Waste management study advisory group

1
Waste management study advisory group

• Study Team
• Antony Clark
• John Lincoln
• Kirsty Whyte
• Helen Peak

2
Objectives for today

• to inform the group of the Audit Scotland
  approach to studies
• to discuss the study brief
• to discuss the methodology for the project

3
Public sector audit arrangements

• Auditor General
• for Scotland
• audit of health sector
• NDPBs, Executive
• FE colleges, others

• Accounts Commission
• audit of local councils
• police and fire services

Audit Scotland
(and private firms) doing the work
4
The role of VFM studies

• to inform the public, Parliament and others
• to challenge councils
• identify scope for improvement
• to support councils
• provide comparative performance information
• identify good practice

5
Performance audit studies

• how good is performance?
• is performance improving?

6
The study process
7
The role of the study advisory group

• members consist of professional and technical
  advisers drawn from a cross-section of
  stakeholders
• members sit on the group in a personal capacity
• the primary role of the advisory group is to
  provide expert advice and comment on
• study scope and methodology
• study findings
• the final report
• the Accounts Commission and the Auditor General
  retain responsibility for the content of the
  final report

8
Why look at waste management?

• Audit Scotland future study programme
  consultation
• benchmarking refuse collection (April 2000)
• can the extent of change be delivered over a
  short timescale to meet EU targets?
• what is the level of investment required?
• is there sufficient capacity in the system to
  deliver change?
• will all of agencies involved be able to deliver
  the change required?

9
Progress towards meeting targets
10
Key question 1

• what progress has been made to date in meeting
  the targets in the national waste plan?
• what is each councils contribution towards
  meeting the Scotland target?
• do waste plans reflect good practice?
• has the investment from the Strategic Waste Fund
  delivered value for money
• to what extent are the strategy objectives for
  sustainability being met?

11
Key question 2

• What more needs to be done to meet the Directive
  targets (and how much will it cost)?
• are the projections and monitoring arrangements
  underpinning the National Waste Strategy robust?
• what further needs to be done to meet the targets
• what happens if the targets cant be met
• what measures are being considered to reduce the
  amount of waste going to landfill?

12
Key Question 3

• Are councils, SEPA and the Executive in a
  position to deliver the changes required?
• how does SEPAs involvement in the National Waste
  Strategy affect its regulatory role?
• are the facilities and resources required to meet
  the Landfill Directive likely to be delivered on
  time?

13
Study methodology

• survey of 32 councils (including financial
  information)
• fieldwork in a number of councils areas, SEPA and
  the Executive and visits to private sector
  providers
• discussions with other stakeholders (including
  private sector providers and community based
  initiatives)
• the development of case studies
• desk research (including the production of a
  timeline)

14
Potential fieldwork sites

• Council Type
• Glasgow Urban
• Edinburgh Urban
• Dundee Urban
• Argyll Bute Rural
• Perth and Kinross Rural
• Highland Rural
• Fife Mixed
• South Lanarkshire Mixed

15
Potential study outputs (1)

• key points summary (4 - 6 pages) - main audience
  Ministers, MSPs, and council members
• summary report (8 -12 pages) - Council chief
  executives, senior mangers and interest groups
• main report (around 40 pages) - main audience
  Directors of Environmental Services Finance
  Scottish Executive
• Scottish Parliament - Briefings for relevant
  committees

16
Potential study outputs (2)

• presentations / seminars to stakeholder groups
• other outputs identified as part of the study
• detailed feedback on council surveys
• a data compendium including a summary of the
  councils survey findings
• follow up audit methodology

17
Timetable

• finalise study brief January
• firm up study methodology February
• fieldwork visits March - June
• information data analysis July - August
• report writing September - October
• report consultation October - November
• report publication December - January