by reviewer, in discussion with reviewee • Reviewee manages the follow up with his/her council • Either reviewer or reviewee may (politely) opt out at any point

7. Reviewer Selection • Reviewer(s) and why selected • Volunteer reviewers complete form identifying • Expertise and background • What they are willing to do (where, when – eg Fridays?, how long, anything they are particularly interested in, basis (time bank or paid?) • Matched by administrator or peer matching • Two types of reviewer - expert or ‘fresh mind’ • Training at Larger Councils Meeting, SLCC Branch meetings and by quarterly webcast

8. Preparation phase • From experience – this is very important. • Visit will last only 0.5 days if prep is good • Reviewee completes pre-review questionnaire, sends to reviewer • Reviewer reviews questionnaire, asks clarifying questions, requests documents, reads them • Typically this may take a day of the reviewers time • maybe over a period of a few days-one month

9. Visit • Face to Face at Reviewees site • Strictly one day (normally including travel) • Experience shows 9.30-lunch works well with good preparation • Host provides • (unless otherwise agreed in advance): Private room, Internet Connection, PC (or reviewer brings laptop), Telephone access, photocopier, access to confidential papers, refreshments including lunch • Discussions with • The Clerk • Responsible Service Officer • Optionally • Chairman of relevant Committee (or Council if no relevant committee) • Other staff • Relevant third parties • Site visit (normally) • Test evidence for report • Maybe iterative, relevant staff must be available • Reviewer will generally outline main conclusions verbally before departing (probably over lunch!) • Reviewer and reviewee may agree in advance to vary the above

10. Report phase • Feedback given as a report (template provided) • Scope of review, date • Evidence reviewed, individuals ‘interviewed’ • Comments should not normally be attributable to individuals • Key practices identified (what makes up the work/defines the service characteristics) • Comparators/alternatives • Conclusions • Stress the positives • Must do recommendation/timeframe (critical eg health & safety/legislative adherence) • Other recommendations/suggestions • Ideas the Council may wish to consider • Possible follow-up • Final version read only (pdf) • Submits to reviewee in draft for comments prior to finalisation • if first review also to project steering team. If dispute – ask project steering team • Reviewee must retain control of presentation to Council • Final report to project steering team (may be published) • forwarded by reviewee • omitting names of reviewee council and individuals

11. Financial matters • Costs incurred • About 3 days time for the reviewer + opportunity cost • Travel and rarely accommodation for 1 night • Try to avoid accommodation with geographic clustering • 1.5 – 2 man-days time for reviewee • Incidentals (photocopying, telephone calls etc) • Reviewer gets to see another operation • Will give him/her ideas to take back • Personal professional development • Funding – Options – Participants choose which • For all options: reviewee pays travel expenses unless agreed otherwise • Preferred: on an exchange/round robin basis = zero administration • Two councils or a group get together and agree a series of reviews • “Fair exchange” of effort • Paid effort • SLCC managed time bank – not yet available – details to follow

12. How to get involved • The administration is currently manual! • The project team are the dating agency • If you want to be peer reviewed email me stating the subject: james.parker@bishopsstortfordtc.gov.uk • If you would like to offer to do a peer review email me, stating what subjects you are prepared to review • Three members of the project team have already offered to do a peer review (travel expenses only) • On condition that the reviewee also offers likewise

13. Get Involved! • Size doesn’t matter – this process will work for small and large councils • Next Steps for you • Get involved! The process launches 15th September 2011 • Next steps for the project team • Organise training • Material to website • Administration • Explore CALC Links • Possible review of strategy/policy/councillor operation • Parked for now – phase 2 • Explore group peer reviews

14. THE Project Team Thank you for listening, Any Questions?