An update will be provided in relation to the following three areas:
A: Local Area Agreement Refresh
B: Performance Management Exception Report –Third Quarter 2008/09 (including a presentation on the latest economic data)
C: Enterprise Board Risk Register
D: Working Neighbourhoods Fund Consultation
Minutes:
The Board considered a report that provided an update on several areas associated with the Local Area Agreement (LAA).
Local Area Agreement Refresh
The Board was advised that the LAA Refresh provided the opportunity for National Indicators (NIs) contained within the LAA to be renegotiated within GOL.
Following advice received from the Communities and Local Government (CLG) that targets would not be fixed for the duration of the current LAA. At its meeting in December the Board has agreed that NI 153 should be put forward for renegotiation; following discussion with Job Centre Plus (JCP) it was considered that advantage should be taken of the additional time that this would allow to build a stronger case for reducing the target.
The Board was advised that data in relation to NI 171 had been published by the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (DERR) and consequently new targets had been issued to achieve partial convergence to the London average.
It was noted that there had been discussion with the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP) around the Incapacity Benefit (IB) Stretch Target (agreed under the previous LAA) and it had been indicated that they would be sympathetic to any request to remove the target from the LAA as part the Refresh. At present officers were in discussion with ReedIP to form a Service Level Agreement (SLA) and Business Case to demonstrate that this would ??
Performance Management Exception Report –Third Quarter 2008/09
An overview of performance during the third quarter was provided and it was noted that performance in relation to the IB Stretch Target was still well below target. The Board was advised that despite the continued measures and actions being taken to address this target it was remained challenging and these difficulties were shared by neighbouring Boroughs who were also failing to meet the target.
The Board discussed performance against the proportion of young people aged between sixteen and eighteen classed as NEET (not in Education, Employment or Training) and it was noted that although performance was currently above target, the proportion of NEETs whose status was ‘unknown’ was above target.
The Board was advised that the Learning and Skills Council had recently received data in relation to the proportion of NEETs whose status was unknown and there was agreement that this should be circulated as soon possible.
It was noted that due to technical software problems it had not been possible to reach the target in relation to the Better Off Calculation. However, this had now been resolved and it was anticipated that the performance would improve significantly during the forth quarter.
In response to a query as to whether there was a separate centre for job brokerage the Board was advised that this service was delivered by an external provider in locations across the Borough.
The Board discussed how performance against the IB Stretch Target could be improved and it was noted that the Voluntary and Community Sector did a lot of work with IB claimants to help them get back into work.
There was agreement that there should be a presentation, setting out specific examples of the measures taken by St Mungos to assist people into back into work, followed by a discussion session on how the partnership could learn from this at the next meeting.
Enterprise Partnership Board Risk Register
The Board reminded that at its previous meeting it had requested an updated be provided on the risk attached to NI 153 at each meeting.
It was noted that the risk attached to this remained high and forecasts predicted that the economic climate would get worse before an upturn was seen. Work was being undertaken with Job Centre Plus to support new claimants and this would continue to be monitored to see how the partnership should respond.
RESOLVED:
Supporting documents: