---

Contents

Summary

1 Introduction

1.1 Overview
1.2 Background
1.3 Terms of Reference
1.4 Research Approach

2 Hierarchy of Indicators

2.1 Introduction
2.2 A linked hierarchy or framework
2.3 Reporting arrangements, target setting and control

3 Use and Role of Local Performance Indicators

3.1 Introduction
3.2 Number and usage of local PIs
3.3 Political and senior staff commitment
3.4 Cultural change
3.5 Community accountability
3.6 Cross-cutting local PIs
3.7 Setting of targets

4 The Coverage and Nature of Local Performance Indicators

4.1 Introduction
4.2 Identifying a balanced set of indicators
4.3 The coverage of specific groups and communities
4.4 Verification of targets and indicators

5 Developing and collecting Local Performance Indicators

5.1 Introduction
5.2 Sources of Local Performance Indicators
5.3 Provision of training
5.4 Involvement of partners in the process

6 The Effectiveness and Value of Local Performance Indicators

6.1 Introduction
6.2 Effectiveness
6.3 Value

7 Dissemination and Feedback

7.1 Introduction
7.2 Frequency of collection and reporting
7.3 Methods of dissemination
7.4 Feedback

8 Performance Management Frameworks and Benchmarking

8.1 Introduction
8.2 Corporate performance management frameworks
8.3 Benchmarking

9 Future Developments, Lessons and Guidance

9.1 Introduction
9.2 Future developments in the use of local PIs
9.3 Constraints on their development
9.4 Wider lessons for Central Government
9.5 Guidance and support

10 Conclusion

Glossary

Appendices
Appendix A - Case study selection – methodology paper
Appendix B - Best Value Team

Interview Pro-forma
Selected Service Area/Local PI interviews Interview Pro-forma
Partners, voluntary/community and residents groups Interview Pro-forma

Appendix C - Notes of workshop 1 – emerging conclusions
Appendix D - Notes of workshop 2 – draft guidance

List of Figures
Figure 1: Approach
Figure 2: Hierarchy of Indicators.

List of Tables
Table 1: Benefits and limitations of performance measurement
Table 2: Reporting, targets and control by indicator level
Table A1: Local authority distribution across the nine regions of England
Table A2: Profile of stratified sample
Table A3: Selected case study authorities

[ Previous ] [ Contents ] [ Next ]

---

Published 11 December 2001

---

Return to Use of Local Performance Indicators in the Best Value Regime

---

Return to Perfomance Indicators Index

---

Return to Best Value Index

---

Return to Local Government Index

---

Return to DTLR Homepage

---

Web site terms