Celebrating 10 year of the NHT Network Simon Pinkney & Sharon Andrews

1. Celebrating 10 year of the NHT Network Simon Pinkney & Sharon Andrews

2. NHT Public Satisfaction Survey Started in 2008 • Steering Group Representation from each Region/Alliance • National Set of Questions Allows Benchmarking • Historical Data Shows Trends & Improvements • Recognised by DfT Incentive Fund Self Assessment

3. Participants: 112 (2017) 135 authorities have taken part since 2008 • Response rate: 25% (2017 still being finalised) Slightly higher than last year (8 page & 12 page similar) • Online response: 10,814 (2017) 10% of total, up from 7% in 2016. Introduced in 2014 • Total responses since 2008: over 690k

5. Changes in 2017 • Introduction of 8 page version Removal of Public Transport Q9/Q10, Information from the Council Q11b, Tackling Congestion Q13, Taxis minicabs & community transport Q14, Rights of Way Q16a, Provision of cycle routes, bus stops etc. 16b • Cognitive testing Ipsos MORI undertook face to face cognitive testing with a random sample of members of the public to ensure the questions were understandable. As a result of the questionnaire was re-designed and some questions were re-worded to provide a softer more appealing approach. • Push to web pilot Selected households were sent a letter advising that they could complete the survey online – a full questionnaire was only sent a few weeks later to non-respondents • New (fully responsive) on-line facility

7. 2015 CQC Following on from the HMEP Funded Project in 2013/14

8. An efficiency monitor that takes account of Customer Satisfaction, Quality and Investment (also know as ‘3 legged stool’).... helping authorities make judgements about value for money, and find better quantified options for improvement and efficiency savings

9. How CQC Is Different The Key Difference between CQC methodology and more conventional benchmarking techniques is the way in which the analysis makes an overall assessment of performance, taking account of each Authority’s individual circumstances including: Differences in size and scale Service Quality Customer Perception CQC provides each Authority with a unique benchmark, their own theoretical minimum cost, against which they can measure their potential for efficiency saving. Benchmarking against yourself

10. There are a number of factors that need to be taken into consideration for an Authority: Size of Network Traffic on Network – including HGV Condition of Network Wages Public Satisfaction

11. Steering group chaired by Jason Russell Assistant Director of Highways & Transport – Surrey County Council Sub Groups Cost Data Definitions Reporting Members Constitution Why Questions

12. Quantifies an Authority’s potential for efficiency savings Provide a measurable basis for identifying ‘who is good’ (which Authorities are operating most efficiently) Measures changes in an Authority’s efficiency over time quantifies and their realisation of efficiency savings

13. Participants: 91 69 in 2015 • 8 years worth of Cost Data Collected from each participating Authority • Defined Cost Data Work carried out rather than pot of money being used

14. Ongoing Development • Members website • Why Questions To help understand the differences between authorities • Allowance made for additional investment • Better Road Condition Data Amber Condition data collected direct from Authorities

15. Performance Management Framework (PMF)

16. PMF Steering Group • Formed in response to the requirements of self-assessment • Comprises 11 Authorities and a representative from HTMA • Chaired by Jon Munslow, South Gloucestershire Council • Founding members interested in benchmarking

17. Framework application • It has been developed for use in two ways: • Within an authority, to measure progress against local targets • NHT is developing a software tool to support the Framework which can be used by authorities to assess their own performance internally. • Across authorities, to benchmark performance with others • NHT is establishing a benchmarking club to allow authorities to compare their performance using selected indicators in the Framework.

18. Principles of use • Standard set of measures • Use what you want • Add your own • Align themes to your outcomes/corporate goals • Set your own targets

19. Development • Followed Asset Management Guidance and New Code of Practice • Consulted with Matthew Lugg, involved in early development • Sub-groups organised by Asset types • PMF Group Testing

20. Framework Structure • Nine asset groups: Carriageways, Footways, Cycleways, PRoW, Structures, Street Lights, Drainage, Green Infrastructure, ITS Infrastructure • Five themes: Serviceability, Safety, Sustainability, Accessibility & Financial • Three levels of measure: Strategic, Tactical and Operational • Measurement intervals: Annual, Quarterly and Monthly • Local Targets

21. Development cont. • Currently focused on Carriageway • Detailed measure definition • PMF Group Pilot has taken place • Wider Pilot by CQC members • Development via wider Sub Groups of other Asset Types

22. Other Asset Groups: Cycleways: measures being piloted/tested by PMF Group Footways: measures being piloted/tested by PMF Group PRoW: Measures being piloted/tested by PMF Group Structures: working with MSIG ITS Infrastructure: working with WMHA Streetlighting: working with South Gloucestershire GreenInfrastructure: working with South Gloucestershire Drainage: Piece of work with Suffolk

23. Timeline: 11th Sept – 13th Oct Wider Test of Carriageways Measures by CQC Members Test of other Ways measures by PMF Group 26th Oct PMF Steering Group Meeting to review all Ways Measures By 30th Oct All other Asset Measure ready for testing 23rd Nov Results of wider carriageway test reviewed by PMF Group and presented at the NHT Conference By 30th Dec Feedback on all other Measures (PMG Group and Wider) Qtr 1 2018 PMF Group to finalise Framework April 2018 NHT PMF ready for use

24. Connect & Share • A national virtual resource of practice material updated by the sector and freely available to all

25. Connect & Share Principles • Self sufficient • Decentralised • Relies on existing Networks (national & regional) • Available to all free of charge

26. How it operates • Run by a Steering Group • Facilitated by NHT Network • Practice materials held on HMEP website

27. How it works • Relies on support of existing Networks • Gathers practice material from Networks and individual Authorities • Uses surveys of practice and performance data • Issues regular newsletters/practice updates

28. Enrolled networks Networks sign up and agree to: • Promote the use of Connect & Share • Submit practice material and case studies to the Connect & Share • Respond to surveys raised by the Connect & Share Steering Group • Host Connect & Share events and arrange presentations of practice materials from across the region

29. Regional Support Package NHT is offering the following support free of charge: • Access to a secure database for capturing, storing, comparing and sharing performance data • A purpose built website with facilities for on-line data capture, comparative reporting and a searchable practice library • Access to regional reports of NHT data, highlighting differences across the region, over time and between authorities Note: This support package was previously called NHT Regional Benchmarking and is offered free of charge, provided there are sufficient current users of NHT Services in an area.

30. Steering Group • Provides a focus for collection of practice (sets priorities) • Reviews website content • Provides the sector with updates of latest material • Reports progress to the HMEP Strategic Steering Group

31. Benefits • Greater visibility of the things that work • Reinforces collaboration locally, between regions and across the sector. • Provides a more complete picture of what is happening across the sector and who to talk to. • Enables best performers to share their experience. • By the sector for the sector

32. Enrolled networks

33. 2008 - Public Satisfaction Survey 2015 - CQC 2017 – Connect & Share 2018 – Performance Management Framework (PMF)

34. Future Development • Wider data analysis • Link PMF data to Public Satisfaction Scores • Extend survey offering • Key Stakeholder satisfaction survey being considered • Engage Supply Chain Partners • Development of Regional Benchmarking • Extend nationally as part of Connect & Share