Agenda item

Michelle Hoyles, Business Manager Corporate Policy and Transformation:

a.    presented a report to update Performance Scrutiny Committee on the Councils approach to refreshing the membership of the Lincoln Citizens’ Panel

b.    advised that the membership of the Lincoln Citizens’ Panel was most recently reviewed in 2018, and currently contained 722 members. Of those members 304 continued to actively participate in Panel activities. Currently there was 418 Panel members who had been inactive for more than twelve months

c.    explained that the review would consist of removing from the Panel all members who had been inactive for more than twelve months and would seek to recruit a further 700 new panel members in a way that reflected the current make up of the City based on the latest Census updates.

d.    further explained that the Council would procure a third party to undertake the recruitment on its behalf. This approach was taken for the previous Panel refresh in 2018

e.    proposed that, in future it would be beneficial for the Citizens’ Panel to be reviewed and refreshed at more frequent intervals, with a proportional change of membership either annually or every two years.

f.     referred to paragraph 2.5 of the report and highlighted the other options for service feedback and business intelligence to compliment the views of the Citizen Panel as a wide suite of performance an feedback measures that would be explored

g.    invited committees questions and comments:

Question: Referred to the harder to reach demographics of younger people and 30-40 year olds and asked if there were different ways to engage with these demographics.
Response: The current Citizens Panel was skewed in favour of the older age brackets, it was important to achieve a balance and get a full spread of the demographics. We would be working with a third party to recruit to the panel and we would also consider other options of how we could engage people.

Question: Asked what topics the Citizens Panel were consulted on.
Response: The topics were varied, and we tried to focus on key areas. There were also some standard questions. The most recent topics covered were parking and climate.

Question: Asked how many members of the panel were asked to participate each time.
Response: We needed to ask the panel to participate regularly to keep them actively engaged. We would ask all 1000 members unless it was for a specific area such as ward. There was a buffer as we know that some people would not respond to the surveys.

Question: Asked how many responses were received from the surveys.
Response: The most recent survey received 240 responses.

Question: Asked how surveys were sent to members of the panel.
Response: They were internet surveys, but paper surveys could also be sent.

Question: Asked what characteristics would be considered when selecting members for the panel.
Response: It was important that the range of members reflected the current makeup of the City. We were focussed primarily on age and locations.

Question: Asked if the Council would set the criteria for selecting panel members when working with the third party.
Response: The Council set the criteria, based on the most recent Census data, we would work with the third party and their perspectives would be considered.

Question: Asked if the annual or two yearly panel refresh would be completed by the third party and would this be cost effective.
Response: The aim was to make the panel self-sustaining, it would be brought back to committee for consideration.

Question: Asked if active members of the panel would be retained following a panel refresh.
Response: Yes, we would prefer to retain active members and encourage new members to join rather than asking people to leave.

Question: Asked if a timetable for when surveys should be returned by be implemented. This would ensure that feedback from the panel was received before a meeting where the information was needed for consideration.
Response: We would look at timings for the return of future surveys.

Question: Commented that the Citizens Panel results were not included in the consultation of Executive reports and asked what was the purpose of the panel.
Response: The Council needed to consult with residents in the City. A reliable, broad range of responses was needed. Part of the review would be to look at if we were asking the panel the right questions and was there a better way of consulting with residents.

Question: Asked how much the third party consultant would cost.
Response: This information would be circulated following the meeting.

Question: Asked if a heat map of where people lived and who had responded to surveys could be provided.
Response: Yes. A heat map could be provided.

Question: Asked if external factors such as the time of year affected how many responses were received.
Response: There were currently 2 key surveys in the year, November and June. We could track how many responses were received.

Question: Asked if the style of questions asked had been considered.
Response: We would be reviewing the questions so that we could receive the most useful information possible.

Question: Asked if a copy of the most recent survey could be sent to members for information.
Response: This would be circulated following the meeting.

RESOLVED that

1.    the contents of the report be noted.

2.    an update be brought to Performance Scrutiny Committee due to be held on 17 August 2023.