CAN SCRUTINY COPE ....... WITHOUT A SCOPE ??

Ian Mortimer - Resident

Involvement Manager

Aims of the workshop

What is a scopeThe importance of effective scoping within a scrutiny review

How to avoid the perils of scope creep

Good scope, bad scope

Identify area to scrutinise

Scope your review

Collect information

Compare and challenge

Recommendations – evidence

based

So what – evaluate,

monitor and review

General points

• Scoping occurs after a review area has been determined

• It informs what the reviews aims and objectives will be

• It determines how the review should be organised and tackled

• It helps a group agree what methods should be used• It helps you to focus on your work• It helps you meet deadlines• It helps you plan your work activities• It prevents you from going down blind alleys that

lead nowhere or to very little effect• In short... It outlines what needs to be achieved and

how it will be achieved

Feb 2015 – RSP project plan 0.1.

Resident Scrutiny Panel

Investigation Project Plan

Preparation Stage – Scoping out the Investigation

Area to be investigated North Lincolnshire Homes (NLH)- Grounds Maintenance service contract specification Members of the Scrutiny Panel involved Tony Sanderson (Chair), Bill Drinkeld, Sam Taylor, Tim Mills, Harry Mortimer, Carol Lightburn,

Malcolm Borrill, Victoria Fernandez How was the investigation triggered? Request from NLHs EMT and VFM/Procurement Manager Investigation start date 27 January 2015 Investigation end date 22 April 2015

What will be included in the investigation? Key elements that should be included within a potential contract extension/new contract specification for the Grounds Maintenance service, due 2015. This will involve RSP members :-

Identifying future service improvements and enhancements for consideration within a new contract specification/contract extension ( e.g. performance, standards, contract monitoring , VFM etc)

Determining how the contract is currently administered, monitored and delivered and its resultant impact on NLH , residents and communities

Establishing resident perceptions and expectations of the service Ensuring that any future contract is tailored around the needs of the

tenants and local communities Ensuring that any future contract delivers social value and high

outcomes for those who it affects

What will be excluded from the investigation?

Service charges NLHs contract performance framework Prescribed issues affecting contract management where the RSP

have limited influence e.g. cost, price indexes, schedule of rates, annual uplifts etc

Services and departments to be involved NLH Grounds Maintenance Client team, NLH Procurement Manager, Resident Involvement team Staff members to be involved Richard Clark, Emma McGowan, Holly Wilson, J ennifer Allen , Ian Mortimer

Resident Scrutiny Panel Investigation 7 – North Lincolnshire Homes Grounds Maintenance service

Not started On-going Complete

Key stages/ Dates

w/c 26/1

w/c 2/2

w/c 9/2

w/c 16/2

w/c 23/2

w/c 2/3

w/c 9/3

w/c 16/3

w/c 23/3

w/c 30/3

w/c 7/4

w/c 14/4

w/c 21/4

Receive background documents from NLH

Read, analyse and produce summary of key learning points

Presentation by NLH Managers

Research national good practice

Analysis and summary of good practice

Prepare questions for Ground Control Contract Manager

Prepare questions for resident survey

Conduct resident survey

Analyse resident survey

Presentation by Ground Control Project Manager

Scope Creep

Occurs when a change to the review is undertaken when the review is already underway

Causes the project to drift away from its original purpose – can end up derailing a review

It has a negative impact on the review as it impacts on the work, resources and timescales already allocated to the review

What was excluded initially , is now included therefore making the review larger and longer to complete

It is becoming increasingly a common failure of completing reviews

Is all scope creep negative though ??

How to avoid scope creep

Fully analyse and gather requirements at the start of the review

Have measures in place for scrutiny members to discuss and agree the risks of amending the original scope – what impact will it have in the long term ?

Is the additional work, necessary, will it really add value ?

Learn to say no. In extreme cases, stop the review so that

additional requirements can be integrated rather than tacked on ( this should be avoided as much as possible though)

True or false ? – Good scope/bad scope Comment True/False

1 You can carry out a scrutiny review without the need for a scope

2 A scope helps a review to stay on track

3 You can change the scope during the review as many times as you want

4 A scope doesn’t need to be agreed by all members of the group

5 Scoping is a fundamental part off any scrutiny review

6 Scope “creep” is generally regarded as a good thing within a scrutiny review

7 Having a scope helps you cope

8 2 reviews in 5 don’t get completed on time because of scoping issues

9 The lack of a robust scope is one of the 2 main reasons as to why scrutiny reviews fail

Group discussion

We are the scrutiny panel for EMTPF housing organisation and for our next review we have decided to investigate...

HOW WE LET EMPTY HOMES/VOID PROPERTIES

Provide examples of what areas of the above the review should focus on as part of our initial scoping work (i.e. What to include, what to exclude)

Group discussion

We are the scrutiny panel for EMTPF housing organisation and for our next review we have decided to investigate...

GROUNDS MAINTENANCE SERVICES

Provide examples of what areas of the above the review should focus on as part of our initial scoping work (i.e. What to include, what to exclude)

Any Questions