IPF - delivering essential services to public sector managers
 
HomeAboutContact The Chartered Insitute of Public Finance and AccountancyHomeOnline ShopInstitute of Public Finance Ltd.
 
 
 
About CIPFA Benchmarking

November 2003
Why Benchmarking ?

One of the key themes in performance improvement is the need for local authorities both to operate efficiently and to show that they operate efficiently. While no authority wilfully wastes money, statistics such as the Audit Commission's Performance Indicators show that some authorities appear to have higher unit costs than others. These may or may not present a fair picture, but an authority cannot prove to local taxpayers that it is offering value for money unless it can provide some evidence. Such evidence is also a necessary requirement for Best Value and Comprehensive Performance Assessment (CPA).

Benchmarking helps answer fundamental questions such as:
  • How are we performing ?
  • Are we performing better year on year ?
  • How does our performance compare with our peer organisations ?
  • Can we learn anything from other organisations ?

Why CIPFA Benchmarking ?

We launched four Benchmarking Clubs in 1998 and have since expanded the range to cover most of the main financial services. CIPFA Finance Benchmarking offers a unique product currently delivered to 1,650 members of individual Clubs.

The strengths that make CIPFA Finance Benchmarking Clubs so successful are:
  • A large and proactive membership
  • Consistency through common and robust definitions
  • Careful validation of data supplied by members
  • Confidential comparisons with a wide range of similar authorities
  • Detailed reports showing not just how members compare in terms of headline cost benchmarks, but also some of the reasons why their performance differs from others'
  • Exchanges of experience between members
  • The opportunity to learn from other authorities' successes and failures
  • Learning from 'good practice'
  • The ability to compare with members who have contracted out services
  • Savings in time and cost, as the effort of defining and collecting benchmarks is spread over all club members.

Key Aims

Comparing like with like by producing precise definitions of what is being benchmarked and applying data validation techniques to ensure the benchmarks provided are as good a comparison as can reasonably be expected.

Encouraging participation by the use of member steering groups, information meetings and review meetings.

Promoting good practice by circulating checklists and monitoring the degree of compliance.

Facilitating exchange of information, methods and ideas.

Enabling further process comparison by supplying the full database of raw data to all members returning data.

Mapping performance trends over time.

Collating and providing information on quality initiatives employed by members.

Cost Versus Quality

Best Value is as much concerned with the quality of services as with their cost.

The main focus of the CIPFA Clubs is on benchmarking costs and other workload-related measures. This is not by choice, simply because it is so difficult to measure and compare quality. Where Best Value Performance Indicators are defined, many clubs collect these. In addition, most of our clubs use Good Practice questionnaires to monitor achievement against predefined good practice.

Each club questionnaire also has a Scrapbook section where we collect textual and quality information that is compiled for all members and circulated via e-mail. Previously asked questions include information on e-commerce, customer satisfaction, staff retention and recruitment, future departmental developments and details of best value service reviews.

Confidentiality

Club members agree to respect the confidentiality of all information. To this end all reports refer to individual members by letters and a key to the names is provided separately, which members are asked not to show to anyone other than their immediate colleagues.

How the Clubs Operate

Each CIPFA Benchmarking Club operates along the following lines:

The Benchmarking Cycle
  • Steering Committee
    A group of volunteers meets to settle the details for the year's benchmarking exercise, for example:

    • what new performance indicators should be included in the questionnaire;
    • what definitions need to be altered;
    • which year's data to be benchmarked: previous actuals or next year's estimates;
    • confirm the timetable for the year and other arrangements.
  • Questionnaire
    Once agreed, this is circulated to members, asking for data to be returned by a fixed date.
  • Information Meeting
    Meetings are held to help members complete the questionnaire and to identify and discuss any general difficulties.
  • Data Analysis & Validation
    Members return their data in Excel spreadsheets, which include a range of checks to highlight possible errors. IPF then reads the data into its database, and so far as possible validates it, by identifying figures that appear questionable and raising this with the members. Minor errors or discrepancies are then highlighted in a draft report, which invites members to review their results, and to supply revisions where needed.
  • Feedback Report
    This compares each member's figures with the average of their selected comparison group and also includes histograms showing the range of performance of each of the other members. A second copy of the report is also provided showing comparisons with all other members of the club or where relevant by class.

    Within this report, we also offer time-series analysis and quartile information for the key benchmarks.
  • Scrapbook
    Each club can also ask for processtype questions, e.g. details of IT; document storage arrangements; local quality targets; arrangements for consulting users; examples of good practice etc. This information cannot be averaged and benchmarked, but the collated responses to each question are e-mailed to members as Word files.
  • Raw Database
    An Excel file of all the raw data is emailed to members.
  • Review Meetings
    When final reports have been circulated, a series of small meetings is organised for each club to review the results. The purpose of these meetings is to enable members to discuss matters of mutual concern and interest in detail. The meetings mark the beginning of the transition from the benchmarking of costs to the benchmarking of procedures, systems, organisation structures and quality initiatives.

Access to the Service

Membership is open to public sector organisations via an annual subscription. This fee covers documentation, data collection, telephone helpline, reports and one place at information and review meetings.


November 2003
 
 
 
 
Feedback relating to the services IPF provide is always appreciated.

Please use the form below to send us your comments and suggestions regarding .

Comments:
 
 
Copyright Institute of Public Finance Ltd © 2008Terms and Conditions