Corporate Performance Management Framework

Foreword

Bassetlaw District Council is undergoing a period of significant transformational change. Throughout this transformation, we remain committed to delivering high‑quality services and improving outcomes for our communities, as we continue to progress Vision 2040 and navigate Local Government Reorganisation. We remain focused on getting the basics right: running the Council and its services safely, efficiently, and effectively every day.

This Performance Management Framework sets out how we will monitor progress, strengthen accountability, and ensure that every part of the organisation is aligned to achieving our long‑term ambitions.

Performance management is central to how we work. It provides clarity of purpose through a strong vision, mission, and values, and it supports a clear golden thread from the Council Plan through to service plans, team priorities, and individual objectives. By embedding SMARTER performance indicators, accurate data, and robust reporting arrangements, we create a culture where improvement is continuous, decisions are well‑informed, and success is measurable.

This framework also reinforces the importance of trust, accountability, and learning across the organisation. Through tools such as the Local Outcomes Framework, our portfolio of change initiatives, and enhanced business intelligence, we will better understand Bassetlaw, our residents, and the challenges and opportunities ahead.

Together, these elements ensure that we remain focused, transparent, and ambitious; delivering meaningful progress for Bassetlaw now and for future generations.

Cllr Julie Leigh
Leader of the Council and Cabinet Member for Strategy & Communications.

Introduction
A clear vision, mission and values
A Gold Thread
Continuous improvement, trust and accountability
SMARTER Performance Indicators
Systems
Accurate Data
Robust Reporting Arrangements
Appendix 1: Key Dates
Appendix 2: Performance Indicator Criteria
Appendix 3: Examples of Indicators

Introduction

The purpose of this document is to provide a guide for managing organisational performance in Bassetlaw District Council. It explains the Council’s approach to monitor and deliver effective and efficient services.

What is Performance Management?

Performance Management is a continuous process that ensures an organisation’s activities, projects, and outputs are aligned with its strategic goals. It involves setting expectations, monitoring progress, evaluating results, and taking action to improve performance. Importantly, it is not just about gathering data or producing reports – it is about using information to drive meaningful change.

Why it matters

Effective performance management is essential because it turns information into action.

By actively managing performance on a regular basis, organisations can:

Identify what is working and what is not
Intervene early when performance is off track
Ensure improvement actions lead to real, measurable outcomes
Make better, evidence‑based decisions
Improve accountability and transparency

Our approach to Performance Management will be led by having:

A clear vision, mission, and values

Based on the following principles:

A golden thread - between strategic ambitions and day‑to‑day work
Continuous improvement, trust and accountability
SMARTER Performance Indicators
Accurate data
Robust reporting arrangements

A clear vision, mission and values

Council Plan

The Council Plan is the Council’s primary strategic plan. It sets out the organisation’s key priorities achieve over the medium term. The Plan is formally reviewed every four years and provides the overarching direction for all services and activities. The current Council Plan is included in Vision 2040 which contains our:

Vision – a clear statement of where we aspire to be in the future.
Mission – what we do and how we will achieve our Vision
Values – the principles and behaviours that shape the way we work and serve our communities.

A Golden Thread

The golden thread is a core principle of effective performance management. It ensures that there is a clear and unbroken line of sight between the Council’s highest‑level strategic ambitions and the day‑to‑day work delivered by services, teams, and individual officers. When well‑embedded, the golden thread aligns people, plans, and performance so that every action contributes meaningfully to the Council’s intended outcomes for communities.

A diagram of the council plan, service plans, team plans, and personal development plans.

Service Planning

Heads of Service and Service Managers are responsible for reviewing Service Delivery Plans, Service PIs and targets every year, with guidance from the Insights & Scrutiny Manager and Policy Unit. This process should start in January and be finalised by February, so that information is available in performance management system ahead of the new financial year.

Service Delivery Plans explain the purpose of each service area and outline roles and responsibilities. Plans are underpinned by clear aims, success criteria's, and measurable Performance Indicators.

Service Delivery Plans ensure:

Strategic priorities are translated into actionable goals
Everyone understands how their work contributes to the Vision, Mission, and Values reinforcing accountability and engagement.
Resources are targeted effectively, reducing duplication and focusing effort where it delivers the greatest impact.
Performance Management is purpose-led, with objectives and indicators directly linked to corporate priorities and legal frameworks

For quality control and audit purposes, all PIs will be subject to control checks to ensure they are based on sound methodology, effectively owned and maintained, and support the organisation’s objectives and data quality standards.

The Target Setting process will identify indicators to be monitored as a time series – that is data set that tracks a sample over time. Time series analysis can be useful to analyse trends and see how a variable changes over time.

Team Plans and Team Meetings

A Team Plan is a bridge between the Service Delivery Plan and individual objectives agreed through appraisals. It translates service‑level priorities into day‑to‑day team activity, helping staff understand how their work contributes to wider organisational goals. These operational plans can be used in team meetings to review progress, performance updates, learning, and changing priorities. The use of these types of plan varies across services depending on the size of team, structure, and nature of the work.

Appraisals and Personal Development Plans

All employees will agree objectives linked to corporate priorities.

The appraisal process takes place on an annual basis. The aim of the process is to appraise the performance of individuals against previously agreed objectives and targets as well as to determine individual training needs and to develop an appropriate Personal Development Plan. The targets and objectives against which the individual is appraised are determined from organisational and departmental priorities along with the goal to support and improve professional competence and aspirational development.

The appraisal is a two-way process that enables officers to help identify and shape future delivery plans. Further information can be found in the Council’s Appraisal Policy and Procedure.

1-to-1 Meetings

1-to-1 meetings support individuals in meeting their objectives, address barriers, provide feedback, and ensure alignment with the wider service and organisational goals.

Continuous improvement, trust and accountability

A strong performance culture depends on an environment where staff feel safe to identify mistakes, acknowledge them, and learn from them. Continuous improvement is only possible when trust and openness are embedded throughout the organisation. The Council is committed to fostering this culture by encouraging constructive feedback, open dialogue, and shared learning across all teams and services.

At the same time, continuous improvement must work hand‑in‑hand with clear accountability. When performance issues arise, the emphasis will be on support, guidance, and corrective action rather than blame. This approach ensures that individuals can learn and progress while maintaining the high standards expected of public services.

Responsibility refers to the obligation to carry out tasks or comply with rules. This can be shared across teams. Accountability, however, relates to answerability for outcomes and cannot be shared. Ensuring that everyone understands their role and ownership within the performance framework strengthens transparency, supports effective scrutiny, and helps ensure that performance challenges are addressed promptly and constructively.

By combining a supportive, learning‑focused culture with clear expectations around responsibilities and outcomes, the Council enables both personal development and continuous improvement.

Key responsibilities linked to Performance Management are outlined below (this list is not exhaustive).

The Leader of the Council

The Leader is responsible for the overall strategic direction and performance of the Council. As Chair of Cabinet, the responsibility of the Leader ties all Cabinet portfolios together.

Chief Executive (head of paid service)

As head of paid service, the Chief Executive will ensure that all the authority's functions are co-ordinated as well as organising staff and appointing appropriate management.

Assistant Chief Executive, Director of Regeneration and Neighbourhoods

Accountable for strategic performance of services within the Regeneration and Neighbourhoods Directorate.

Cabinet and Cabinet Members

Responsible for monitoring strategic performance, delivery of the Council Plan and performance at portfolio level.
Responsible for taking executive decisions affecting performance.
Accountable to the public for their decisions and must submit themselves to necessary scrutiny.

Corporate Leadership Team

Accountable to Elected Members for the overall performance of the organisation.
Responsible for pro-actively managing areas of under-performance.
Leading on the overall strategic objectives of the Council.

Heads of Service

Responsible and accountable for the overall performance of their service.
Responsible for agreeing, monitoring and delivering Service Plans in liaison with Cabinet Members.
Sign off on PIs, targets and measures in liaison with Cabinet Members.
The Head of Performance and Engagement is responsible for sponsorship of the Council’s Performance Management Framework and for providing quarterly cyclical performance information to CMT.

Managers

Responsible for the operational performance of their respective areas.
Taking corrective action to address underperformance.
Motivate and recognise good performance.
Oversee data input into performance software.
Facilitate employee appraisals.
Supporting Heads of Service to prepare and monitor Service Plans, PIs, targets and measures.

Officers

Operational delivery.
Supporting the delivery the Council’s aims and objectives.
Ownership of PIs.
Collation of data, accurate and timely input into performance software.

Policy Unit

PI and Service Plan reporting.
Performance Software Administration and support
Conducting visual checks of information.
Issuing reminders to performance software users.
Providing critical friend advice on Performance Management, making recommendations on appropriate measures
Raising awareness and providing training on Performance Management

Audit and Governance Committee

Governance and internal controls.
Risk management.

Overview and Scrutiny

Holding the Executive to account
Scrutiny of service performance
Budget Performance Monitoring
Constructively challenge areas of under-performance.
Conducting evidence-led reviews on services and making recommendations to Cabinet/Council.

SMARTER Performance Indicators

When deciding what to measure, managers should consider the principles of SMARTER and criteria and examples in the appendix.

Having too many performance indicators that are not directly linked to the organisation’s strategy makes it difficult to measure success against priorities.

It is important that PIs and objectives and targets follow the SMART Principles – Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Realistic, Time bound.

Additionally, data should be Evaluated and acted upon. To assist this, where possible, indicators will be Red Amber Green (RAG) rateable.

To ensure consistency of reporting, targets are fixed for the financial year, only in exceptional circumstances will targets be changed in-year.

Escalation process for underperforming indicators

When the performance of a Performance Indicator deteriorates, or moves from green to amber, the manager of the indicator should take early corrective action.

When a Performance Indicator moves to Red, the Policy Unit will escalate the issue to the next managerial level so that senior managers are made aware and can make a formal plan for corrective action.

The plan for corrective action will address:

Reasons for underperformance
Any Risks associated with underperformance
Actions to be taken to improve performance and timescales

The responsible manager will provide a summary of the above in the narrative accompanying the Performance Indicator and this will be provided in performance reports to CMT and the appropriate Committee.

Additionally, all red indicators, irrespective of type will be reported as exceptions to CMT quarterly.

Diagram of escalation process

Measuring Performance and Effectiveness

In designing Performance Indicators it is important to keep the end goal in sight and define what success looks like.

Most performance indicators fall into two categories:

Measures of Performance - “Are actions being executed as planned?”
These measure activity, output, and delivery. They focus on whether tasks, processes, or interventions are being carried out as intended. Measures of Performance may consider:
- Economy – What are the costs of the service?
  (resource use / cost control)
- Efficiency – What is the ratio of outputs to resource inputs?
  (productivity of the service)
- Quality – Is the service achieving quality standards and customer satisfaction? (quality of delivery and outputs)
- Equity – Is the service’s distribution of outputs, outcomes, benefits, and impacts equitable among groups? (fairness of delivery and access)
  
  Example Measure of Performance: Percentage of people who complete the required training.
Measures of Effectiveness - “Are we achieving the desired outcomes?”
These measure impact, results, or changes in state that occur because of the actions taken. Measures of Effectiveness may consider:
- Effectiveness – Do actual outputs and outcomes achieve our intended objectives?
- Impact – What is the social value and effect on quality of life?
  (long‑term outcomes / societal change)
  
  Example Measure of Effectiveness: Increase in knowledge or competence following completion of training.

Local Outcomes Framework

The Local Outcomes Framework is a national outcomes-based performance framework that sets out the key results central government expects to see delivered locally. It provides a shared set of priority outcomes for councils across areas such as housing, health, children’s services, social care, neighbourhoods, and climate. The Council will use the framework to:

Track key national outcomes in a consistent way
Guide local planning and priorities
Improve transparency for residents
Identify where improvement is needed
Support constructive performance discussions with government

Key Performance Indicators

A scorecard of locally defined Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) is used to monitor the overall performance of the organisation to provide a strategic overview. KPIs are aligned to the Council Plan and are reported as part of a combined budget monitoring and performance report to Cabinet.

KPIs will be agreed by the Council’s Corporate Leadership Team and Leader of the Council.

KPIs will be:

Limited in number
Comparable over time and to other organisations if possible
Closely linked to the Council’s vision, and strategy
Organisationally balanced and targeted at key areas
Support the Best Value Duty

Service Performance Indicators

A suite of locally defined Service Performance Indicators (SPIs) are used to measure the success of Service Delivery Plans and the performance of individual services. These indicators look at operational delivery, report quarterly to Overview and Scrutiny and are reviewed on an annual basis. SPIs will be limited in number and aligned to priorities of each service.

Portfolio of Change Initiatives

Change initiatives and business as usual (BAU) play complementary roles in effective service delivery: BAU focuses on running the organisation – delivering services reliably, efficiently, and to agreed standards by doing things right – while change initiatives focus on improving the organisation, challenging current practice, adapting to new needs, and doing the right things to achieve better long term outcomes and value.

As an organisation delivering transformational change alongside our day-to-day services, we will monitor and report all major change programmes at Cabinet level, using a portfolio approach. This means looking at all change activity together so that senior leaders can see the full picture, understand risks and progress, and make informed decisions.

Change initiatives are overseen through Programme Management Office (PMO) governance arrangements. Progress will be measured using carefully selected indicators which help us track how well organisational change is being delivered. These may include:

Digital adoption and channel shift
Process redesign milestones
Customer experience and journey improvements
Productivity gains
System modernisation
New organisational capabilities, such as skills, automation and improved use of data
Benefits realisation, both financial and non‑financial

A portfolio management approach ensures that change initiatives are prioritised, balanced, and aligned with strategic objectives, so that investment in change delivers maximum value and improved long term outcomes.

Our portfolio performance reporting will provide a clear and honest view of how projects and programmes are progressing. In-line with the structure and capacity the organisation, we will keep this simple by using short updates and easy-to-read dashboards that show what is on track, what is behind, and what needs attention.

Reports will focus on the key information needed to make decisions, including progress, risks, issues, costs and expected benefits. This approach follows recognised good practice, which encourages transparent, straightforward reporting without unnecessary detail.

This portfolio-based approach to performance data and insights, delivered in partnership with the Programme Management Office, ensures senior leaders have timely, high-quality intelligence to support evidence-based decision-making.

Benchmarking

It is important to consider how our peers are performing to gauge our performance and targets. There are several comparator groups that can be used and information can be found in:

LG Inform – Local Government Association
Local Outcomes Framework Statistical Neighbours
Housemark - data, insight and analysis for the UK housing sector
LG Improve – Financial Resilience Index

Business Intelligence

Business Intelligence brings together analytics, horizon scanning and clear data visualisation to support evidence‑based decision‑making at all levels of the organisation. Effective BI enables services to understand demand, performance drivers and emerging risks, helping managers to take timely, informed action. Live dashboards provide detailed, near real‑time operational insight, allowing issues to be identified early and interventions to be made where they will have the greatest impact.

Snapshot performance reports provide a consistent, quality‑assured view of progress over a defined period and support strategic oversight, accountability and governance by Cabinet and Scrutiny. By focusing on agreed KPIs, outcomes and trends, they enable proportionate challenge and informed discussion of longer‑term performance. Using both approaches to their strengths ensures operational decisions are informed by real‑time activity, while strategic decisions are grounded in stable, contextualised performance information.

"Get to know Bassetlaw"

“Get to know Bassetlaw” is an information pack that can be used by staff, visitors and senior leaders of other local authorities to ensure that current local context, knowledge and priorities are preserved and shared. The pack will aim to raise the baseline of local knowledge and inform policymaking.

Systems

The Council manages its performance information with the aid of a specialist performance management software Ideagen, administered by the Policy Unit. Data may be held in other systems such as MS Lists, MS Planner, Excel or Customer Relationship Management systems. Microsoft Power BI may be used as a reporting tool where live data tracking is required.

Officers with responsibility for actions or Performance Indicators have access to Ideagen and training will be provided for new users and on request.

Each PI will be assigned to a user who is responsible for inputting the data, and a manager who is responsible for checking the information.

Users of Ideagen should log into the system regularly and input data when it becomes available, rather than waiting until the end of the reporting period.

In addition to the system generated reminders, performance officers will also send out a reminder email to all users at the start of the reporting period. All PI data must be accompanied by an explanatory note, which Elected Members can understand. Where data is delayed or unavailable, a note should be provided to explain why.

Accurate Data

It is the responsibility of the assignee and manager to ensure timely and accurate data and information is entered into Ideagen and council systems.

High-quality information is essential for effective decision-making. Ensuring that we measure the right things, for the right reasons, underpins our ability to plan, manage, and demonstrate the impact of our services.

The Council is committed to maintaining the highest standards of data quality. To achieve this, our objectives are as follows:

Accuracy and Reliability - Ensure that collection, recording, analysis, and reporting of performance data is accurate, consistent, and reliable, enabling decision-making at all levels. Any use of AI must be in line with the Council’s AI Policy, Procedure and guidance.

Compliance with Legislation and Standards - Store, use, and share data in accordance with statutory requirements including the UK General Data Protection Regulation (UK GDPR), the Data Protection Act 2018, the Freedom of Information Act 2000, and the Local Government Transparency Code. Data will also support equality monitoring in line with the Public Sector Equality Duty.

Governance and Accountability - Clear responsibility for data quality to senior officers, including designated roles such as the Data Protection Officer (DPO). Governance arrangements will ensure accountability and escalation routes for data quality issues.

Data retention and disposal will follow corporate schedules to safeguard confidentiality and integrity.

Data Sharing and Partnerships - Ensure that all data sharing with partners is underpinned by formal agreements, setting out lawful bases for processing, responsibilities, and safeguards.

Transparency and Accessibility - Communicate performance data openly to stakeholders and the public, ensuring that published information is accessible, machine-readable, and compliant with accessibility legislation.

Continuous Improvement - Monitor and review data quality regularly through internal audits, external inspections, and staff training. Audit and Inspection Readiness - Ensure that data meets external inspection and audit standards, demonstrating compliance and supporting public confidence in the Council’s performance.

Further guidance on data quality standards can be found in the government’s Data Quality Framework and associated best practice publications.

Robust Reporting Arrangements

A range of performance information is reported to both members and officers through Cabinet, Overview and Scrutiny and Management team meetings. In context with business planning arrangements, the primary reporting lines of each metric is shown below:

Method	Primary Audience	Reporting Frequency	Note
“Get to know Bassetlaw”	Community Leaders Employees	Annual	An information pack that can be used by staff, visitors and senior leaders of other local authorities to ensure that current local context, knowledge and priorities are preserved and shared.
Report of Portfolio of Change Initiatives	Cabinet Corporate Leadership Team	Quarterly	A dashboard of all major change initiatives in the council – excluding BAU.
Budget Monitoring and Performance Report	Cabinet Overview & Scrutiny	Quarterly	Includes: Council Plan Progress Key Performance Indicators Budget and Capital Programme monitoring Reserves position
Report of PI Exceptions	Corporate Management Team	Quarterly	Flagging underperforming indicators.
Housing Service Performance Report	Housing Scrutiny Sub-Committee	Quarterly	Housing Service metrics only including Tenant Satisfaction Measures (Perception and Management Information).
PI Scorecard and Service Delivery Plan progress	Cabinet Members Senior Management	Monthly	Combines key and service performance indicators and service delivery plan progress to provide Cabinet Member and senior management assurance/oversight.
Local Outcomes Framework	Cabinet Senior Management	Every 6- months	Framework launched 2026. Cabinet and Senior Management will consider the Framework’s priority outcomes formally twice a year upon publication.
Power BI Dashboards	Management Teams Project and Programme Boards.	Issue Specific	Dashboards built for reporting live data and deeper insights into business operations.
The Council’s Website	General Public Service users	Quarterly	Performance information detailing how our services are performing.

Additional reporting arrangements may be used as required.

Housing Services

Whilst the Council has regard to LGA guidance by promoting only a limited number of key performance indicators to maintain strategic focus and clarity, within Housing Services there is a requirement to report on more granular detail, particularly in relation to health and safety compliance. This approach ensures the requirements of the Regulator of Social Housing’s Consumer Standards are fully met and the Council is taking all reasonable measures to ensure the safety of our tenants.

As such, our Performance Management Framework reflects the Regulator’s requirement that landlords robustly collect, publish and actively use a wide-range of performance information, to evidence delivery of consumer standard outcomes and enable tenant scrutiny.

Safety compliance is systematically monitored through the framework, including statutory and regulatory health and safety requirements, with performance reporting providing assurance that tenant homes are safe and that any risks are identified and addressed promptly.

Underperformance against agreed performance indicators triggers a defined escalation process, including corrective action planning and escalation through Corporate Management Team (CMT) exception reporting where issues are significant or persistent, ensuring timely intervention in line with the regulator’s requirement for proactive performance oversight and issue resolution.

Robust performance reporting is in place to senior officer and political leadership through regular Cabinet Member reporting, and Cabinet/Corporate Leadership Team performance reports, providing clear accountability for service delivery.

More detailed, service level performance is monitored through issue specific BI dashboards (e.g. voids, repairs), providing timely, real-time insight to support proactive management and early identification and escalation of emerging issues.

This approach provides a clear line of sight from operational delivery to Member oversight, supports the transparent publication and scrutiny of performance, and ensures that performance information is used to drive continuous service improvement in line with the Transparency, Influence and Accountability Standard.

Appendix 1: Key Dates

Q1: April, May, June
Data entry window: first three weeks in July.

Q2: July, Aug, September
Data entry window: first three weeks in October

Q3: October, November, December
Data entry window: first three weeks in January

Q4: January, February, March
Data entry window: first three weeks in April

Stage	Q1	Q2	Q3	Q4
Performance officers send reminders	First week in July	First week in October	First week in January	First week in April
Managers check system & quality assure data	Fourth week in July	Fourth week in October	Fourth week in January	Fourth week in April
Reports run (automatic)	Midnight 31 July	Midnight 31 October	Midnight 31 January	Midnight 30 April
Reporting to Cabinet & Scrutiny Committees*	September	December	March	June

*Overview and Scrutiny Committee and Housing Scrutiny Sub Committee.

Corporate Management Team Meeting receive Performance reports each quarter through cyclical monitoring.

Cabinet Members will receive advance notification of Performance Indicator Scorecards approximately one week before final reports are prepared.

Service Planning Timeline

Activity	Timing
Review Service Plans and Performance Indicators	January and February
Set Targets	February
Revised set of Performance Indicators in system	March
Service Delivery Plans in system	March
Portals created	By end of March
Appraisals, learning and development planning	Programmed annually

Appendix 2: Performance Indicator Criteria

These criteria will be used by the Policy Unit in discussions with Head of Service in determining reportable measures of success.

Performance Indicators reported to Elected Members should meet the following:

Clear Purpose and Strategic Alignment - Why are we measuring this?

Indicators must have a clear rationale and show how they support the delivery of the Council’s priorities. Each indicator should align with:
- Vision 2040 and Council Plan Priorities
- Service Delivery Plans
- Statutory or Regulatory requirements where indicators are mandated
- Indicators should focus on outcomes as well as outputs.
Actionable Indicators - If this changes, what will we do?

Every indicator should support decision‑making and intervention:
- The indicator highlights where action or improvement is needed
- It measures something the Council can influence or impact
- It can flag emerging risks, performance deterioration, or pressure
- Data should trigger timely operational or strategic discussion
- Indicators that cannot lead to action or change should not be included.
Benchmarked and Targeted - What is this being compared against?

To give context and enable Members to judge performance:
- Most indicators (unless newly created) should have a target
- Definitions and data should, wherever possible, align with standard datasets (e.g. ONS, CIPFA, LOF benchmarking)
  
  Comparisons may include:
- Previous performance trends
- Neighbouring or similar councils
- Statutory or national benchmarks
- Service or contractual standards
- Targets should be realistic and evidence‑based.
Clear Title, Description, Narrative - What is the indicator showing?

Each indicator must be clearly defined so Members understand exactly what is being measured. This includes:
- A clear title avoiding technical jargon
- A description outlining what is included or excluded
- The data source and how the indicator is calculated
- The reporting frequency (monthly, quarterly, annual)
- A named Assignee and Manager, showing who is responsible for data quality and performance
  
  Narrative commentary should explain:
- What the data means
- Why performance has changed
- Any actions being taken
Supports Accountability and Continuous Improvement

The purpose of reporting performance to Members is to enable transparency and improve outcomes for residents.

Indicators should support constructive challenge and accountability, not blame.

Services should use indicators to monitor their own performance and learn from trends.

Indicators should be reviewed for ongoing validity, especially if they are:
- Constantly RAG‑rated Green
- No longer aligned to strategic priorities
- Duplicating other measures

Performance Indicator Checklist

Heads of Service and the Policy Unit should consider this checklist when developing or reviewing their suite of performance indicators. It is designed to ensure indicators are meaningful, proportionate, and support both service improvement and effective governance.

Questions

Does it align to the Council Plan or regulatory requirements?
Do we have sufficient outcome-focussed measures?
Is there a clear definition of success and failure?
Can it be comparable over time, and against external benchmarks?
Is it actionable?
Is the target realistic and evidence-based?
Can we influence it?
Do we understand the drivers and context behind it?
Is the data reliable to collect?
Does it avoid duplication with other indicators/ reporting systems?
Who is the named owner of the data?
Will Members find it useful?

Appendix 3: Examples of Indicators

Good Indicator
“Household recycling rate (%), compared with national and regional averages”

Statutory reporting requirement
Outcome measure that aligns with environmental priorities
Benchmarkable

Bad Indicator
“Number of waste collections completed”

Nearly always 100% unless there’s a major failure
No insight into performance quality
Reflects business as usual activity monitored by service

Good Indicator
“Average number of days to re-let void properties (compared to target and peer benchmark)”

Standard, meaningful measure across councils
Shows efficiency and financial impact
Directly actionable for the service

Bad Indicator
“Number of void properties inspected”

Output, not outcome
Doesn’t indicate whether performance is good or poor
No link to strategic impact on homelessness or income

Good Indicator
% of major planning applications determined within the statutory timeframe (with extensions of time included)”

Standard national indicator
Shows service efficiency and compliance

Bad Indicator
“Number of planning applications received”

Not a measure of performance
Reflects demand, not service quality

Last Updated on Thursday, August 13, 2026