1. Parks Tendering Residents Executive Committee Recommendations Lynne Price and Paul Barton

2. 1: Quality based versus frequency based: 1.1 The current contract is a "quality " E.g. grass should be be no longer than xx mm in length at any time. 1.2 Where a "frequency" E.g. cut the grass 15 times a year 1.3 Could we suggest you build in the flexibility to a frequency based contract e.g. on grass cutting you’d say its 15 cuts a year fortnightly between March and September but the ‘Client’ (NBBC) is able to instruct that contractor hold off any unnecessary cut and that is ‘banked’ to be pulled in later in the mowing season if need be or even the value of it transferred into other work if unused by the end of the mowing season – so it’s sort of ‘smart frequency’ (this could be monitored by NBBC via the suggested monitoring system in point 3)

3. 2: Non routine works and routine works: 2.1 Why not separated off the routine and almost all one-off works from the contract? For NBBC and residents this is a key one – In the existing contract the grounds contract NBBC commit to only using the grounds contractor for one off's. This means you get unskilled, unspecialist grounds staff doing specialist works (path construction / ‘hard’ landscaping / installations etc) and less staff than there should be doing the routine works which then go downhill…. 2.2 If there are any one-offs this could be placed with local and specialist contractors meaning NBBC may get better work done on the one off jobs and similar if not better rates. In this way NBBC may get better work done by more skilled people more efficiently and put money back into the local economy. 2.3 To retain ultimate flexibility NBBC ask for some rates from the grounds contractor making 100% clear throughout the tendering process that there was no guarantee of any such works at all so they should not factor that into tendering and should price both separately and that if NBBC did bring them into one-offs it would only be on the basis of them setting up a completely separate team from the routine works

4. 3: Monitoring and penalty systems 3.1 Suggested contractors should be required to provide a live works monitoring system that is either live or no more than a day behind. Staff teams to all have mobile devices to tick off progress against work programme including as where appropriate date and time stamped photographing of completed works as they do them. 3.2 NBBC and potentially public have full access to the system on the web. This would then allow NBBC and residents to readily see and understand what is and isn’t being done. 3.3 Also on a related note they also need to be required to provide a system for public enquiries / complaints that NBBC have access into and that integrates with NBBC systems. So that NBBC and the contact centre and public can closely follow progress on / completion of all specifically ground maintenance related complaints that NBBC/Call centre/residents have feed through to them. Contractor would need to update progress on each – keeping resident/complainant informed and putting note of how concluded in line with NBBC complaints policy 3.4 Customer satisfaction surveys sent out by both contractor and NBBC in different areas. 3.5 Payment for works could be closely linked to this so the contractor doesn't get paid for what they haven’t done and if they or their staff do try to deceive NBBC by saying works are done where they clearly aren’t would give NBBC a much more traceable way of establishing if the contractor are being fraudulent…

5. 4: Overview / Accountability 4.1 Involve contractor in Member scrutiny / make them more publicly accountable for their performance - make their manager do quarterly or 6 monthly written and sometimes verbal reports and an annual report on performance against a range of relevant performance indicators – percentage of work completed, numbers of default penalties, numbers of public complaints agreed as directly due to failure in their performance 4.2 Make sure there is a robust KPI (Key Performance Indicator) 4.3 Actually fully operate and implement the penalty system for work not undertaken –  don’t pay them for it.  fully and unfailingly penalise them for not doing the work. Make it clear from the outset of tendering that after e.g. a 4 month ‘honeymoon’ (if they are a new contractor) then the system will be fully and unfailingly implemented – That way they resource and price properly at the outset - not trying to cut corners / under-resourcing

6. 5: Tender assessment – resourcing and pricing: 5.1 Tender assessment – look incredibly hard at what resources are allocated to what operations and whether they can realistically deliver what they are being required to deliver 5.2 Score pricing in bands above and below a realistic market rate for the works – deduct more and more points the further anyone is above or below the target – that would push out anyone significantly overcharging or under pricing / under resourcing

7. 6: Walkabouts 6.1 A designated officer from the contractor attend walkabouts so on hand for reported problems.

8. 7: Livery and ID 7.1 NBBC logo should be on all livery and staff wear I.D badges

9. 8: Accessibility 8.1 Maybe the contractor has a satellite office in town hall so accessible to NBBC staff and potentially residents

10. The End?? “NO” Due to the council encouraging feedback from other interested parties as well as the REC there has been a report produced with recommendations, Some of which have already been implemented on the existing contract. We are aware that some of our recommendations have been implemented, however the document hasn’t been finalised as of yet so I cant share this with you right now… watch this space! The report advised the Planning & Environment Overview and Scrutiny Panel (PEOSP)of the findings of the Grounds Maintenance Review Select Committee and to seek approval for the recommendations to be forward to the Portfolio Holder, for consideration when the new Grounds Maintenance Contract is put out to tender and procured.

11. Thanks for listening!!