Agenda item

2022/23 Quarter 2 Corporate Performance Report (A91941/EF)


The Head of Information & Performance Management introduced the report to provide Members with monitoring information for the period up to the end of Quarter 2 2022/23 (April to September 2022) to review performance against the third year of the Authority’s 2019-24 Corporate Strategy. 


Mr Berresford left the meeting during consideration of the item at 10:25am.


Members had the following queries:


KPI 2b - the Landscape Strategy states the importance of field barns in the White Peak landscape and the desirability of their conservation, but it does not specify how this should be achieved. 

It was suggested that this indicator could be amber rather than red due to the qualifying comments at the end of it.


KPI 14 - regarding volunteering hours, Members asked how the given value had been  arrived at.  The Head of Engagement advised that this was via the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) values which give different values to different types of volunteering.


KPI 11 - The Chair congratulated the Mosaic Partnership on its successful HLF bid.


KPI 15 – Members suggested that as well as focussing on creating thriving communities via Planning, more engagement could take place with Communities and not only through Parish Councils.


KPIs 18-20 – Members enquired how many staff vacancies the Authority had at the moment and were advised by the CEO that currently there was an 18% turnover rate which was twice what the figure had been previously.  Some vacancies were proving difficult to fill and there were various reasons for this.  The Authority was working to ameliorate the reasons that were within its own control.  Members commented that neighbouring authorities were experiencing the same issues.


Regarding the Corporate Risk Register, the following information was provided by Officers in response to queries from Members:


·         the highest risk areas had been inspected and assessed for Ash Die Back and that work was ongoing in lower risk areas.

·         the wording of the section regarding the impact of Covid may need to be adjusted to make it clearer.

·         Planning Service performance standards, the national standard for the determination of minor applications (which make up most of the Authority’s case load) was that 70% should be determined within 8 weeks.  The Authority’s percentage was currently around 60%.  Several actions were being taken to tackle this.

·         Conversations had been taking place between the Head of Planning and the Planning Advisory Service on how the two organisations can work together to improve the situation regarding determination rates.

·         An action plan was also emerging from the Planning Service Review. 

·         New staff had been recruited and would be starting in the New Year.


Members requested that Planning, Monitoring &Enforcement be noted and that if improvements were not seen to be occurring that it would need to be reflected in the serve risk register.


The recommendations as set out in the report were moved, seconded, put to the vote and carried.




1.      That the performance report up to the end of Quarter 2, given in Appendix 1, of the report, is reviewed and any actions to address issues agreed.

2.      That the corporate risk register up to the end of Quarter 2, given in Appendix 2 of the report is reviewed and the status of risks accepted.

3.      That the status of complaints, Freedom of Information and Environmental Information Regulations requests, given in Appendix 3 of the report, are noted.




Supporting documents: