Appendix A Borough Plan outcomes performance Q2 2017/18 Reducing - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Appendix A

Borough Plan outcomes performance – Q2 2017/18

Reducing Inequality

Green

• Early years providers good or
• utstanding
• Schools judged good or better in Ofsted

inspections

• Children looked after with 3 or more

placements

• NEETs aged 16-18
• Employment rate 16-64
• Gap between ethnic minority and
• verall employment rate
• Gap between 16-64 claiming out of

work benefits and London average

• Permanent admissions 18-64
• Permanent admissions 65+
• Older people at home 91 days after

discharge

• Adults with learning disabilities in their
• wn home

Amber

• 3 & 4 year olds benefitting from early

years education

• Care leavers in EET
• Child & Family Assessments completed

in 45 working days

• Gap between 50-64 claimant rate
• Out of work benefits

Red

• 16-18 destinations unknown
• Gap between claimant rate 18-24

Reducing In Inequality

Children’s Services

Percentage of early years registered providers inspected rated good or

• utstanding

Target: 83% RAG rating:

What does the data say? Performance is above target at 92%. This also compares favourably to the London average. There has been a slight increase comparing Q2 to Q1.

G

78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 2017-06-01 2017-09-01

Percentage of early years registered providers inspected rated good or outstanding

Percentage of early years registered providers inspected rated good or

• utstanding

Benchmarking data (15/16 academic year) London average Neighbours 83% Hackney 80% Haringey 77% Lewisham 75% Southwark 82%

Reducing In Inequality

Children’s Services

Percent of two year old children benefitting from funded early education

Target: TBC RAG rating:

What does the data say? There has a deterioration in performance compared to Q1 from 58% to 56%. This is largely due to a lower take up rate over the summer months and is expected to increase again in Q3.

55 55.5 56 56.5 57 57.5 58 58.5 2017-06-01 2017-09-01

Percent of two year old children benefitting from funded early education

London average Neighbours 57.00 Hackney 47.00 Haringey 50.00 Lewisham 62.00 Southwark 68.00 Benchmarking data (March 2016)

Reducing In Inequality

Children’s Services

Percentage of 3 & 4 year olds benefiting from free early years education

Target: 93% RAG rating:

What does the data say? Performance in Q2 remains at 90%; below the target of 93%. An increase is anticipated in the next quarter with the take up of 30 hours by parents. Lambeth compares favourable to the London average and our nearest neighbours.

A

85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 2017-06-01 2017-09-01

Percentage of 3 & 4 year olds benefiting from free early years education

Percent of 3 & 4 year olds benefiting from free early years education Target

London average Neighbours 85% Hackney 88% Haringey 84% Lewisham 85% Southwark 85% Benchmarking data (2015/16 academic year)

Reducing In Inequality

Children’s Services

Percentage of schools judged good

• r better in Ofsted inspections

Target: Above National Average RAG rating:

What does the data say? Lambeth schools continue to improve following Ofsted

• inspections. Only 4 schools (all primary) are in the

'requires improvement' category and one secondary school is in ‘special measures’. The school improvement team in Lambeth have provided additional support to ensure that these 5 schools can move up to 'good' at their forthcoming inspections.

G

70% 75% 80% 85% 90% 95% 100% 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16 2016/17 2017/18

Percentage of schools judged good or better in Ofsted inspections

National average Neighbours 89% Benchmarking data

Reducing In Inequality

Children’s Services

Proportion of care leavers in employment, education or training aged 19-21 (LC.18)

Target: 60% RAG rating:

What does the data say? Performance in this area has improved and is in line with our comparator group. Following recent scrutiny discussions, the target of 60% will be reviewed to ensure that it is appropriately ambitious, reflecting our high aspirations for care leavers. Work with young people outside of the cohort reported in this indicator is not reflected in the performance shown here. In particular, work with the current year 10 and 11 cohorts to keep them in education and make firm plans for them post-16 will lead to significant improvements in this indicator over the next two years.

A

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Proportion of care leavers in employment, education

• r training aged 19-21

Proportion of care leavers in employment, education or training aged 19-21 Target

London average Neighbours 54% Hackney - 49% Haringey - 47% Lewisham – 49% Southwark - 51% Benchmarking data

Reducing In Inequality

Children’s Services

Child & Family Assessments completed within 45 working days (SG.05)

Target: 90% RAG rating:

What does the data say? Performance has seen an improvement this financial year and our year to date performance is 83%. Lambeth are committed to ensuring that families are being assessed and effective intervention is taken at the beginning of a child’s journey with Children’s Services, this ensures children are being safeguarded in a timely manner and contributing to good developmental outcomes. Performance continues to be scrutinised closely using the weekly reports sent to all managers.

A

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Child & Family Assessments completed within 45 working days

Child & Family Assessments completed within 45 working days Target

London average Neighbours 82% Hackney - 54% Haringey - 79% Lewisham – 80% Southwark - 76% Benchmarking data

Reducing In Inequality

Children’s Services

Percentage of children looked after at 31 March with 3 or more placements during the year ending 31 March

Target: 12% RAG rating:

What does the data say? This is an area of good performance for children social care and continues to exceed the target. The Placement Panel continues to scrutinise placements and there is management oversight requiring approval

• f all placement moves.

G

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 2015-06-01 2015-09-01 2016-03-01 2016-06-01 2016-09-01 2016-12-01 2017-03-01 2017-09-01

Percentage of children looked after at 31 March with 3 or more placements during the year ending 31 March

Percentage of children looked after at 31 March with 3 or more placements during the year ending 31 March Target

London average Neighbours 11.0% Hackney - 9.0% Haringey – 9.0% Lewisham – 7% Southwark – 12.0% Benchmarking data

Reducing In Inequality

Children’s Services

First Time Entrants To The Youth Justice System aged 10-17 (per 100,000 population)

Target: TBC RAG rating:

What does the data say? Following a reduction in recent years, the number of First Time Entrants to the Youth Justice System has been on an upward trajectory since the end of 2016/17 and is now 614 per 10,000. This is still lower than the most recent peak in September 2015.

100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800

First Time Entrants To The Youth Justice System aged 10-17 (per 100,000 population)

London average Neighbours 415 Hackney - 443 Haringey – 484 Lewisham –713 Southwark – 552 Benchmarking data (2015/16)

Reducing In Inequality

Children’s Services

Percentage of young people in suitable education, training or employment at the end of their YOS intervention

Target: TBC RAG rating:

What does the data say? The percentage of young people in suitable education, training or employment is currently 63%. This represents an improvement compared to Q1.

54.0% 63.0%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% 01/06/2017 01/07/2017 01/08/2017 01/09/2017

Percentage of young people in suitable education, training or employment at the end of their YOS intervention

Lambeth outturn

London average Neighbours Unavailable Unavailable Benchmarking data

Reducing In Inequality

Children’s Services

Rate of proven re-offending by young offenders

Target: TBC RAG rating:

What does the data say? There has been a small decline compared to quarter 1 bringing the rate of proven re-offending below the 50%

• mark. However, this is significantly above the

national average for this KPI.

10 20 30 40 50 60 2017-06-01 2017-09-01

Rate of proven re-offending by young offenders

National average Neighbours 41.8% Unavailable Benchmarking data (Dec 15)

Reducing In Inequality

Children’s Services

Percentage of young People aged 16-18 who are not in Education, Training or Employment

Target: Below London and national average RAG rating:

What does the data say? Performance has improved considerably over the past year and continues to exceed target.

G

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Percentage of young people aged 16-18 who are not in Education, Training or Employment (NEET)

Percentage of young people aged 16-18 who are not in Education, Training or Employment(NEET) Target

London average Neighbours 3% Hackney - 2.5% Haringey –3% Lewisham –3.2% Southwark – 2.2% Benchmarking data (2015)

Reducing In Inequality

Children’s Services

Percentage of young people aged 16-18 where destinations are unknown

Target: Below London and national average RAG rating:

What does the data say? Q2 data is very high because the reportable cohort is now 16-17 year olds (years 12-13) and September is a churn period, due to new enrolments. Therefore the Q2 outturn is not accurate due to everyone within the cohort becoming unknown until data is received from

• enrolments. However we will be able to report a more

accurate percentage in Q3.

5.2% 62.5%

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0% 2017-06-01 2017-07-01 2017-08-01 2017-09-01

Percentage of young people aged 16-18 where destinations are unknown

Lambeth (avg)

R

Benchmarking data (2016) London average Neighbours 3.5% Hackney – 3 .3% Haringey – 10.2% Lewisham – 3.9% Southwark – 3.0%

Reducing In Inequality

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Employment rate – aged 16-64

Target: 80% RAG rating:

What does the data say? The employment rate in Lambeth continues to rise and again is the highest figure ever recorded at 83.1% This reflects the highly qualified population of the borough and the strength of the London economy.

G

76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84

Employment rate – aged 16-64

Employment rate – aged 16-64 Target

Benchmarking data (2017 Q2-rolling) London average Neighbours 73.8% Hackney – 73.6% Haringey – 69.0% Lewisham – 78.7% Southwark – 74.0%

Reducing In Inequality

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Employment rate - ethnic minority aged 16-64

Target: For monitoring purposes only RAG rating:

What does the data say? The ethnic minority employment rate appears to have risen since 2015 when the figure was generally around 65%. The margin of error on this statistic is quite large however, so we should avoid drawing any significant conclusions until this figure is sustained over several quarters. The figures also suggest that the ethnic minority population level has increased over the last couple of years, providing reassurance that any changes in employment rates are not due to ethnic minority residents leaving the borough.

58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 2016-10-01 2017-03-01 2017-06-01 2017-09-01

Employment rate - ethnic minority aged 16-64

London average Neighbours 63.9% Benchmarking data

Reducing In Inequality

Neighbourhoods & Growth

The percentage point gap between the employment rate of ethnic minority aged 16-64 and the overall employment rate

Target: Narrow the gap with the overall employment rate RAG rating:

What does the data say? Whilst both the overall employment rate and the ethnic minority employment rate have increased in the last quarter, the latter has increased by a greater amount allowing the gap to be narrowed. This is the smallest that the gap has ever been reported to be.

G

6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15

The percentage point gap between the employment rate of ethnic minority aged 16-64 and the overall employment rate

The percentage point gap between the employment rate of ethnic minority aged 16-64 and the overall employment rate Target

London average Neighbours 9.6% gap Benchmarking data

Reducing In Inequality

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Claimant rate - aged 18-24

Target: For monitoring purposes only RAG rating:

What does the data say? There has been a marginal increase in the claimant rate 18-24 since last quarter. Given the time of year this is likely to reflect those who were students up until this summer who are now signing on whilst they look for work. The actual increase was 15 claimants.

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Claimant rate - aged 18-24

Claimant rate - aged 18-24

London average Neighbours 2.5% Hackney – 2.9% Haringey – 2.9% Lewisham – 3.1% Southwark – 3.1% Benchmarking data (Oct 2017)

Reducing In Inequality

Neighbourhoods & Growth

The percentage point gap between the claimant rate of those aged 18-24 and the overall claimant rate

Target: Narrow the gap with the overall claimant rate RAG rating:

What does the data say? There was a slight increase in the gap between the 18- 24 claimant rate and the overall claimant rate likely due to the academic year coming to an end.

R

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7

The percentage point gap between the claimant rate of those aged 18-24 and the overall claimant rate

The percentage point gap between the claimant rate of those aged 18-24 and the overall claimant rate Target

London average Neighbours 0.5% Hackney – 0.5% Haringey – 0.6% Lewisham – 0.6% Southwark – 0% Benchmarking data (Oct 2017)

Reducing In Inequality

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Claimant rate - aged 50+

Target: For monitoring purposes only RAG rating:

What does the data say? The 50+ claimant rate has decreased by 0.3 percentage points compared to Q1. This is marginally higher than the baseline of 4.2%

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5

Claimant rate – aged 50+

Claimant rate - aged 50+ Target

London average Neighbours 2.6% Hackney – 4.5% Haringey – 3.6% Lewisham – 3.7% Southwark – 4.9% Benchmarking data (Oct 2017)

Reducing In Inequality

Neighbourhoods & Growth

The percentage point gap between the claimant rate of those aged 50-64 and the overall claimant rate

Target: Narrow the gap with the overall claimant rate RAG rating:

What does the data say? The 2017/18 target is to narrow the gap with the Lambeth claimant rate. In Q2, the gap is 1.9%. This is a decrease of 0.1 percentage points compared to Q1, but higher than the baseline.

A

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5

The percentage point gap between the claimant rate of those aged 50-64 and the overall claimant rate

The percentage point gap between the claimant rate of those aged 50-64 and the

• verall claimant rate

Target

London average Neighbours 0.6% Hackney – 2.1% Haringey – 1.3% Lewisham – 1.2% Southwark – 1.8% Benchmarking data (Oct 2017)

Reducing In Inequality

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Proportion of people aged 16-64 claiming out of work benefits

Target: Less than the London average RAG rating:

What does the data say? DWP have not published the latest data for this indicator - except to update the population figures which has led to the reported figure reducing to 8.1% from 8.2% (however the number of claimants remains 19,750).

A

7 7.2 7.4 7.6 7.8 8 8.2 8.4 2017-06-01 2017-09-01

Proportion of people aged 16-64 claiming out of work benefits

Proportion of people aged 16-64 claiming out of work benefits Target

London average Neighbours 7.5% Benchmarking data (August 2016)

Reducing In Inequality

Neighbourhoods & Growth

The percentage point gap between people aged 16-64 claiming out of work benefits and the London average.

Target: Narrow the gap with the London average RAG rating:

What does the data say? The DWP have not published more recent data so this is the same data as reported last quarter where there was a 0.1% reduction in the gap with the London average.

G

0.84 0.86 0.88 0.90 0.92 0.94 0.96 0.98 1.00 1.02 2017-06-01 2017-09-01

The percentage point gap between people aged 16-64 claiming out of work benefits and the London average

The percentage point gap between people aged 16-64 claiming out of work benefits and the London average. Target

London average Neighbours 0.9% gap Benchmarking data (gap with London average)

Reducing In Inequality

Adults & Public Health

Permanent admissions to residential and nursing care homes for 18-64, per 100,000 population (Part 1)

Q2 Target: 8.00 RAG rating:

What does the data say? The admission rate for the 18 to 64 category remains very low and within the target set. There have been a total of 4 admissions so far this financial year and 3 of these were for service users with learning disabilities.

G

0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0

Permanent admissions to residential and nursing care homes for 18-64, per 100,000 population (Part 1)

Permanent admissions per 100,000 population

London average Neighbours 8.6 Hackney – 12.5 Haringey – 7.3 Lewisham – 13.1 Southwark – 3.6 Benchmarking data (2016/2017)

Reducing In Inequality

Adults & Public Health

Permanent admissions to residential and nursing care homes for over 65s, per 100,000 population (Part 2)

Q2 Target: 286.7 RAG rating:

What does the data say? There have been a total of 44 new admissions reported in this financial year for the over 65s age group and the

• utturn is significantly better than the target set, which

is to have no more than 68. Only 5 admissions were for residential care , the remainder were for EMI and nursing placements.

G

0.0 50.0 100.0 150.0 200.0 250.0 300.0 350.0 400.0 450.0 500.0

Permanent admissions to residential and nursing care homes for over 65s, per 100,000 population (Part 2)

Lambeth (avg)

London average Neighbours 438.1 Hackney – 477.8 Haringey – 477.4 Lewisham – 687.4 Southwark – 398.3 Benchmarking data (2016/17)

Reducing In Inequality

Adults & Public Health

Proportion of older people (65+) who are still at home 91 days after discharge from hospital into reablement / rehabilitation services

Target: 92% RAG rating:

What does the data say? The most recent outturn data is from Q1 2017/18 and shows performance for this indicator to not only be exceeding target but also above the London average.

G

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%

Proportion of older people (65+) who are still at home 91 days after discharge from hospital into reablement / rehabilitation services

Lambeth (avg)

Benchmarking data London average Neighbours 85.5% Hackney – 88% Haringey – 82.5% Lewisham – 92.9% Southwark – 83.3%

Reducing In Inequality

Adults & Public Health

Proportion of adults with learning disabilities who live in their own home or with their family

Target: 66% RAG rating:

What does the data say? Good performance has been maintained in Q2 at 77% and although has fallen very slightly since Q1 it remains considerably above target.

G

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0% 80.0% 90.0% 100.0%

Proportion of adults with learning disabilities who live in their own home or with their family

Lambeth (avg)

Benchmarking data (2016/17) London average Neighbours 71.3% Hackney – 74.6% Haringey – 78.3% Lewisham – 77.4% Southwark – 65.4%

Strong and Sustainable Neighbourhoods

Green

• Private dwellings & HMOs

improved to Housing Act standards

• Lambeth Council homes

brought up to LHS standard in- year Amber Red

• Victims of serious youth

violence

• Violence against the person –

with injury offences recorded

• Percentage of land with

unacceptable levels of litter

• Percentage of land with

unacceptable levels of detritus

• Percentage of land with

unacceptable levels of graffiti

• Levels of NO2 (Lambeth)
• Number of prosecutions against

rogue landlords

• People killed or seriously injured

in road traffic accidents

Strong & Sustainable Neighbourhoods

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Victims of Serious Youth Violence

Target: No higher than previous year RAG rating:

What does the data say? The number of victims of youth violence continued to increase in Q2 to 403 over the last 12 months. This represents an increase of 31% over the last 12 months and is the 4th highest across the whole of London

250 270 290 310 330 350 370 2016-06-01 2016-09-01 2016-12-01 2017-03-01 2017-06-01 2017-09-01

Victims of Serious Youth Violence

Victims of Serious Youth Violence Target

Benchmarking data (rolling year to August 2017) London average Neighbours N / A Hackney 254 Haringey 324 Lewisham 323 Southwark 439

R

Strong & Sustainable Neighbourhoods

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Violence against the person - with injury offences recorded

Target: Reduction from 2016/17 baseline RAG rating:

What does the data say? This indicator is calculated on a 12 month rolling basis, with data available 3 months in arrears. Compared to the previous quarter, Violence against the Person - with injury offences recorded remained virtually unchanged with 8 crimes less. Comparing the most recent 12 months to the previous 12 months, Violence against the Person is also unchanged with just 1 crime more.

R

3550 3600 3650 3700 3750 3800 2016-06-01 2016-09-01 2016-12-01 2017-03-01 2017-06-01 2017-09-01

Violence against the person - with injury offences recorded

Violence against the person - with injury offences recorded Target

London average Neighbours 2377 Hackney 2887 Haringey 3046 Lewisham 2956 Southwark 3218 Benchmarking data (2015/16)

Strong & Sustainable Neighbourhoods

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Percentage total waste that is sent for reuse, recycling or composting

Target: 32% RAG rating:

What does the data say? The most recent data in Q1 shows a small increase in the percentage of total waste that is sent for reuse, recycling or composting over the past year. Q2 data is not yet available. Following the rescheduling of waste collection and street cleaning services a new spreadsheet has been devised to reflect the new service offer but is not yet in a comparable format to previously reported data.

20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34

Percentage total waste that is sent for reuse, recycling

• r composting (NI192)

Percentage total waste that is sent for reuse, recycling or composting (NI192) Target

Benchmarking data (2015/16) London average Neighbours 32.32 Hackney 24.83 Haringey 36.16 Lewisham 18.00 Southwark 34.95

Strong & Sustainable Neighbourhoods

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Residual household waste per household

Target: 446kg RAG rating:

What does the data say? Q2 data is not yet available. Following the rescheduling

• f waste collection and street cleaning services a new

spreadsheet has been devised to reflect the new service offer but is not yet in a comparable format to previously reported data.

425.00 430.00 435.00 440.00 445.00 450.00 455.00 2015/16 2016/17

Residual household waste per household (NI191)

Residual household waste per household (NI191) Series 2

London average Neighbours 585.1 Hackney 609.3 Haringey 521 Lewisham 698.3 Southwark 558.7 Benchmarking data

Strong & Sustainable Neighbourhoods

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Percentage of land and highways with unacceptable levels of litter

Target: 8% RAG rating:

What does the data say? This tranche (Apr – Jul) has not achieved target and the score has declined since the previous tranche period (Dec – Mar). Litter inspection scores often have a seasonal

• implication. The bulk of the surveys were conducted during

July which typically has higher footfall on streets due to the warmer weather. This month we have reinstated two cages with litter bin emptying being a priority.

R

2 4 6 8 10 12 2015-09-01 2015-12-01 2016-03-01 2016-09-01 2016-12-01 2017-03-01 2017-09-01

Percentage of land and highways with unacceptable levels of litter

Percentage of land and highways with unacceptable levels of litter Target

London average Neighbours Unavailable Hackney 3.9% Haringey 5% Benchmarking data (March 2017)

Strong & Sustainable Neighbourhoods

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Percentage of land and highways with unacceptable levels of detritus

Target: 10% RAG rating:

What does the data say? This tranche period (Apr – Jul) has not achieved target and has seen a decline from the last tranche (Dec – Mar). The majority of roads in Lambeth now receive a sweep every 4 weeks which alternates between a mechanical and manual sweep. On heavily parked roads a mechanical sweep is not always effective and therefore the roads rely solely on the manual sweep.

R

2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 2015-09-01 2015-12-01 2016-03-01 2016-09-01 2016-12-01 2017-03-01 2017-09-01

Percentage of land and highways with unacceptable levels of detritus

Percentage of land and highways with unacceptable levels of detritus Target

London average Neighbours Unavailable Hackney 2.5% Haringey 2% Benchmarking data (March 2017)

Strong & Sustainable Neighbourhoods

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Percentage of land and highways with unacceptable levels of graffiti

Target: 6% RAG rating:

What does the data say? The inspections during tranche 1 (Apr – Jul) achieved the same performance as the last tranche (Dec – Mar). The graffiti inspections include any visible graffiti, including that

• n private land or any located in another borough. This

makes it difficult to manage when the removal is not within

• ur remit. One of the biggest challenges is graffiti on

Network Rail owned property.

R

2 4 6 8 10 12 2015-09-01 2015-12-01 2016-03-01 2016-09-01 2016-12-01 2017-03-01 2017-09-01

Percentage of land and highways with unacceptable levels of graffiti

Percentage of land and highways with unacceptable levels of graffiti Target

London average Neighbours Unavailable Hackney 2% Haringey 2.8% Benchmarking data (March 2017)

Strong & Sustainable Neighbourhoods

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Reduce levels of NO2 (Lambeth)

Target: 40 RAG rating:

What does the data say? Based on Quarter 2 data, the levels of NO2 in Lambeth show a decrease (but data is only available for July for Streatham). But more data is needed to be able to confirm there is a fall in air pollution in the borough. This data also hasn't been ratified yet by Kings College London; ratification will take place in early 2018. Lambeth continues to deliver its Air Quality Action Plan (www.lambeth.gov.uk/AQAP) to improve air quality in the borough.

R

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 2017-06-01 2017-09-01

Reduce levels of NO2 (Lambeth)

Air quality: Reduce levels of NO2 (Lambeth) Series 2

London average Neighbours N / A N / A Benchmarking data

Strong & Sustainable Neighbourhoods

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Number of private dwellings and HMOs improved to compliance with statutory Housing Act standards

Q2 Target: 70 RAG rating:

What does the data say? This is a cumulative KPI and at mid-year, 53% of the annual target has been delivered.

G

35 74

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 2017-06-01 2017-07-01 2017-08-01 2017-09-01

Number of private dwellings and HMOs improved to compliance with statutory Housing Act standards

Number of private dwellings and HMOs

London average Neighbours Local KPI Local KPI Benchmarking data

Strong & Sustainable Neighbourhoods

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Number of Lambeth Council homes brought up to LHS standard in-year

Target: 5083 RAG rating:

What does the data say? This is a cumulative indicator. The KPI is currently on track to achieve the end of year target. Due to the nature of the work, a larger number of units is expected to be completed in Q3 and Q4.

1056 2654 3751 6789 1845 2025

1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000

Number of Lambeth Council homes brought up to LHS standard in-year

Number of Lambeth homes brought up to LHS standard

London average Neighbours Local KPI Local KPI Benchmarking data

G

Strong & Sustainable Neighbourhoods

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Number of prosecutions/civil penalties against rogue landlords

Q2 Target: 8 RAG rating:

What does the data say? This is a cumulative indicator and 16 prosecutions are expected to be achieved by the end of the year. There was 1 prosecution in Q2 with a number in the pipeline, however performance remains below target.

1

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 2017-06-01 2017-07-01 2017-08-01 2017-09-01

Number of prosecutions/civil penalties against rogue landlords

Number of prosecutions/civil penalties against rogue landlords

R

London average Neighbours Local KPI Local KPI Benchmarking data

Strong & Sustainable Neighbourhoods

Neighbourhoods & Growth

Number of people killed or seriously injured in road traffic accidents

Target: No more than 88 RAG rating:

What does the data say? The number of KSIs in the borough had been on a downward trend in recent years but has risen to 122 in 2016 (the most recent data we have access to, for period 1 Jan to 31 Dec 2016), an increase from 99 KSIs in the borough in 2015. Data for Q2 is delayed due to compatibility and data quality issues following the introduction of a new Met Police collision recording system.

20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Number of people killed or seriously injured in road traffic accidents

Number of people killed or seriously injured in road traffic accidents

R

London average Neighbours N / A N / A Benchmarking data