Waverley Borough Council Home Page Waverley Borough Council Home Page


Waverley Borough Council Committee System - Committee Document

Meeting of the Executive held on 04/07/2001
SCOPING REPORT – ARTS DEVELOPMENT REVIEW



- 5 -
ANNEXE 1

SCOPING REPORT – ARTS DEVELOPMENT REVIEW

Introduction

1. This review will examine the Council’s role in encouraging and enabling participation in the arts in and around Waverley and test key issues surrounding that role.

2. The review will primarily address the questions:

Does the community believe that the Council should be active in arts development work – or a particular aspect of arts development work – and if so to what extent? Is the Council’s role in arts development sufficiently valued by the community to justify its nature and scale? Is the way in which the Council goes about its arts development work effective in achieving the objectives set out in the Leisure Strategy Update? How could the delivery of arts development services be altered to achieve tangible improvements in service delivery and what are the resource implications? Service Coverage

3. The Council’s existing arts development work takes the form of:

Grant aid to third-party arts organisations both on a revenue, capital and a project funding basis. Examples include Cranleigh Arts Centre, Sculpt-It, Haslemere Hall and many small events. Some of these grants are made from budgets other than those for arts development – e.g. the matched-funding provision; Devising, obtaining funding and implementing new arts activities and projects designed to increase participation in the arts and to encourage people to take part for the first time; Supporting third-party organisations in obtaining funding for their activities and projects from external sources; Providing expertise to third-party organisations in arts development activities and operations; Bringing arts expertise into broad areas of the Council’s activities and services, including public art, economic development, twinning activities, tourism, countryside and work with young people; Managing the Council’s relationship with arts funding agencies; Promoting and publicising the work of artists, arts organisations and agencies at work in the Borough as an aspect of the Council’s economic development work. 4. The Council does not directly manage any venues, and it is not within the scope of this review to undertake a full analysis of the operation of independent facilities such as Cranleigh Arts Centre. However, it is within the scope of the review to consider the extent to which the support the Council gives to venues assists in meeting its own objectives. The total cost of arts development activities in 2001/02 as shown in the budget book is 171,610.

5. The review will examine each of these areas of activity to test the extent to which it is justified and the extent to which efficient use is being made of the resources currently made available. 6. In this way it will be possible to meet the requirements the best value review process in respect of the ‘fours Cs’, in particular as follows:

Challenge

7. The Council is not obliged by law to provide an arts development service. The justification for the provision of the service, at some level or other, is therefore the extent to which doing so reflects either the wishes, or the best interests, or both, of the community at large.

8. It is therefore necessary to test the extent to which the Council is adequately reflecting the views of the community in the nature or extent of the service which is being provided. It is essential however that this is done in a way which reflects on the breadth of the Council’s work in which arts development features – which includes economic development, community safety and services to young people.

9. The way in which the service is provided must also be challenged. The service has ‘customers’, both in the sense of the organisations that receive support from the Council and the individuals who take part in the activities that are organised. The review must examine the extent to which they are satisfied with the nature and extent of the service that is available to them.

Compare

10. The review will compare and contrast the scale, nature and effectiveness of Waverley’s arts development work with that of other local authorities of a similar nature. Bench-marking exercises can be undertaken with other Surrey authorities and with authorities in Waverley’s ‘family group’ as defined by CIPFA and the Audit Commission.

Consult

11. The ‘challenge’ element of the review process will primarily be used to test the extent to which the service is valued and its continuation supported. The consultation element will therefore be used primarily to consult with service users, partner agencies and other stakeholders as to how effective the service is, how it could be improved and the issues it should address if it is to improve. The process will also be used to examine what measures could be used to best determine whether that improvement has taken place.

Compete

12. Arts development (as opposed to arts facility management) is an almost exclusively public sector activity. There is no commercial market for a function which is, essentially, involved in the distribution of public funding and which does not generate revenue. However, there are other organisations involved in the supply of arts development activities in Waverley and the review will identify whether there are any other mechanisms by which the work Waverley currently undertakes could be obtained through other routes.

Links with Appropriate Waverley Strategies

13. This Fundamental Service Review will relate to other Waverley Strategies and Plans, particularly Corporate and Service Plans, the Community Strategy and any specific service strategies. Those that are particularly relevant to the Leisure Reviews are as follows:-

Community Safety Strategy
Local Plan and Replacement Local Plan
Economic Development Plan
Local Agenda 21 Strategy
‘A Fresh Future’ – the Four Year Plan 1999-2003
Equal Opportunities
Leisure Strategy
Tourism Action Plan; ‘Visitors mean Business’
Surrey Youth Strategy

14. In addition, Waverley has a statutory obligation to prepare and submit an Asset Management Plan along with its Capital Strategy. This is designed to demonstrate that the Council is taking a strategic approach to the use of its property assets in the provision of its services. It is therefore essential that the use of property for the provision of services forms an intrinsic part of all FSRs.

Timetable

15. A provisional outline timetable is provided in the Gantt chart attached to this report. It is intended that the review be completed before 31st December 2001. The review has three main phases:

Phase 1 – Data Collection/Information Gathering

16. This phase will include:

Establishing the role for Members and other stakeholders in the reviews themselves; Establishing the mechanism for testing community views about the Council’s role in arts development and then implementing this; Identifying the appropriate consultation mechanisms and the extent of the consultation process and then implementing Using the Excellence Model to examine the service Identifying and gathering relevant performance data, including comparisons with other local authorities and nationally recognised performance indicators; Bench-marking with other local authorities and similar service deliverers of a similar nature; Investigating current examples of good practice and effective service delivery models and subjecting them to critical examination; Phase 2 – Analysis

17. This phase will include:

Analysing responses to the ‘challenge’ and consultation exercises Analysing the outcomes of bench-marking, Excellence Model and performance measurement exercises Identifying the key issues for change to improve performance and the mechanisms by which these can be measured Testing options for performance improvements with key stake-holders Phase 3 - Recommendations 18. This phase will include:

Preparing the report of the review team Discussing the implications of change with Members Seeking approval for changes which are considered desirable Service Review Group

19. The service review group will consist of:

Steve Tilbury - Head of Leisure Services
Linda Salway - - Arts Manager
Emma Waters - Arts Development Officer
Nina Inman - Administrative Assistant
Representative from Department of Finance

20. Other staff from within the Environment and Leisure Department may need to be involved depending on the nature of the work which the review group is undertaking.

Resource Implications

21. The Arts Development team is small in number and two of the three staff are part-time. A number of major projects are running throughout 2001/02 and important partner organisations are also undergoing major change (including South East Arts and Farnham Maltings). If services are to be maintained it is likely to be necessary to provide some additional temporary staff resource to assist in the review and the delivery of services.

22. It will also be necessary to meet the cost of consultation, bench-marking material and the extra administrative costs (travel etc) generated by the review process. There will be no requirement to use consultants for any significant part of the work although independent researchers will be necessary for focus groups.

Timetable

23. A proposed timetable is shown in the GANNT chart attached.

comms/executive/172 17690