Quarterly Performance Indicators for 2009

Local Indicators
| Ind No. |
Indicator |
Target |
Q1 2009 |
Q2 2009 |
Q3 2009 |
Q4 2009 |
|
1
|
Percentage of domestic
applications decided within 3 weeks.
|
70%
|
51.1%
|
57.7%
|
57.6%
|
61.7% |
|
2
|
Percentage of domestic
applications decided within 5 weeks.
|
80%
|
68.7%
|
82.7%
|
79.6% |
88.2% |
|
3
|
Percentage of non-domestic
applications decided within 5 weeks.
|
60%
|
69.2%
|
63.1%
|
66.7% |
43.7% |
|
4
|
Percentage of domestic
applications checked within 2 weeks.
|
70%
|
68.3%
|
60.0%
|
72.4% |
71.9% |
|
5
|
Percentage of domestic
applications checked within 3 weeks.
|
80%
|
87.8%
|
80.0%
|
82.7% |
78.1% |
|
6
|
Percentage of non-domestic
applications checked within 3 weeks.
|
60%
|
76.9%
|
73.7%
|
80.% |
66.6% |
|
7
|
First time approvals.
|
90%
|
96.6%
|
97.1%
|
100.0%
|
100.0% |
|
8
|
Sites Inspected within 9
months.
|
70%
|
47.5%
|
44.6%
|
44.4%
|
41.8% |
National Indicators
| Ind No. |
Indicator |
Target |
Q1 2008 |
Q2 2008 |
Q3 2008 |
Q4 2008 |
|
9
|
Percentage of applications decided
within 5 weeks.
|
72%
|
69.0%
|
78.2%
|
77.9%
|
75.0% |
|
10
|
Percentage of applications checked
within 2 weeks.
|
60%
|
63.0%
|
54.7%
|
70.6%
|
61.7% |
|
11
|
Percentage of applications checked
within 3 weeks.
|
80%
|
85.2%
|
78.1%
|
82.3% |
74.4% |
|
12
|
First time approvals.
|
75%
|
96.6%
|
97.1%
|
100.0% |
100.0% |
Performance Indicators 2008 and 2009

View the performance indicator
graph as a larger gif image, 28kb.
Local Indicators
| Ind No. |
Indicator |
Target |
2008 |
2009 |
| 1 |
Percentage of domestic
applications decided within 3 weeks. |
70% |
40.4% |
57.0% |
| 2 |
Percentage of domestic
applications decided within 5 weeks. |
80% |
65.4% |
79.8% |
| 3 |
Percentage of non-domestic
applications decided within 5 weeks. |
60% |
56.2% |
60.7% |
| 4 |
Percentage of domestic
applications checked within 2 weeks. |
70% |
52.3% |
68.1% |
| 5 |
Percentage of domestic
applications checked within 3 weeks. |
80% |
77.1% |
82.1% |
| 6 |
Percentage of non-domestic
applications checked within 3 weeks. |
60% |
66.7% |
74.3% |
| 7 |
First time approvals. |
90% |
97.2% |
98.4% |
| 8 |
Sites Inspected within 9
months. |
70% |
54.0% |
44.6% |
National Indicators
| Ind No. |
Indicator |
Target |
2008 |
2009 |
| 9 |
Percentage of applications
decided within 5 weeks. |
72% |
63.1% |
75.0% |
| 10 |
Percentage of applications
checked within 2 weeks. |
60% |
51.8% |
62.5% |
| 11 |
Percentage of applications
checked within 3 weeks. |
80% |
76.0% |
80.0% |
| 12 |
First time approvals. |
75% |
97.2% |
98.4% |
Review at January 2009
Performance Indicator Review for Year 2009
This review is to consider the 12 performance indicator
standards set for the various services within the Barrow-in-Furness
Borough Council Building Control Department for the year
2009.
The standards were set in 2001 as part of the council’s
Quality Improvement Scheme (QIS) under the general guidance of Best
Value.
The targets were set so as to be challenging and devised from
customer feedback questionnaire replies and results of a District
Surveyors Association (DSA) benchmarked national survey.
Findings:
Of the 12 performance indicators 8 exceeded the set
targets. Of the remaining 4, indicators 1 & 2 dealing
with approval times are in part influenced by the time taken for
applicants to return requested amendments.
Customer feedback suggests that indicators 4, 5, and 6 are the
indicators that are of most importance; these monitor times taken
to check applications and give feedback to the applicant.
Indicator 4, domestic applications checked in less than 2
weeks was only 1.85% from meeting the target. Indicators 5
& 6, domestic and non domestic applications checked in less
than 3 weeks both exceeded the set targets.
As stated above indicators 1, 2 & 3 dealing with approval
times are influenced by the applicants themselves as in most
instances they are dependent on the time taken for applicants to
respond to queries raised on the application; it must however be
noted that 100% of applications have been dealt with in the
required statutory time periods.
Indicator 8, sites inspected within 9 months has shown 9.38%
drop on the previous year; this however could have been expected
due to the fact that time limits for the taking of enforcement
action have been increased this indication has lost much of its
importance.
If the indicators are looked at as a whole the average target
is 72.25% with performance levels achieved being 73.43%, this shows
an overall increase in performance of 6.99% on the previous
year.
Of the 12 standards 11 have shown an increase on the previous
year.
From the above it can be seen that it would appear that
performance levels have increased over the last 12 months in
comparison to the previous year, it is felt that this may in some
part be due to the fact that the Building Control Trainee is
approaching the end of his training and is now starting to add
value to the section combined with the fact that 2008 saw a high
rate of sickness within the section (30 weeks)
Fee earning application numbers have decreased slightly on the
previous year but this has been offset by the facts that several
larger commercial schemes have been deposited which are obviously
more involved and time consuming. Non fee earning
applications have shown a significant increase over the last couple
of years with numbers increasing from 232 in 2007 to 1241 in
2009. This has placed further pressures on the administrative
staff as the applications still need to be mapped and logged.
Fee earning application numbers are still 20% higher than when
the performance indicators were set in 2001; staff levels have also
reduced from this period.
As 8 out of the 12 targets being met and another 2 being
within 2% of meeting the set standards it can be seen that
improvements have been made over the previous period.
With the current indicators being set some time ago it is
planned to review these over the coming 12 months and assess if
they are still fully relevant to the section.
Feedback from our on ongoing customer questionnaire does not
reveal any serious dissatisfaction with the level of service being
provided.