January 2013

South Downs

National Park Authority

Performance Assessment

Final Report

Table of Contents

1. Introduction .................................................................................................. 3

2. Background to NPAPA ..................................................................................... 3

3. The South Downs NPA performance assessment process..................................... 4

4. Team Considerations ...................................................................................... 5

5. Progress and Commentary: Areas of Strength ................................................... 6

6. Progress and Commentary: Areas for Improvement ........................................... 9

7. Good Practice and Special Features ................................................................ 12

8. Recommendations........................................................................................ 13

Introduction

1.1 The South Downs NPA (the Authority) was established on 1 April 2010 following

an extensive designation process based upon Government proposals set out in

1999. The Authority became operational with effect from 1 April 2011. Members

were appointed at the start of the shadow year (2010/2011) and they were

supported initially by a small team of interim senior staff. Recruitment to the

permanent establishment continued through 2011/12 with the chief executive

taking up his post in January 2012. From the outset the Authority placed strong

emphasis on an enabling role rather than the direct provision of services. This

approach has continued and for example, was a particular determinant in the

decision to outsource its corporate services.

1.2 In order to articulate what it saw as its role and aspirations the Authority set

down a set of Guiding Principles which together with the statutory National Park

purposes and duty, have guided the work of the Authority pending the adoption

of is first National Park Management Plan (NPMP).

1.3 A feature of this current National Park Authority Performance Assessment

(NPAPA) programme is the raising of expectations across the lines of enquiry to

increase the standards of performance. In the case of the South Downs NPA and

in recognition of its short life the NPAPA framework was amended to provide for

the focus of the review to be on the progress to date made by the Authority and

on its prospects for future improvement.

2. Background to NPAPA

2.1 National Park Authorities (NPA) are required to achieve best value through

structured approaches which improve their effectiveness, efficiency and

economy.

2.2 To provide an objective external assessment of the individual Authority’s

performance, each Authority is subject to periodic review through the National

Park Authority Performance Assessment. [This was the first such review for the

South Downs NPA.]

2.3 The NPAPA methodology uses a peer review team approach which is led and

facilitated by SOLACE Enterprises. The process was developed and first applied

for most NPAs in 2005. It is based on best practice assessment for public bodies

and uses techniques similar to the former Comprehensive Performance

Assessment. NPAPA has been agreed by Defra, the Department for

Communities and Local Government, the Audit Commission and the English

National Park Authorities Association as the appropriate approach for NPAs.

2.4 The NPAPA process is intended to give each Authority a better appreciation of its

strengths and weaknesses in order to assist it to improve the quality of the

important services which it offers to the public. In the case of the South Downs

NPA the main thrust of the process was to assess what progress the Authority

has made since it was established on 1 April 2010 and became fully operational

on 1 April 2011.

2.5 The aims of peer assessment are to:

•

Provide an objective, robust and managed external challenge to the

Authority’s self-assessment of its current performance;

•

Encourage thinking about strengths and areas for improvement;

•

Contribute to strong and forward looking improvement planning.

2.6 The SOLACE Enterprises model of peer assessment for Authority’s involves an

NPA Chief Executive, a local Authority Chief Executive, an NPA Member and an

NPA Staff reviewer, all working with a SOLACE Enterprises facilitator for 4 or 5

days on site. This model has been specifically designed for providing peer

assessment for national parks.

3. The South Downs NPA performance assessment process

3.1 The assessment of South Downs NPA began several weeks before the November

2012 on site period. A provisional timetable of activities was drawn up and

background documentation was circulated to the peer review team prior to their

visit. This included the Authority’s own self-assessment which was considered

closely by the whole team to help determine the focus of the assessment.

3.2 The team was:

• Chris Billinge, Member, Lake District NPA,

• Nicola Bulbeck, Chief Executive, Teignbridge District Council

• Graham Essex-Crosby, SOLACE Enterprises facilitator

• John Packman, Chief Executive, Broads Authority.

• David Wyborn, Head of Planning & Sustainable Development, Exmoor NPA

3.3 On the evening prior to the visit the team met to prepare for the assessment

process. In that preparatory meeting the team:

• Reviewed the proposed methodology for the assessment.

• Reviewed the background information provided by the Authority, including

the self-assessment, the related evidence and documentation.

• Agreed initial lines of enquiry to be pursued during the visit and any

additional activities and documentation that was needed to gather

information on these.

• Confirmed the team roles and responsibilities for the assessment period.

3.4 The team had regard to the whole of the published Key Lines of Enquiry for

NPAPA (as amended for a new authority), but gave particular attention to the

issues that appeared from the documentation to warrant more detailed focus. In

assessments such as these, the team cannot look at absolutely everything in the

same level of detail and the process needs to be bounded in some way.

3.5 The various methods that the team used to gather information included:

• Face to face and telephone interviews with a cross section of stakeholders

from inside and outside the Authority.

• Small group discussions with staff, Members and partners.

• Tours of the area to familiarise the team with the National Park.

• A review of documents provided by the Authority before and during the visit.

3.6 Throughout the process the team held a continuing dialogue with the Authority

to reflect back what they were learning and the way that their views were

forming. This provided the Authority with an opportunity to present the team

with additional information and also helped to generate ownership of our

feedback and the thinking and reasoning behind our views.

3.7 On the final day of the visit the team verbally fed back the results of the

information gathering process in a more structured way to a group of Members

and senior managers.

3.8 The team took care to note areas of strength as well as areas for improvement.

However, the main aim of the assessment process is to stimulate improvement,

so comparatively more attention has been given in this report to explaining and

evidencing the areas on which the team believes the Authority should focus its

attention in the future. Indeed the team judged that its key role and

responsibility is to help the Authority generate the best improvement plan

possible and this consideration has influenced the form of this report. The SDNPA

made it clear from the outset that this was also what it was seeking from the

process.

4. Team Considerations

4.1 The NPAPA framework gave structure to the team’s evidence gathering and

review. There was evidence of good and positive progress. At this stage of the

Authority’s development there were also gaps and significant areas for

improvement. Often the gaps and significant areas for improvement were to be

found in the same Key Lines of Enquiry as evidence of good and positive

progress. The extent of these differences within each Key Line of Enquiry means

that in the team’s view the conventional assessment approach would not give a

‘true and fair’ picture of the achievements to date of the Authority.

4.2 In order to help the Authority generate a robust and deliverable improvement

plan the team concluded that a tailor-made narrative report without scores,

separating out the strengths from the areas for improvement would be most

appropriate and of most value to the Authority.

4.3 The team are of the view that it has been a good time to review the Authority,

its direction of travel and its progress. An NPAPA re-assessment should be

undertaken at an appropriate time in the Authority’s development and a

recommendation to this effect is included at section 8 below.

5. Progress and Commentary: Areas of Strength

5.1 Progress has been made in producing the strategic planning framework for the

Authority. A vision “2050 Vision for the South Downs” has been agreed with

partners and stakeholders. This was developed through extensive consultation

and participative community workshops.

5.2 The newly published State of the Park Report is attractive and informative. The

special qualities of the South Downs are clearly identified and are supported by

case studies, maps and factual information. The report is also clear about gaps

in the data and evidence and research has already been commissioned with a

view to filling some of those gaps.

5.3 Work is underway on producing the National Park Management Plan through a

series of technical working groups and stakeholder workshops and is being

progressed through the South Downs Partnership. The target completion date is

November/December 2013. A set of ‘emerging priorities’ are being developed in

discussion with partners and these link to National Park purposes within the

wider context of sustainable development. Each priority area is being developed

through a hierarchical approach of themes, outcomes and 5-year outputs.

Through good communication and positive engagement, partners are closely and

actively engaged in the NPMP process. This timetable is in advance of the

statutory deadline of the end of March 2014.

5.4 In the absence of a NPMP, the Authority has determined that the overarching

purposes and duty together with the Guiding Principles should complete the

‘golden thread’ and link the vision for the Park to the Authority’s business plan,

to service plans and to the staff performance development review system. The

business plan “South Downs National Park Authority Business Plan 2012/13” is

structured around National Park purposes and duty.

5.5 High level priorities are set out in the business plan with service plans providing

the supporting delivery programme. Business plan development involves both

Members and staff. Performance against the business plan objectives and targets

is monitored by the senior management team and by Members.

5.6 In order to offer support to local communities and to provide funding for projects

across the park the Authority established the South Downs Sustainable

Communities Fund (SCF). The fund is used to support community-based

initiatives and grants of up to £20,000 are made against agreed criteria. SCF

funding has been used effectively to lever in matched funding. The Authority has

also established a Major Projects Fund (MPF) to provide money to support larger-

scale projects to be developed or delivered with key partners.

5.7 The Authority has built effective relationships with key partners and has

established an impressive track record of attracting external funding, for

example the Nature Improvement Area (NIA), High Level Stewardship funding

and successful bids for Local Sustainable Transport funding.

5.8 A landscape-scale approach is being developed in order to set objectives and

priorities for the South Downs in relation to conservation and enhancement.

Early work is characterised by partnership working and by commissioning further

research. The NIA project “South Downs Way Ahead” exemplifies this approach

with 29 partners, a total project cost of £3m and a footprint centred on the

South Downs Way that covers the whole length of the national park. This is a

high profile project being one of 12 such national projects to receive Government

funding (£608,000). There is a range of research projects being undertaken with

partners including spatial mapping (Forestry Research), climate change

vulnerability (Natural England), habitat and species baseline data (Biodiversity

Records Centre), Farmland Birds (Natural England and RSPB) and “In the High

Woods” archaeological project (Chichester DC and National Trust).

5.9 Progress on the second statutory purpose – promoting opportunities for

understanding and enjoyment of the special qualities of the South Downs NPA –

is characterised by a range of research projects but also with a number of

delivery projects. The “Learning and Research Partnership” is a collaborative

venture with 16 higher and further education institutions representing a wide

range of subject specialisms and research interests. “Our South Downs” offers an

innovative approach to outdoor learning and aims to connect children and young

people with the special qualities of the National Park through the 738 schools in

or near the Park. SCF monies have been used to support delivery of a range of

projects including the Rother Valley Forest Schools Cluster, Butser Ancient Farm

Visitor Centre, community shop developments and the development of a visitor

centre for the Birling gap.

5.10 Whilst the highway authorities took the decision not to delegate rights of way

functions to the NPA, the development of the Public Rights of Way Accord allows

the Authority to encourage improvements and to achieve consistency of

standards. A local access forum has also been established.

5.11 The Authority is engaged in a number of demonstration projects in order to

further its understanding of the area and the issues and challenges faced by

local communities. These projects include work through Young Pioneers,

engaging with black and ethnic minority communities through MOSAIC and work

with specialist groups such as MIND and the Grace Eyre Foundation. In addition

the Authority is working with the Little Green School for boys with emotional and

behavioural difficulties to develop the school grounds as a resource for outdoor

learning.

5.12 There is direct engagement with a number of voluntary groups, the largest of

which is the South Downs Volunteer Ranger Service (established in 1981).

Volunteers contribute over 5,000 work days each year and their work is

supported and directed by the Authority’s Area Managers and Rangers many of

whom transferred from the predecessor South Downs Joint Committee. The

managers and rangers are very much valued and are seen as an effective front-

facing resource for the NPA. They have built positive relationships with

communities, landowners and farmers and have used their inter-personal skills

to good effect in problem solving.

5.13 There are 15 local authorities with some of their area inside the boundaries of

the National Park and this provides for a complex challenge to the delivery of

planning services – Local Plan, development management and minerals and

waste planning. On the advice of the Secretary of State when designating the

NPA, the Authority set up a series of agency agreements with the local

authorities for the delivery of its development management function. This

approach is also consistent with the Authority’s Guiding Principles since it

demonstrates partnership working and allows the Authority to pursue a

strategic-focussed enabling role. Currently 11 of the 15 local authorities operate

within the terms of the agency arrangements. The service for the remaining 4

local authorities has been taken back in house at their request. The development

of this service has been a key priority for the organisation and additional

resources were introduced to implement the new planning application

management system. Whilst some problems remain with the implementation of

the system, work is now well in hand to introduce a robust framework of Service

Level Agreements (SLAs) building on the willingness of officers and Members

from all participating authorities to make it work.

5.14 A number of studies have been commissioned to support the development of the

Local Plan. Pending the finalisation of the NPMP a number of partnership-based

initiatives have also been set up to support the delivery of socio-economic

benefits including the biosphere reserve project with Brighton & Hove City

Council and the Collabor8 sustainable tourism project. An internal group has

been charged with working up an action plan aimed at improving the Authority’s

own environmental performance.

5.15 As part of its consideration of the governance arrangements for the new

organisation an early decision was taken to outsource corporate support services

as much as possible. Agreements are now in place to deliver financial services

(Brighton & Hove City Council), legal services (West Sussex County Council),

Monitoring Officer (Hampshire County Council) and ICT (Advanced 365). The

Authority has put in place a full suite of governance policies and procedures

covering such matters as schemes of delegations, Standing Orders, Member-

officer protocols, whistleblowing and anti-fraud and corruption. A Standards and

Audit Committee has been established with independent members.

5.16 The arrangements with Brighton & Hove cover the complete range of financial

services including financial planning, accounting, creditor and payroll payments,

insurances, treasury management and internal audit. These arrangements

provide a robust framework to make the proper stewardship of public funds

possible. The statutory role of Chief Financial Officer (CFO) is provided by the

City Council and the CFO and her Deputy are part of the Authority’s Senior

Management Team (SMT). A Medium Term Financial Strategy and capital

programme are in place.

5.17 The Authority has adopted a prudent approach to its budget setting. Medium

term affordability is a key driver and as a consequence, the permanent staffing

structure and other revenue expenses are conditioned by the indicative Defra

grant settlement for 2014/15. The budget monitoring process provides for

monthly reporting to SMT and quarterly to Members. Annual Accounts are

published in accordance with statutory requirements and, whilst the Accounts for

the shadow year (2010/11) received a qualified audit opinion, those for the first

full operational year (2011/12) received an unqualified audit certificate.

Procurement systems are in place and the appointment of a finance and

procurement manager should deliver further improvements and provide closer

professional liaison with Brighton & Hove.

5.18 The Authority has recently completed the purchase of an interest in Capron

House and which, as the South Downs Centre, will be the main organisational

hub. This is the first set of premises to be owned by the Authority with its other

delivery points being shared with partners.

5.19 The 27 Members of the Authority took up their roles at the start of the shadow

year and initially they were supported by a small team of officers, many of whom

were on interim contracts. Staff recruitment took place through 2011/12 whilst

staff from the former South Downs Joint Committee transferred to the Authority

in April 2011. A constructive relationship is being built with the trade union and

with staff representatives. In January 2012 a staff survey was undertaken and

the resulting action plan has been developed by staff and Members.

5.20 The Chief Executive communicates regularly with staff, Members and volunteers

and is establishing good relationships with external partners. The Senior

Management Team (SMT) is well regarded and viewed as high performing. The

Team offers visible and effective leadership and is seen as keen to empower

staff. Within SMT there is a feeling of mutual trust and respect that offers the

potential of a corporate approach rather than one built around service silos. The

staff are committed and proud to be working for the National Park and delivering

its purposes.

5.21 Member development has been a feature of the early life of the Authority with

induction training involving other national parks and key strategic partners, a

series of regular workshops, specialist training in matters such as planning and

area familiarisation tours. Members are also subject to an annual 1:1 session

with the Chair and Vice Chair of the Authority. One outcome of this extensive

Member engagement programme is that Members on the Planning Committee

accept collective responsibility for their decisions.

6. Progress and Commentary: Areas for Improvement

6.1 In spite of extensive consultation the “2050 Vision for the South Downs” is

lengthy, arguably could apply to any number of national parks and is unwieldy in

terms of day to day use. The Authority and its lead partners need to produce a

memorable summary of the 2050 vision that is inspirational and becomes a

mantra for day to day use.

6.2 Partner commitment to the preparation of the NPMP needs to be maintained

through to delivery. There is a growing concern from lead partners that in the

absence of an agreed strategic plan there is a lack of ability to make progress

and move to the delivery stage. Whilst the target date for completion of the

NPMP (Nov/Dec 2013) is within the timeframe set by Defra, the process has

involved extensive consultation with communities, partners and stakeholders

many of whom have been involved in such processes over a number of years.

Consultees are supportive of the Authority’s work on the NPMP but partners are

coming to the view that progress is slow and the lack of a plan is causing inertia.

A number of interviewees expressed concern over the emerging priorities

document which they felt had not been readily understood by everyone. In

addition a number of partners considered that the slow progress was actively

holding back work on the jobs and growth agenda for the Park and its

hinterland.

6.3 The use of the statutory purposes and duty coupled with the Authority’s Guiding

Principles has offered an interim solution. Increasingly this is too broad-brushed

and suffers from an absence of the keener focus on an agreed set of key

priorities. Until the NPMP is available little progress can be made on finalising

such matters as delivery mechanisms, identifying lead partners and establishing

effective means of measuring and reviewing project outcomes as they relate to

the ‘state of the park’. The lack of an agreed NPMP is also diluting the

organisation’s corporate and strategic planning framework, for example in terms

of the ‘golden thread’ and business planning.

6.4 The Authority has made good use of partnership working in terms of strategy

development and project submissions for funding. The process of partnership

working however can become bureaucratic and less effective resulting in delays

to decision-making. Care needs to be taken that the work and proliferation of

partnerships – i.e. partnership overload - does not go unchecked.

6.5 Greater rigour needs to be brought to the Sustainable Communities Fund (SCF)

project approval process and to ensuring that there is effective project

monitoring to ensure identified outcomes are delivered. Concern has been

expressed that the distribution of SCF grants has been opportunistic and they do

not appear to be delivering to any long term key strategic priorities. The

Authority has put aside significant sums of money into its SCF - £400,000 in

2011/12 and £300,000 in 2012/13 and subsequent years. To date over 75

schemes have received funding from the SCF in the form of grants ranging from

a few hundred pounds to £20,000. Applicants are required to produce a project

initiation document setting out the nature of their project, the financial

implications and the deliverable outcomes of the scheme. Many of the schemes

are commendable and worthwhile in their own right and have been developed

through the knowledge and networks built up by the area staff.

6.6 Accountability and performance management are not yet fully effective. The

Authority has established a performance framework that sets out roles and

responsibilities across the organisation. Broad objectives are laid down in the

business plan with service plans providing the supporting detailed targets that

are cascaded to teams and individual members of staff. Monitoring is undertaken

monthly by SMT and quarterly by Members of the Resources and Performance

Committee. There is a focus on processes such that Members review progress on

the delivery of tasks including SCF funded projects but there is little

consideration of outputs, outcomes and the quality of service delivery. There is

little evidence of seeking customer feedback or of Members receiving reports on

measurable and quality outputs for scrutiny. Objectives and commitments are

often not SMART which makes it difficult for Members to review effectively, to

challenge and to hold officers to account.

6.7 Some volunteers feel that they are not supported by the corporate centre. The

role of volunteers as a public face for the Authority is more critical given the

Authority’s focus on its enabling and facilitating role. On a day to day basis

volunteers work well with the area staff and carry out a range of tasks. Decision-

making by the corporate centre however appears slow and is having a negative

impact on the relationship between the volunteers and the Authority. There is an

opportunity for the volunteers to make a greater contribution to the work of the

Authority but this may be at risk if the relationship is not fully supported.

6.8 The timetable and resources for preparation of the Local Plan need to be

reconsidered. The preparation of the Local Plan is a high priority for the

Authority. The current project plan indicates that the submission stage will not

be reached until 2016 having ‘slipped’ from 2015. The reasons for this slippage

are unclear and some Members seemed unaware of the change. The Local Plan is

critical to help ensure the delivery of sustainable development and the socio-

economic duty and indeed the Authority has acknowledged that this was an area

where performance to date has been weak. The Local Plan is also essential in

providing clarity to the partners delivering the planning service.

6.9 There is a need to review the staff structure. The overall shape of the

organisation together with the allocation of resources between teams would

merit consideration. Any new structure should reflect the need for additional

capacity for delivering the NPMP priorities within a sound governance framework

and for ensuring for example, that planning services attain high quality in terms

of levels of performance.

6.10 The workload in setting up any organisation can be very onerous and

demanding. Staff are enthusiastic about the National Park but some felt their

goodwill, retention and wellbeing are at risk due to current workloads. Staff

reported that there was little time for reflection making the desire to become a

learning organisation more difficult to achieve. Resources need to be deployed to

areas of priority in order that time critical projects can be completed ahead of

current plans. Fast-tracking key plan preparation should provide greater focus

for the organisation in completing its strategic planning framework with a view to

enabling an earlier transition to delivery mode.

6.11 The Authority has low public visibility. The area teams are small when viewed

against the geographical size and nature of the Park. Whilst initiatives such as

the online Forum help raise the profile of the National Park and the Authority,

the impact is at best uncertain and probably low key. The Authority and its

partners are undertaking some positive work from small community-based

projects funded through SCF up to significant national level work such as

Sustainable Transport Fund and the NIA “South Downs Way Ahead” projects.

There is a need to tell people, communities, visitors, stakeholders and interested

parties what is happening in their national park.

6.12 National Park status was hard fought and there is an urgent and continuing need

to demonstrate that the park designation is bringing added value to the South

Downs and to the National Park family as a whole. In the current economic

climate there are increasing and unrelenting pressures on public bodies and on

public expenditure. There is a sense in which the Authority has yet to rise to this

challenge in terms of the national agenda. A number of National Parks are

leading on the delivery of exemplar projects with regional and national

significance. Consideration should be given to identifying a large rural issues

project and for the Authority to offer leadership at a national level.

6.13 The Authority needs to establish its identity and the South Downs brand. Some

staff and Members described the Authority as timid, and seeking to avoid public

debate on issues that might be controversial or would result in adverse media

coverage. There was an explicit feeling that they needed to avoid what they

perceive as the problems faced by the New Forest National Park in the early

stages of its development. The timescales for strategy and plan development

have become protracted (a fear of failure). Delays in some operational decisions

were attributed to the lack of identity and brand.

6.14 A risk management framework is in place including regular reporting. Evidence

suggested that risk management is not yet fully embedded in the culture of the

organisation. Identification, assessment and management of risks need to be

robust and also pursued more actively by Members.

6.15 Members are not agreed on their optimum role. In the early days of the

organisation the work of the Authority was characterised by informal meetings

such as workshops and task and finish groups. This practice has continued with a

newly established task and finish group on the Local Plan and also the monthly

meetings between SMT and the Chairs and Vice Chairs of Authority. The formal

public committee meetings are considered less important by Members. This

leaves Members with a lack of clarity on where in the structure they can

participate in setting direction, policy making, approval and decision making. The

relationship between informal and formal meetings needs redesigning to affirm

the proper role of Members and ensure the Authority is seen to conduct its

business with appropriate public scrutiny and access

6.16 The Members’ transition to a more strategic role is work in progress. For a large

part of the shadow year there was a full complement of Members compared to a

smaller number of staff. Members were engaged in both operational and

strategic issues. As the organisation grew and developed Members

acknowledged the need for them to take a more strategic overview and to pass

operational matters for determination by managers and staff. This transition is

not yet complete and Members are still involved in day to day issues, making

operational decisions and monitoring inputs rather than outputs and quality

outcomes. Some Members also felt not fully engaged in business plan

development – “a matter for officers” or that they had not been consulted on the

action plan following the staff survey.

7. Good Practice and Special Features

7.1 Community engagement

7.2 Relationship with partners

7.3 External fundraising

7.4 Approach to delivery of corporate support services

7.5 Agency arrangements for delivery of planning services

8. Recommendations

The recommendations of the team are shown below. Some of the issues covered

are included in the Authority’s draft summary improvement plan but the team

would suggest that in some cases a more fundamental change may be required.

There are also issues in the Authority’s plan not covered in this report, such as

the need to undertake further work on equality and diversity, and which the team

would support.

8.1 That a re-assessment of the Authority using the NPAPA framework be

undertaken one year after the NPMP is scheduled to be adopted (circa Autumn

2014). [4.3]

8.2 The Authority and its lead partners need to produce a memorable and locally

distinct summary of the 2050 vision that is inspirational and becomes a mantra

for day to day use. [6.1)

8.3 The Authority needs to engage with the Members and the South Downs

Partnership about ways in which the work on the NPMP can be expedited leading

to an earlier publication date thereby moving to plan delivery at an earlier stage.

[6.1, 6.2 & 6.3]

8.4 There is a need to keep partnership working under review in order to ensure that

partnerships are fit for purpose. [6.4]

8.5 Greater rigour needs to be brought to the Sustainable Communities Fund (SCF)

project approval process and to ensuring that there is effective post project

monitoring to ensure the intended outcomes are delivered. Work should be

undertaken so that the Authority gets the best return from the projects it invests

in. These returns could include financial, press and media coverage, other

publicity and more. [6.5]

8.6 The planned review of performance management system needs to address the

current shortcomings and early consideration needs to be given to producing a

system that can be used by the South Downs Partnership to allow SMT and

Members to rigorously monitor delivery against the NPMP and Business Plan.

[6.6]

8.7 Work needs to be undertaken to ensure volunteers feel supported at an

Authority level so that they may make a greater contribution to the work and

profile of the National Park. [6.7]

8.8 The resources allocated to the preparation of the Local Plan need to be

significantly increased and the timetable compressed as far as possible. [6.8]

8.9 There is a need to review the staff structure. [6.9]

8.10 Ways in which the public profile of the National Park and the Authority can be

raised should be identified and implemented. [6.11]

8.11 In order to demonstrate that the NPA is adding value consideration should be

given to identifying a large rural issues project and for the Authority to offer

leadership at a national level. [6.12]

8.12 The Authority needs to establish both its identity and the South Downs brand.

[6.13]

8.13 The approach to risk assessment and management needs to be more pro-active

and Members should offer greater challenge. [6.14]

8.14 The relationship between informal and formal meetings needs redesigning to

affirm the proper role of Members and ensure the Authority is seen to conduct its

business with appropriate public scrutiny and access. [6.15]

8.15 The Members’ transition to a more strategic role is work in progress and

attention should be given to completing that changeover. [6.16]

Graham Essex-Crosby on behalf of SOLACE Enterprises

January 2013