The Focus of the Survey

The survey itself was designed in order to focus on six main areas of interest, drawing upon the issues raised in chapters two, three and four.

Phasing & Guidance: As LAAs were implemented in several phases, there were

questions as to how this phasing affected each area’s ability to sign off and deliver upon an LAA. Therefore questions in this section were designed in order to identify any patterns in how phasing affected a number of issues, particularly focusing on guidance from CLG and how this had changed.

Beyond this, the overview sought to ask questions about the nature of the guidance itself. This focused on how clear the guidance was, as well as identifying any gaps or flaws that arose. It also questioned each locality manager on the extent to which the guidance from CLG allowed them to develop and focus upon issues which affected their individual area.

Government Office for the Regions: As the representative of Central Government

in negotiating and signing off LAAs, GOR had the potential to play a key role in defining the focus of any particular LAA. Consequently, several key themes emerged. Firstly, there was an exploration of how the experience of negotiating the LAA indicators varied across the UK regions, both to see if any particular region had a strong overall relationship and vice versa. Consequently, the case studies could then focus on why this might be the case. Similarly the same data was analysed on an intra-regional basis, to investigate the extent to which each GOR dealt with individual LAAs within its boundary. This was also of interest, as

detailed case studies could be selected which could allow for any differences to be explored.

Districts and Counties: The next section of the national overview focused exclusively on those areas operating a two-tier district and county model. This was in order to ascertain whether converting multiple SCSs – each focusing on an individual district’s concerns - into one county-wide LAA was an issue in practice. To this end, the questions focused on the extent to which an LAA balanced district concerns against each other, before moving on to ask if any district carried any more influence in the negotiation process or not. Any findings in this section were intended to assist in making the case for the inclusion/exclusion of a district and county model local authority area in the case study selection.

Elected Representatives: The role of elected representatives in the LAA process

and their accountability was also felt to be something that could influence LAA implementation. In particular these concerns related to whether elected representatives were helpful or not in their conduct and the impact of party politics. To this end, results were analysed in the context of how the council was comprised at the time of the survey. This also allowed for a consideration of how a contrast between local political composition and the governing Labour administration in Whitehall may have lead to difficulties in delivering an LAA.

Strengths and Weaknesses: This section of the survey sought to obtain a more

general perspective on how LAA managers perceived the LAA. This process identified some of the core features of LAA practice and asked practitioners to identify them as either a strength or weakness. Then, each respondent was asked to rank, in order of importance, the three factors that they believed were most important to the effective delivery of an LAA.

Improving Practice: The final section tied in closely with the strengths and weaknesses segment but provided a more qualitative element, inviting LAA practitioners to share their thoughts on how they believed LAA practice could be improved.

Reflecting these six themes the National Overview survey set out a total of 15 questions (Table 5.1).

Table 5.1 - National Overview Survey Questions

1. In your opinion, how clear was the guidance from CLG?

(Central Government) when you were producing your LAA? (Clear, Adequate,

Unclear)

2. What aspects of this guidance were a) helpful; b) unhelpful; c) absent?

(Overview of Expectation, Stakeholder Involvement, Themes, Indicator

Selection, Negotiation and Signing Off)

3. In your opinion, how relevant to you feel the national indicators are in allowing your LAA to address the issues facing your area, within the four main policy blocks?

(Relevant, Irrelevant)

4. Of the areas where you have developed local indicators, what emphasis were they given compared to the national indicators set by your LAA?

(More Emphasis, The Same, Less Emphasis)

5. How would you rate your experience with Regional Government Office when negotiating the indicators for your LAA?

(Good, Adequate, Poor)

6. In your opinion, to what extent did the Regional Government Office balance issues specific to your area, compared to national policy priorities when negotiating your LAA?

(High, Moderate, Low)

7. To what extent were the priorities detailed within each Sustainable Community Strategy presented at a district level reflected in the overall LAA?

(High, Moderate, Low)

8. Did any district(s) carry more influence than others during the LAA production process?

(Yes, No)

9. If you answered ‘Yes’ to the previous question, what was the reason for this? (Funding, Selection of Indicators, Size of Population, Negotiation Experience, Other (please specify))

10. Overall, to what extent are elected local members involved in the LAA process in your area?

(Very Involved, Moderately Involved, Minimally Involved, Not Involved)

11. In your opinion, to what extent do you feel the involvement of elected officials has helped or hindered the LAA process?

(Helped, No Difference, Hindered)

12. Based on your experiences, what do you feel are the overall strengths and weaknesses of LAAs?

(Scope of the National Indicators, Three year timeframe of the LAA,

Involvement of Statutory Partners, Local Authority as Lead Partner,

Negotiation and Signing off with Regional Government Office)

13. In order of priority, what do you feel are the three most important requirements for the successful implementation of an LAA?

(Clear Guidance, Relationship with Central Government, Relationship with Regional Government, Relationship with Local Authority, Good relations with partners, effective community engagement, active partner agencies, local politics, other (please specify))

14. In your opinion, how could future LAA practice be improved? 15. Comments

Upon the completion of the overview, the findings were analysed and used to help inform case study selection. This was done in conjunction with several other data sources, including economic statistics. The process of selecting the case study areas is outlined later in this chapter.