The 'go to' organisation for Local Government improvement in Scotland

1. Getting ready

Relevant senior officers within the host local authority will meet with the Improvement Service to:

• Discuss the service/area of activity’s motivation and aims for the peer collaborative improvement;
• Develop the Improvement Service’s understanding of the key issues facing the service/area of activity;
• Consider the key areas for the peer collaborative improvement to focus on, which will likely develop from LGBF deep dives and/or the host local authority’s self-assessment, benchmarking, performance management and other improvement activity.
• Identify which local authorities, and potentially partner organisations, should be invited to contribute peer reviewers.
• Discuss the peer collaborative improvement approach and the arrangements that will need to be in place to facilitate the work of the peer collaborative improvement team.
• Agree a timeline for the peer collaborative improvement.

The host local authority, supported by the Improvement Service, will contact relevant chief executives to request that their local authority participates in the peer-led improvement by contributing a peer reviewer.

2.  Pre-work

In advance of the peer collaborative improvement commencing, the PSIF checklist will be issued to those stakeholders relevant to the review.  The stakeholders will be asked to self-assess the service/area of activity against the checklist. The host local authority will also gather relevant evidence, KPIs, etc. to further support the fieldwork and context-setting process. The Improvement Service will support the host local authority in the analysis of the checklist as required.

This preparatory work will seek to identify the strengths and weaknesses in the area under review, identifying a number of areas for improvement (AFIs), which will act as the basis for improvement discussions in the peer collaborative improvement process.

The host local authority will draw together a succinct paper identifying what it is seeking to achieve from the forthcoming fieldwork, which will be shared with the peer collaborative improvement team and host local authority participants including all relevant materials, such as the checklist report and other evidence, such as business and performance plans, recent reviews undertaken etc.  These outputs will be shared at least two weeks in advance of the fieldwork to ensure that everyone is up to speed and ready to engage meaningfully in the process. Preparation in advance of the session will be critical to ensure that the host local authority is clear about what they wish to achieve through this process and the peer collaborative improvement team are clear about their role in providing peer support to achieve this.

3. Fieldwork

The host local authority will lead the fieldwork (approximately 2 or 3 days), which may be done in person, remotely or a combination of both. This will involve colleagues from the host local authority, peer reviewers and IS exploring priority areas and looking for ways to help address identified challenges.

There are three main phases of the fieldwork, albeit there will be flexibility in relation to these to suit needs of host Authority. The three phases are:

1. Context setting and prioritisation with host participants and the Peer collaborative improvement Team
2. Interviews and focus group discussions with stakeholders to identify ways to address identified challenges
3. Improvement Planning session following discussions to agree key actions

The first phase will begin with some context setting around the area under review with time spent on reflecting upon the findings that have emerged from the checklist and the implications emerging from the evidence gathered as part of this process. Group discussions around the AFIs identified through the self-assessment will allow the host local authority participants and the Peer collaborative improvement Team to consider, scrutinise and challenge the AFIs and look to achieve consensus on these going forward to the next stage, and forming the basis of interviews and focus group discussions.

The interviews and focus group discussions will allow the peer collaborative improvement team to probe further into those prioritised AFI’s, and to work with host local authority participants to identify, explore and evaluate potential options which might be adopted to support improvement. This will provide an opportunity to build in potential learning from any relevant approaches adopted by the peer reviewer councils.

The improvement planning session will utilise the templates used in the PSIF sessions that have been tried and tested in frontline, middle manager and senior management levels. When the host local authority is comfortable to do so, improvement work will consider the following:

1. What key actions need to happen to make this improvement a reality?
2. Are there any risks or costs (financial or resource) associated with these improvement actions?
3. How can we measure or know that the actions have been implemented?
4. Overall outcome.

It may well be that some areas identified as part of the fieldwork sessions require further work to be undertaken. Such flexibility needs to be built in to ensure that the peer collaborative improvement approach best suits the needs of the host local authority.

4. Capturing findings, recording and reporting

The host local authority is expected to produce a report based on the peer collaborative improvement. The report should include a focus on action and next steps.

It is important that findings from the peer collaborative improvement engagement are summarised in a report to which all participants are involved. The host authority will be responsible for finalising the report, which should reflect input from the peer reviewers and Improvement Service. It will be important that next steps are clearly outlined, with timescales identified where possible.

In drafting the report, the peer reviewers and Improvement Service should offer feedback.

It is very likely that colleagues from the host local authority involved will also want to share key messages from peer collaborative improvement with elected members through local committee processes.

5.  Sharing findings

It is likely that learning and aspects of practice worthy of sharing will emerge in the peer collaborative improvement work, which could be applied in other contexts.  It will therefore be important, wherever possible, to share this learning and practice across the system. If the host local authority is reluctant to share the full report publicly, it would be helpful for them to publish a summary report on the LGBF website.  This will support local government to underpin improvement through capturing, sharing and encouraging faster uptake of its collective knowledge, innovative methods and learning practice. It will also encourage a culture within Scottish local government where seeking new knowledge and improved ways of working and minimising unnecessary duplication is the norm.