1 / 14

SLCC/ILCM Peer review process Process Guidance and Status Update

SLCC/ILCM Peer review process Process Guidance and Status Update. Issue 1 September 2011. Peer Review Process - Purpose. SLCC/ILCM Larger Councils Network ‘Peer Review’ scheme Facilitates information exchange sharing of best practice Between the councils in England and Wales.

zurina
Download Presentation

SLCC/ILCM Peer review process Process Guidance and Status Update

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. SLCC/ILCM Peer review processProcess Guidanceand Status Update Issue 1 September 2011

  2. Peer Review Process - Purpose • SLCC/ILCM Larger Councils Network ‘Peer Review’ scheme • Facilitates • information exchange • sharing of best practice • Between the councils in England and Wales. • A structured form of networking • Allows Councils to get focussed advice on selected areas • Raising professional standards

  3. The scheme • A process or service of one council reviewed by individual (usually the Clerk) from another council • Reviewer provides opinions advice and recommendations • Reviewer may be • an expert/practitioner • Someone with experience • more likely, just a ‘fresh pair of eyes’ • Typical scenario for review • A single service or limited group of related services • Council Structures/Processes • Eg Committee Structure/Meeting Management etc • Operational Structures/Processes • Eg Staffing Structure/Organisational Processes/Policies & Procedures (inc accounting policies etc.) • NOT everything at once – impractical • Reviewer is ‘Critical Friend’ • Reviewee manages presentation to his/her council

  4. Scheme Status • Project Team established • List members here • Three peer reviews held amongst members • Finance, Cemetery, Events • Very positive experience • Rewarding for both reviewers and reviewees • Less threatening than feared • Three more planned, round robin basis • Material prepared • Launch – 15 September 2011

  5. The Toolkit - Material to help you • This presentation • A pre-review Questionnaire • A report template and example report (style guide to follow) • Terms and Conditions • Members of the project team who designed this • Available for limited telephone & email consultation • Training sessions quarterly (web based) • Meeting of participants to be arranged

  6. Process outline • Reviewee identifies a need • Identify reviewer (administrative activity to be developed) • Reviewee completes pre-review questionnaire • Basic details about the Council • What he wants reviewing • What he wants to get out of it • Key documents • Reviewer prepares, reads documents • Site visit (one day including travel) • Report written by reviewer, in discussion with reviewee • Reviewee manages the follow up with his/her council • Either reviewer or reviewee may (politely) opt out at any point

  7. Reviewer Selection • Reviewer(s) and why selected • Volunteer reviewers complete form identifying • Expertise and background • What they are willing to do (where, when – eg Fridays?, how long, anything they are particularly interested in, basis (time bank or paid?) • Matched by administrator or peer matching • Two types of reviewer - expert or ‘fresh mind’ • Training at Larger Councils Meeting, SLCC Branch meetings and by quarterly webcast

  8. Preparation phase • From experience – this is very important. • Visit will last only 0.5 days if prep is good • Reviewee completes pre-review questionnaire, sends to reviewer • Reviewer reviews questionnaire, asks clarifying questions, requests documents, reads them • Typically this may take a day of the reviewers time • maybe over a period of a few days-one month

  9. Visit • Face to Face at Reviewees site • Strictly one day (normally including travel) • Experience shows 9.30-lunch works well with good preparation • Host provides • (unless otherwise agreed in advance): Private room, Internet Connection, PC (or reviewer brings laptop), Telephone access, photocopier, access to confidential papers, refreshments including lunch • Discussions with • The Clerk • Responsible Service Officer • Optionally • Chairman of relevant Committee (or Council if no relevant committee) • Other staff • Relevant third parties • Site visit (normally) • Test evidence for report • Maybe iterative, relevant staff must be available • Reviewer will generally outline main conclusions verbally before departing (probably over lunch!) • Reviewer and reviewee may agree in advance to vary the above

  10. Report phase • Feedback given as a report (template provided) • Scope of review, date • Evidence reviewed, individuals ‘interviewed’ • Comments should not normally be attributable to individuals • Key practices identified (what makes up the work/defines the service characteristics) • Comparators/alternatives • Conclusions • Stress the positives • Must do recommendation/timeframe (critical eg health & safety/legislative adherence) • Other recommendations/suggestions • Ideas the Council may wish to consider • Possible follow-up • Final version read only (pdf) • Submits to reviewee in draft for comments prior to finalisation • if first review also to project steering team. If dispute – ask project steering team • Reviewee must retain control of presentation to Council • Final report to project steering team (may be published) • forwarded by reviewee • omitting names of reviewee council and individuals

  11. Financial matters • Costs incurred • About 3 days time for the reviewer + opportunity cost • Travel and rarely accommodation for 1 night • Try to avoid accommodation with geographic clustering • 1.5 – 2 man-days time for reviewee • Incidentals (photocopying, telephone calls etc) • Reviewer gets to see another operation • Will give him/her ideas to take back • Personal professional development • Funding – Options – Participants choose which • For all options: reviewee pays travel expenses unless agreed otherwise • Preferred: on an exchange/round robin basis = zero administration • Two councils or a group get together and agree a series of reviews • “Fair exchange” of effort • Paid effort • SLCC managed time bank – not yet available – details to follow

  12. How to get involved • The administration is currently manual! • The project team are the dating agency • If you want to be peer reviewed email me stating the subject: james.parker@bishopsstortfordtc.gov.uk • If you would like to offer to do a peer review email me, stating what subjects you are prepared to review • Three members of the project team have already offered to do a peer review (travel expenses only) • On condition that the reviewee also offers likewise

  13. Get Involved! • Size doesn’t matter – this process will work for small and large councils • Next Steps for you • Get involved! The process launches 15th September 2011 • Next steps for the project team • Organise training • Material to website • Administration • Explore CALC Links • Possible review of strategy/policy/councillor operation • Parked for now – phase 2 • Explore group peer reviews

  14. THE Project Team Thank you for listening, Any Questions?

More Related