Carol Hayden
Comprehensive area assessment (CAA) was supposed to usher in a new era of inspection by tackling the big 'cross-cutting' issues - like community cohesion, worklessness, fear of crime, and teenage conception rates – with calls for co-ordinated action by health, local government, police, probation and fire and rescue services.
But until now each of these service providers has had its own inspectorate - Ofsted, the Care Quality Commission, Audit Commission, and Her Majesty's Inspectors of Constabulary, Probation and Prisons.
And these different performance frameworks and reporting mechanisms have reinforced traditional professional and organisational boundaries, encouraging agencies to focus on their own internal processes and narrow performance indicators rather than working together on the really 'big ticket' items.
CAA was designed to overcome all this. It provides the first area based assessment of local services, focusing on how well local partnerships are tackling issues together and the outcomes for local people.
Great in theory but how well is it working in practice?
An independent assessment of the first year of CAA has found some encouraging signs.
Steve Martin
There is strong support for the principles which underpin new framework. Assessed bodies welcome the focus on outcomes (as opposed to individual services), the attempt to reduce the burden of inspection, and the emphasis on local priorities (as opposed to national targets) which, they say, has provided a real boost for partnership working.
And they praise the work of 'CAA leads', the Audit Commission staff who oversee area assessments.
But there were some teething problems. Inspectors had less than six months to make their assessments and some found it difficult to get to grips with new ways of working.
Confused about the criteria
Some assessed bodies were confused about the criteria for awarding them red and green 'flags' (which highlight risks and innovative practice) and many report that they didn't learn anything new from the inspection reports.
More fundamentally, assessments didn't seem properly 'joined up' and neither local politicians nor the public showed much interest in the process.
A step in the right direction then, but some real challenges for the future – for both local and national government.
The lack of engagement by local councillors is particularly worrying because it belies their role as the democratically elected community leaders.
Meanwhile the lack of joined up assessment around area priorities requires action by central government. Rather than reducing the burden of inspection, there is a danger that CAA becomes just another layer of assessment on top of existing service inspections.
Local inspectors are showing themselves to be increasingly willing to work together, but there is only so far they can go if the big Whitehall departments which sponsor their work are unwilling to embrace a more holistic, place-based approach.
Carol Hayden is director of research and evaluation at Shared Intelligence
Steve Martin is professor of public policy and management at Cardiff Business School
• Their report on CAA (produced with Ipsos MORI) is available here
