Subscribe to our Newsletter
|
|
|
Local Area Agreements – a new way of slicing the cake? |
|
|
|
FIRE correspondent Tony Prosser examines the impact of Local Area Agreements, and looks at the implications for the Fire and Rescue Service of further changes to the system
REBUILDING TRUST BETWEEN THE various tiers of government has for a long time been at the forefront of much thinking at national and local level. The tensions between the need for centralised direction-setting and local delivery and accountability have sometimes held up progress towards improving the quality of life in the community. The government has been aware of this and has articulated the proposed changes in the relationship for England in the Department for Communities and Local Government (CLG) Strong and Prosperous Communities white paper of 2006. One of the key elements of this paper about the delivery of local government services in England, is the implementation of the next phase of the Local Area Agreement (LAA), already in use but in need of refinement. The proposals were presented in outline in the Developing the Future Arrangements for Local Area Agreements discussion document issued in February. Once the arrangements have been developed fully and agreed they will form part of the Local Government and Public Improvement Health Bill (LGIOH Bill) (Clauses 78-91). This seeks to improve co-operation between local partners in order to deliver benefits and improvements to the whole community (rather than just to discrete sectors or locations).
Mature Partnership
With the conclusion of round three of the current local area agreement process and the development of the new arrangements for LAAs, what are the implications for the Fire and Rescue Service, currently a major player in current agreements? Is the changing political and economic landscape – not to mention the success of FRAs in meeting its own national targets – likely to have an impact on the continued success in engaging in the Service? Furthermore, as funding could be lost from government sources for initiatives (such as the highly successful Home Fire Safety Check (HFSC) campaign) could the new LAAs lead to an adverse impact upon the delivery of individual FRAs’ own objectives? Partnership working for the Fire and Rescue Service is not new. Since the mid-1990s FRSs have developed effective local partnerships with other organisations. Local Area Agreements, however, make partnerships a recognised way of local government doing business – since 2005 a rolling programme has encompassed all top-tier local authorities, starting to work together to deliver a shared vision for local areas. The development of a more mature partnership between local and central government has been seen to be pivotal to delivering a sustainable and improving community. Rolled out over three rounds, the processes have been tinkered with and modified as lessons have been learned and incrementally improved.
As with IPDS, the local area agreement has spawned its own lexicon – ‘stretch targets’, ‘single pot mainstreamed ring-fenced funding’ etc. Essentially, an LAA is a three year agreement setting out the priorities for a local area agreed between central government, and a geographical district, represented by Local Strategic Partnerships (LSPs) which include fire and rescue authorities. When implemented effectively, they will deliver sustainable communities, improve intergovernmental relations, enhance efficiency, strengthen partnerships and help to provide a framework for enhancing local government’s community leadership role.
At the Table
Currently, agreements are made up of four ‘blocks’ of work. These are Children and Young People, Safer and Stronger Communities, Healthier Communities and Older People and Economic Development (to include the environment from 2008) and performance is measured across these areas. Fire and rescue authorities’ activities can have a significant impact across all four blocks whether in the domestic environment, the community or in business. They should inevitably be at the table for engagement with the process, including the setting of ‘stretch targets’ across a wide range of activities.
Stretch targets increase the challenge to partners in return for financial rewards, giving incentive to deliver optimum performance across a wide range of objectives. Activities to achieve these stretch targets have been ‘pump-primed’ to initiate improvements and could include funding for equipment and staffing across a wide range of organisations and partnerships, with public, private and voluntary sector organisations. For the fire and rescue authorities, stretch targets for fire reductions are relatively simple.
Multi-agency targets (such as the education and health sectors reducing teenage pregnancy targets) which may not be completely achievable in a single cycle of the agreement may prove more problematic to resolve as they involve a variety of factors including culture and education. Until now fire and rescue services have had a mandatory target within the Safer and Stronger Communities block to reduce fires and arson and increase domestic fire safety. In many ways, this target, reflected in the Public Service Agreements (PSA) and articulated in the National Framework document, could be seen as an example of how an organisation’s specific target could be reflected in the wider community objectives. Since the beginning of the 2007, regional road shows have been used as a vehicle by CLG to promote and seek comment upon the proposed changes. A sustained period of work will then follow including reviews of current round 1, 2 and 3 LAAs, transitional arrangements and refinement of procedures ready for ministerial sign-off in March 2008. There are still some uncertainties regarding the arrangements. One is the continued use of reward grants as an incentive. Until the results of the comprehensive spending review are revealed – delayed until national and local government changes are implemented – both reward grants and target indicators are likely to be held in abeyance.
Variety of Sources
In terms of the funding of LAAs, the existing framework, which includes the pooling of area-based funding streams, is linked to the establishment of targets in the LAA. The future arrangements require that local authorities and partners use a variety of funding sources to deliver the national indicators, while the unring-fenced, new area-based LAA grant will be used to fund area-based activities. The decision on how much funding should be used to support delivery of local and national priorities will be determined locally.
With the possible loss of the reward grant and uncertainty about funding any pump-priming money, the consultation process may be challenging for the CLG representatives from all sectors of local government, as definitive answers about the process may be a little prematurely asked for. For the Fire and Rescue Service, the current Fire Service funding streams will be expected to be used to fund fire indicator related activities unless there are wider cross cutting issues for which unringfenced grant funding is available. As one of the objectives of the new arrangements is to reduce the burden of bureaucracy, the number of targets set for agreements are being significantly reduced.
The agreements will contain up to 35 improvement targets and include 18 statutory early years education targets. The 35 improvement targets will be selected from 200 indicators contained in the national set and locally agreed targets. Performance management of LAAs will continue to be high on the agenda and in future will be informed by an annual review of the agreement through the proposed Comprehensive Area Assessment (CAA) which will replace the Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA). The CAA framework will focus upon managing performance based upon location, rather than upon individual public bodies responsible for the delivery of local services and will be enacted through the LGIH Bill, which is expected (at the moment) to be operating fully in 2009.
This national set of indicators will be based upon the outcomes determined through the delayed outcomes of the Comprehensive Spending Review 2007 (CSR 2007) which, for LAAs, will focus upon the four blocks of activities. Currently the national indicator set is under development but some improvement targets will still use existing indicators – by 2009 the national indicator set will be complete. The proposed improvement targets will be based upon local priorities that are contained within a community strategy plan. Regarding Fire and Rescue Service priorities, it is impossible to conceive that fire-based targets will not form part of the larger number of indicators. However, given that there is a wider arena of social problems than just fire (teenage pregnancies, substance misuse to name just a few) and 35 out of 200 is a small fraction, there remains the real possibility that ‘fire only’ targets may be reprioritised adversely due to limitations on the agreement.
‘Mission Accomplished’
Judging the ‘mood music’ emanating from central government, the success achieved by fire and rescue services in reducing a 50 year low in domestic fire deaths, should be celebrated. One of the acknowledged key players in changing the culture and mainstreaming community fire safety in the UK has been the National Fire Safety Centre. Now that the ‘mission accomplished’ message has been delivered for the NFSC, it has been seen in some quarters that the fire prevention agenda is slipping below the radar screen of central government. Should this happen, it may become very problematic for fire and rescue authorities to persuade partners to place fire targets in the local area agreements.
The end of the HFSC funding from CLG in 2008 has the potential to cause another problem for the FRAs. Many of the initiatives that have been crucial to the successful reduction in fire deaths have been due to the directed and ring-fenced funding for fire prevention activities through the Home Fire Safety Check initiative. The loss of this funding will pose a problem for authorities with ambitious plans to extend their activities beyond 2008. Local Area Agreements may provide the only avenue for acquiring the funds necessary to continue what has been hailed as a notable success for the fire and rescue services but competition from other public bodies, with their own success criteria, may be stiff. Despite some notable successes in some LAA partnerships, the future rounds may prove more of a problem.
While many details of LAAs have yet to be completed and fully agreed, it is certain that the new process will produce many challenges for fire and rescue authorities. Set against the background of a slowing economy, with external pressures on funding and a decline in economic growth, previous CSR settlements may seem recklessly profligate. With local government spending likely to stagnate, partners may be seeking LAA funds themselves. The potential for damaging effective partnerships needs to be carefully avoided if the good results achieved over the last three years are to be sustained. The local area agreements themselves do not appear at the moment to be due for a radical change. The results of the May elections in England could possibly have an impact on the flavour of the negotiations at a local level. However, in terms of another vehicle for pan-area service delivery to the community, an alternative is unlikely for the foreseeable future despite concerns on the part of some politicians.
The next evolution of the LAA process is the Multi-Area Agreements (MAA) which could impact upon areas within a larger geographic boundary. The recent proposals for changes of structure in some county councils could permit the introduction of MAAs across a county-sized area, while still having a single lead local authority for the local government. In the longer term, the muchawaited Lyons Review into local government funding may in the long-term lead to a different view being taken on how community-wide issues are funded and governed.
The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of West Midlands Fire Service.
|
|
|
