PART 1
(OPEN TO THE PUBLIC)	ITEM NO.	
_____________________________________________________________

REPORT OF THE LEAD MEMBER FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES
_____________________________________________________________

TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
ON 19TH MARCH 2001
_____________________________________________________________

TITLE: 	UPDATE REPORT ON THE CLEANSING OF DRAINS AND GULLIES
_____________________________________________________________

RECOMMENDATIONS: That the report be noted and the comments of the members on service delivery and enhancements be provided.
_____________________________________________________________

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: The report details the current level of gully cleansing whilst discussing operational problems, which may occur, and actions for improvement with future projections for service delivery
_____________________________________________________________

BACKGROUND DOCUMENTS: (available for public inspection) NONE
_____________________________________________________________

CONTACT OFFICER: David Robinson/Wayne Priestley
TEL NO: 1002/2060	
_____________________________________________________________

WARD(S) TO WHICH REPORT RELATE(S)	ALL WARDS
_____________________________________________________________

KEY COUNCIL POLICIES		N/A
_____________________________________________________________

DETAILS (continued overleaf)
_____________________________________________________________

1.0	Background

1.1	Environmental Scrutiny Committee on the 12th December 2000, requested that a report be prepared on the Gully Cleansing Service carried out by the Environmental Services Directorate on behalf of the Development Services Directorate

1.2	Issues that were raised included:

•	Details on how the gully cleansing service has been operated
•	Statistical information on the service specification and provision
•	Future projections for service delivery following review and different ways of working

2.0	Detail

2.1	On behalf of the Development Services Directorate, the Environmental Services Directorate is charged with emptying approximately 47,000 gullies throughout the City of Salford every eight months, this equates to 70500 gullies per annum. Three teams, of a gully vehicle and two operatives, carry out the service with a programme to empty around 110 gullies each per day.

2.2	The monitoring of this work is based on the use of daily worksheets being completed by gully crews identifying those gullies they have cleaned. Any gullies, which require repair, and therefore cannot be cleansed properly, are referred to the Highways Section of the Development Services Directorate for their attention.

2.3	A climate of restricted finance results in Development Services being unable to rapidly repair these gullies and then, when associated with the lack of cleansing, problems of flooding occur in heavy rainfall. This results in the gully crews being diverted from routine programmed maintenance and thereby reducing their ability to meet daily targets. There were 1450 requests, by Development Services, to divert crews to flood situations in the current financial year (which is almost 12 months at the time of writing this report).

2.4	Concurrent with these diversions there are requests from our other customers i.e. Councillors, public, etc. to attend gullies, outside the programme, for various reasons. Again, in the current year, this has equated to 1438 referrals.

2.5	Such referrals require ad-hoc attendance across the City and it is difficult to facilitate area based planning when reacting to priorities such as flooding. On average a diversion from programme, together with inspection and resolution, can take around one hour. The impact of this, on the programme is detailed as follows:

a)	Routine Programme requires 110 gullies/team/day.
This equates to 550 gullies per 37 hour week or approximately 15 gullies per hour.

b)	There are 2888 diversions to date or circa 3000 for a full year.
This equates to 3000 hours work on average.
Outcome is that 45000 gullies within the programme are not attended routinely (i.e. 3000 hours x 15 gullies/hour)

c)	The current level of programmed work identifies that 22000 gullies have been cleaned.

d)	Therefore the gully cleansing resource has delivered the equivalent of 67000 gully cleansing activities although the actual programmed maintenance has only been 32% completed (22k of the 70.5k required).

e)	The outstanding balance of 3500 gullies (70.5k minus 67k) has not been resourced due to Environmental Services manpower or vehicle shortages.

2.6	Quite clearly the impact of not delivering nearly 70% of the programmed activity needs to be addressed.

2.7	Together with colleagues in Development Services we are improving communications with regard to referrals of damaged gullies and feedback on the status of repairs for re-inclusion in the programme. Development Services are the client, in terms of the gully service, and will no doubt prioritise their maintenance and repair programme accordingly.

2.8	As the contractor, with respect to cleansing operations, Environmental Services, as part of its service reviews, has agreed with Trade Union colleagues to utilise agency staff in terms of relief manpower for its cleansing services operations. This will ensure 100% service delivery. Until natural wastage of establishment pool/relief staff a conscious decision has been made by the Directorate to resource gully cleansing as a priority when staff shortages prevent the Directorate from deploying all its services.

3.0	Conclusion

3.1	The Environmental Services Directorate has taken progressive steps to address any failures in service delivery regarding gully cleansing, although, as is apparent from this report, issues regarding the repair of defective gullies are beyond its control. However, through the use of agency staff and even more effective monitoring of the service via the use of Environmental Co-ordinators and the use of the call centre, allowing speedier access for receipt of gully problems, the service will be improved.

3.2	It is felt that through the current re-prioritising of the gully service; by implementing the corrective action highlighted in this report, particularly a closer working partnership with the Client Directorate, that the future provision of the service will meet the specification and quality standards required.

3.3	The provision of an efficient, effective, and economical service, both in terms of gully maintenance and cleansing is essential as Members will be aware that it is part of the Best Value Review of Streetcare presently being undertaken.