LGA Corporate Peer Challenge: Westminster City Council

Feedback report: 4th to 7th February 2025

1. Introduction

Corporate Peer Challenge (CPC) is a highly valued improvement and assurance tool that is delivered by the sector for the sector. It involved a team of senior local government councillors and officers undertaking a comprehensive review of key finance, performance and governance information and then spending four days at Westminster City Council to provide robust, strategic and credible challenge and support.

CPC forms a key part of the improvement and assurance framework for local government. It is underpinned by the principles of Sector-led Improvement (SLI) put in place by councils and the Local Government Association (LGA) to support continuous improvement and assurance across the sector. These state that local authorities are responsible for their own performance; accountable locally not nationally; and have a collective responsibility for the performance of the sector.

CPC assists councils in meeting part of their Best Value Duty, with the Government expecting all local authorities to have a CPC at least every five years.

Peers are at the heart of the peer challenge process and provide a ‘practitioner perspective’ and ‘critical friend’ challenge.

This report outlines the key findings of the peer team and the recommendations that the council are required to action.

2. Executive summary

In this highly diverse borough, there is an in-depth understanding in the council of the importance of increasing engagement with communities and ensuring the organisation is reflective of the communities that it serves. The council has a good level of awareness of the make-up of the borough and its communities but is keen to enhance its understanding of them, both through direct engagement and insight through data and intelligence. Improving the equity, diversity and inclusivity (EDI) of the organisation to directly and positively impact upon resident experience, the quality of service delivery and staff engagement is clearly an absolute priority for the council.

As a borough of contrasts, there is excitement and energy within the organisation and amongst partners around the ambitions of the Administration’s ‘Fairer Westminster’ agenda and its focus on inequalities. The importance of the climate change agenda is also prominent in the organisation’s thinking and ambitions. The council is clear that its priority “is to make fundamental and long-lasting improvements to the lives of our residents and wider communities”.

The Administration’s priorities have been translated into a series of underpinning annual Delivery Plans. This is seeing many of the significant number of political ambitions being fulfilled and the council delivering a huge amount. In delivering such an extensive agenda, some questions have emerged through our discussions with stakeholders regarding the impact that is being secured around some aspects of what is being undertaken and how that is understood. Feedback from partners and communities is that where the council has a ‘laser-like focus’ on a clearly defined ‘objective’ and establishes clear accountabilities, it delivers more effectively.

We see an opportunity here to evolve the annual Delivery Plan approach. This would involve increased collective engagement across the political and managerial leadership in drawing it together. From this should emerge a document that reflects an agreed set of priorities which, as far as possible, are consistently adhered to and on which there is regular progress reporting to Cabinet.

We also see an opportunity to supplement ‘Fairer Westminster’, or the equivalent agenda for future Administrative terms, with the development by the council of a longer-term plan for the borough. This is in a context of the timescales involved in addressing the inequalities in Westminster, necessitating long-term plans that transcend four-year electoral cycles.

People across the organisation are very aware of the ambitions around enhancing the council’s engagement with communities. A range of mechanisms have been put in place to support this and there are examples of leading-edge engagement being undertaken but there is a way to go. The key consideration for the council in this space, as we see it, is determining where it wishes to see community engagement operate in the space between ‘representative democracy’ and ‘participative democracy’. This issue could usefully form the basis of a set of discussions across the senior political and managerial leadership, where the ambitions can be collectively considered and used to shape future policy and practice.

Whilst not universal amongst the people we met, there was widespread reflection of an organisation that, in terms of its culture, is very positively different to several years ago. People reflected that the energy, commitment and ‘demand’ that has been generated in the wider organisation in relation to EDI is generating an unstoppable momentum. It will be important to build upon the broad pockets of good practice in the organisation to see things become more systemic and there is a desire to see EDI ‘lived and breathed’ by the entire managerial leadership cohort.

A constructive and appropriate climate exists around Overview and Scrutiny. The Committees are strongly led by their Chairs. An area for development that we see is the opportunity for the council’s Forward Plan to inform more the thinking of the Committees on where they apply their focus and how they fulfil a key element of their remit, that of the ‘holding to account’ of Portfolio Holders and scrutinising Cabinet decisions.

The elected member induction programme following the elections in 2022 was valued by councillors. With elections coming around again next year, there is an opportunity to draw out any learning from the approach from three years ago and broaden out the nature and focus of what is delivered. This forms part of a theme for us of ‘elected members as valuable assets’ and how the council embraces and delivers on this. This includes maximising the community leadership role of councillors; ensuring the organisation generally is more cognisant of the important roles of elected members; and supporting the Leader fully in his roles and relationships both within London and at the national level in order to maximise the opportunities these provide for Westminster.

Officers at a range of levels reflected the capacity that is being absorbed responding to elected members on casework issues. We see the opportunity to enhance the approach to this through investment in a casework management system and utilising existing officer capacity differently. This would form part of developing a more strategic approach to casework that positions it as a valuable source of organisational learning and service improvement.

The council is currently facing a financial gap of £41m across the next four years, including £4m for 2025/26. Financial planning in Westminster is seen to be robust and the council recognises that the financial context for the organisation is likely to deteriorate over the coming years. This is already being factored into its thinking and planning. It is important that the council works to develop understanding across the wider organisation of the situation that is likely to emerge and what is required in response.

Staff that we spoke to at different levels in the council indicated that they see it as an organisation that values and invests in its people, supports their health and well-being, celebrates success and recognises people’s contribution. The results from last year’s staff survey indicated that 84 per cent of respondents are proud to work for the council and 77 per cent would recommend it as a great place to work. There are exceptionally high levels of stated commitment to helping the council meet its goals and objectives, at 94 per cent.

The council is very conscious that over 300 people in the organisation indicated they had experienced a form of inappropriate behaviour in the last year, whilst more than a hundred others indicated they had seen inappropriate behaviour. More than two hundred and fifty employees indicated they had experienced bullying or harassment in the workplace in the last 12 months. These issues have been highlighted in previous years and, in response, the council established the ‘Let’s Voice It’ initiative to spread awareness across the organisation and empower individuals to report issues anonymously. Whilst the numbers here are stark, it is positive that the climate in the organisation is conducive to people reporting their experiences.

The council is currently embarking upon a ‘reimagining’ of the long-established ‘Westminster Way’ which focuses on developing and empowering employees. At the heart of this work is the move to define a set of core values and behaviours for the organisation going forward. The council is also currently refreshing its People Strategy. As it embarks upon these activities, there is seen to be the opportunity to develop a more corporate and robust approach to skills and managerial and leadership development in the organisation. Staff also highlighted an enhanced approach to succession planning being required, along with a more systematic approach to ‘career pathways’. They also highlighted a desire for more mechanisms to support the sharing of learning and collaboration across the organisation.

3. Recommendations

There are a number of observations and suggestions within the main section of the report. The following are the peer team’s key recommendations to the council:

Recommendation 1

Develop more collective and collaborative leadership focused on delivering the complex cross-cutting agendas facing the council and the communities of Westminster

Recommendation 2

Develop a longer-term plan for the borough in a context of the timescales involved in addressing the inequalities in Westminster

Recommendation 3

Evolve the annual delivery plan approach, involving increased collective engagement in drawing it together informed by the MTFS position, and ensuring it reflects an agreed set of priorities that, as far as possible, are consistently adhered to

Recommendation 4

Establish greater rigour in scoping initiatives before embarking upon them and increasing the collective consideration of them

Recommendation 5

Collectively consider where the council wishes to see community engagement operate in the space between representative democracy and participative democracy

Recommendation 6

Revisit governance arrangements so that there is increased reporting to, and oversight from, Cabinet

Recommendation 7

Increase the opportunities for collective decision-making in public and build on recent developments enabling increased public participation

Recommendation 8

Reassure yourselves that the governance arrangements around the distribution of community grants is sufficiently robust and provides the necessary safeguards

Recommendation 9

Enhance the approach to casework management through utilising existing capacity differently, investing in a casework management system and developing a more strategic approach that positions casework as a valuable source of organisational learning and service improvement

Recommendation 10

Jointly clarify the role of the voluntary and community sector in delivering the ambitions for Westminster

Recommendation 11

Respond to the theme of ‘elected members as valuable assets’ and what is contained within that

Recommendation 12

Ensure work around reimagining the Westminster Way and organisational development addresses what has been highlighted around succession planning, supporting people in translating ‘purpose’ into ‘action’, skills and managerial and leadership development and sharing learning and collaborating across the organisation and that this operates in inclusive and equitable ways

4. Summary of peer challenge approach

The peer team

Peer challenges are delivered by experienced elected member and officer peers. The make-up of the peer team reflected the focus of the peer challenge and peers were selected by the LGA on the basis of their relevant expertise. The peers were:

Andy Donald, chief executive, London Borough of Haringey
Councillor Tudor Evans OBE, leader, Plymouth City Council (Labour)
Councillor Abi Brown OBE, former leader of Stoke-on-Trent City Council and current chair of the LGA Improvement and Innovation Board (Conservative)
Tim Borrett, director of policy, strategy and digital, Bristol City Council
Rachel McKoy, director of legal and governance and monitoring officer, London Borough of Newham
Martin Hughes, head of neighbourhoods, Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council
Madeleine Burch, change and improvement manager, Royal Borough of Greenwich (shadowing role)
Chris Bowron, LGA peer challenge manager

Scope and focus

The peer team considered the following five themes which form the core components of all Corporate Peer Challenges. These areas are critical to councils’ performance and improvement.

Local priorities and outcomes - Are the council’s priorities clear and informed by the local context? Is the council delivering effectively on its priorities? Is there an organisational-wide approach to continuous improvement, with frequent monitoring, reporting on and updating of performance and improvement plans?
Organisational and place leadership - Does the council provide effective local leadership? Are there good relationships with partner organisations and local communities?
Governance and culture - Are there clear and robust governance arrangements? Is there a culture of challenge and scrutiny?
Financial planning and management - Does the council have a grip on its current financial position? Does the council have a strategy and a plan to address its financial challenges? What is the relative financial resilience of the council like?
Capacity for improvement - Is the organisation able to bring about the improvements it needs, including delivering on locally identified priorities? Does the council have the capacity to improve?

As part of the five core elements outlined above, every Corporate Peer Challenge includes a strong focus on financial sustainability, performance, governance and assurance. Specifically with Westminster, the council asked that the peer team explore, within the five core elements, the council’s approach to:

Community Engagement – A review of how effectively we engage with our communities as an organisation, how effectively this engagement is joined up across the council and the dynamic within the Communities Directorate and between the Communities Directorate and other areas of the council
Organisational Culture through the lens of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) – Where are our strengths as an organisation and what are the areas that we can build on to maximise the embedding of EDI in our organisational culture and in our delivery across the council?

The peer challenge process

Peer challenges are improvement focused; it is important to stress that this was not an inspection. The process is not designed to provide an in-depth or technical assessment of plans and proposals. The peer team used their experience and knowledge of local government to reflect on the information presented to them by people they met, things they saw and material that they read.

The peer team prepared by reviewing a range of documents and information in order to ensure they were familiar with the council and the challenges it is facing. This included a position statement prepared by the council in advance of the peer team’s time on site. This provided a clear steer to the peer team on the local context at Westminster City Council and what the peer team should focus on. It also included an LGA finance briefing (prepared using public reports from the council’s website) and an LGA performance report outlining benchmarking data for the council across a range of metrics. The latter was produced using the LGA’s local area benchmarking tool called ‘LG Inform’.

The peer team then spent four days onsite at the council, during which they:

Gathered evidence, information, and views from more than 30 meetings, in addition to further research and reading.
Spoke to more than 150 people including a range of council staff together with elected members and external stakeholders.

This report provides a summary of the peer team’s findings. In presenting feedback, they have done so as fellow local government officers and elected members.

5. Feedback

Local priorities and outcomes

The operating context for Westminster City Council is truly unique and vital to the UK’s reputation and profile. Despite only forming 1 per cent of London’s physical area, the city of Westminster contributes nearly 16 per cent of the capital’s Gross Value Added (GVA), or around £76 billion. It is home to 52,000 businesses and hosts 767,000 jobs, or one-eighth of London’s jobs market. The city sees an influx of one million people every day, with 25 million tourists per annum.

The council has a good level of awareness of the make-up of the borough and its communities but is keen to enhance its understanding of them, both through direct engagement and insight through data and intelligence. Westminster has 200,000 residents, with more than 55 per cent having been born outside of the UK and 10 per cent of the total population having arrived in the UK in the last two years. The city has a younger age profile than England as a whole, and a higher proportion of working-age adults, but child population numbers have decreased significantly in recent years, from 45,000 in 2018 to 33,000 in 2024. Fifty-three per cent of the population identify as ‘White’; 17 per cent identify as belonging to an ‘Asian’ ethnic group; 8 per cent identify as being ‘Black’ and the same percentage are classed as ‘Arab’. The distribution of ethnic groups is clustered unevenly across the borough.

Whilst average household income in Westminster is relatively high, there are significant disparities amongst residents. Of the 128 neighbourhoods of which the city is comprised, 34 are among the 20 per cent most income-deprived in England. Fourteen per cent of households are defined as living in poverty but, again, this varies significantly across the borough with the figure rising to 28 per cent in Church Street ward. Thirty per cent of children in the city are classed as living in poverty and 40 per cent of children are eligible for free school meals.

Fairer Communities – making Westminster a healthier and equitable place for all our residents
Fairer Housing – increasing affordable housing and making sure our tenants and lessees are satisfied
Fairer Economy – building a strong, diverse and growing economy that benefits all residents and businesses
Fairer Environment – working to become a net zero council by 2030 and a net zero city by 2040
Fairer Council – having our council become more transparent and visible to our residents

The Administration is driven to address inequality in all of its forms and the council is clear that its priority “is to make fundamental and long-lasting improvements to the lives of our residents and wider communities”. The vision is one of building a ‘Fairer Westminster’ that “supports and celebrates its communities, led by a council that combines social justice with efficient services”.

In this highly diverse borough, there is an in-depth understanding in the council of the importance of increasing engagement with communities and ensuring the organisation is reflective of the communities that it serves. Improving the equity, diversity and inclusivity (EDI) of the organisation to directly and positively impact upon resident experience, the quality of service delivery and staff engagement is an absolute priority and the council is committed to “continuing our work to transform the council into a thriving, equitable, diverse and inclusive organisation”.

The importance of the climate change agenda is also prominent in the organisation’s thinking and ambitions, with the council having declared a Climate Emergency and setting its net zero targets both for the organisation and the city. Progress and delivery are underpinned by the Climate Emergency Action Plan. The council was recently ranked by ‘Climate Emergency UK’ as the number one city in the UK for climate action.

The Administration’s priorities from the Manifesto have been translated into ‘Fairer Westminster’ and a series of underpinning annual Delivery Plans. This is seeing many of the significant number of political ambitions being fulfilled and the council delivering a huge amount. ‘#2035’ is the over-arching programme, with partners, to tackle inequalities in the city by improving social, economic and health outcomes. The ‘Cost of Living Fund’ has seen £21m of government and council funding dedicated to the provision of practical support for residents, including energy and financial advice, hardship support and food banks. Council investment has seen an increase in the number of children and young people provided with free school meals, at around 14,000, whilst the ‘School Uniform Grant Scheme’ has provided support to 1,500 families. Tackling youth violence, including through the provision of positive activities for young people, is a clear priority.

The council is also focused on delivering continued improvement in its housing service, with a particular focus on repairs and complaints, and the increased provision of affordable housing in the city. Four new Housing Service Centres have opened in the last year, meaning there are now eight across the borough. The last year has seen the delivery of 227 affordable homes and 240 ‘retrofits’ of the council’s least energy efficient homes. More than 300 socially-rented homes have been added to the council’s house-building programme and major initiatives to deliver “truly affordable homes” are underway in Ebury Bridge (391 properties) and Church Street (1,120 properties).

The ‘High Streets Programme’ is seeing £10m investment in areas including Paddington, Edgware Road and Queensway, with an objective of supporting local high streets to become more vibrant neighbourhoods. The council have installed 2,500 on-street electric vehicle charging points and invested £20m to establish the UK’s largest electric refuse collection fleet.

In delivering such an extensive agenda, some questions have emerged through our discussions with stakeholders regarding the impact that is being secured around some aspects of what is being undertaken and how that is understood. As a primary example, the range of ‘hubs’ – such as Family Hubs, Community Hubs and Employment Hubs – that now exists or are emerging across the city is extensive. Whilst this absolutely reflects the ‘Fairer Westminster’ objective of a council that is more visible to residents, we gleaned anecdotal evidence of residents having difficulty in navigating their way around the different hubs as they sought support on complex matters in their lives that didn’t fit neatly with the specific remit of any given hub. What is being delivered through the North Paddington regeneration programme is another example, which we go into more detail around later in this report.

Within the organisation, there is a sense of a council comprising ‘brilliant silos that are doing brilliant things’. This leaves scope for the development of more collectively considered and collaborative approaches focused on delivering cross-cutting agendas for ‘communities’. The council’s resource position is a very positive one but people cited “the absence of a burning platform” as reinforcing the silos that exist rather than enhancing collaborative working and organisational join-up. This may not always be assisting the organisation in delivering a focused set of priorities that are fully worked through and integrated, embedded and securing the necessary impact. Feedback from partners and communities is that where the council has a ‘laser-like focus’ on a clearly defined ‘objective’ and establishes clear accountabilities, it delivers more effectively. Examples that they cited included the support for residents around the ‘cost of living’ and the smaller scale regeneration activity in the likes of Church Street and Pimlico (relative to the much broader such programme in North Paddington). Another example that we identified is the level of rigour being attached to dealing with the demand and budgetary situation in relation to temporary accommodation.

Linked to this theme, there is a desire in the organisation to see greater rigour in scoping initiatives and increasing the collective consideration of them before embarking upon them. One example that was cited was the drawing together of the Communities Directorate in response to the ambitions around community engagement, relative to other approaches that might have been adopted. Another was the suggestion of the creation of a further Housing Service Centre, ahead of the impact of the four created in the last year having been assessed.

There is also a plea from within the organisation for increased prioritisation and officers being provided with the space to get on and deliver what has been committed to. Currently, there is a sense of people being ‘knocked off track’ by additional priorities that emerge and leading elected members seeking reassurance on progress in the delivery of key projects. We touch later in this report on the idea of developing an increased reporting to, and oversight from, Cabinet, which we think would assist with this. We also see an opportunity to evolve the annual Delivery Plan approach. This would involve increased collective engagement across the political and managerial leadership in drawing it together, informed by the MTFS position. From this should emerge a document that reflects an agreed set of priorities which, as far as possible, are consistently adhered to and on which there is regular progress reporting to Cabinet.

Also, officers at a range of levels reflected the capacity that is being absorbed responding to elected members on casework issues. We see the opportunity to enhance the approach to this through investment in a casework management system and utilising existing officer capacity – currently dedicated to ‘progress chasing’ on behalf of councillors – differently. This would form part of developing a more strategic approach to casework that positions it as a valuable source of organisational learning and service improvement.

Finally, we see an opportunity to supplement ‘Fairer Westminster’, or the equivalent agenda for future Administrative terms, with the development by the council of a longer-term plan for the borough. This is in a context of the timescales involved in addressing the inequalities in Westminster, necessitating long-term plans that transcend four-year electoral cycles.

Performance

The council performs very impressively in a number of key areas, including children’s services receiving an ‘Outstanding’ rating from Ofsted in November last year, representing the third consecutive time this outcome has been achieved since 2019. The Care Quality Commission recently rated adult social care in Westminster as ‘Good’ and there is optimism around the imminent judgement from the Regulator of Social Housing following the recent inspection.

More generally, comparative performance across a range of services in Westminster can be seen to be ‘mixed’. Looking at the ‘LG Inform’ data and performance information system which the Local Government Association hosts on behalf of the sector, the following can be seen for Westminster when comparing it with the other councils in its CIPFA ‘family’ grouping of similar authorities, using the most recently available data:

Where Westminster is amongst the better performers:

Average Attainment 8 score achieved by pupils
The percentage of children becoming the subject of a child protection plan for a second or subsequent time
Overall satisfaction of people who use adult social care services with their care and support
The percentage of vacant dwellings as a percentage of all dwellings in the area
The number of households on the housing waiting list
The timeliness of processing of major Planning applications

Where Westminster is less high performing:

The percentage of council tax collected as a percentage of council tax due
The percentage of care leavers in education, employment or training
The timeliness of processing minor Planning applications
The timeliness of processing other Planning applications
The percentage of household waste sent for reuse, recycling and composting

Where performance in Westminster is around the average:

The percentage of non-domestic rates collected as a percentage of non-domestic rates due
The proportion of 16 and 17 year olds not in education, employment or training (NEET)
The proportion of the population aged 16 to 64 qualified to at least Level 2
The percentage of child protection cases reviewed within required timescales
The children looked after rate per 10,000 children
The percentage of care leavers in suitable accommodation
The time taken to process housing benefit new claims and change events
The number of households living in temporary accommodation per 1,000 households
The number of affordable homes delivered
The amount of residual waste per household

‘Headline Report’ for Westminster in the LG Inform system:

Organisational and place leadership

‘Fairer Westminster’ has provided a clear focus for the organisation and partnership working. There are good examples of joined-up partnership working, such as the early help model with an integrated leadership team across a number of organisations; the approach to the ‘cost of living’ crisis; the pathway for care leavers; and work on anti-racism.

People across the organisation are very aware of the ambitions around enhancing the council’s engagement with communities. A range of mechanisms have been put in place in relation to support this, including the drawing together of the Communities Directorate; the ‘Commonplace’ consultation platform; a ‘Resident Research Panel’; the ‘Community Participation Charter’; and a Register of Active Residents. The involvement of a range of teams, including the corporate communications function, in the Quality Improvement Board to provide oversight of public consultations was highlighted as being highly beneficial in enhancing the co-ordination of consultation activity across the organisation.

The Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND) Parents and Carers Forum was highlighted as an example of leading-edge engagement and was indeed identified as such in the Local Area SEND Inspection in 2020. Another example that was outlined was the Citizens’ Climate Assembly. This took place in June and July 2023 and saw a random but representative group of 50 local residents come together to explore how the borough can overcome the main barriers to becoming a net zero city by 2040 and ensure the objective is delivered in the fairest way. The Assembly, and the related Action Committees that emerged from it, have helped to steer the council’s approach to tackling the climate emergency and highlighted the importance of embedding climate action across every council service.

In a context of the council being keen for the peer team to explore its approach to community engagement, specific activities that were undertaken to provide insight to this included a focus group with key stakeholders in the regeneration activity in North Paddington; a focus group with representatives from voluntary and community sector organisations from across the city; and interview and focus group activity with key stakeholders within, or with experience of working with, the Communities Directorate.

In North Paddington, the high level of ambition being shown by the council and the major investment that is taking place, reflected in the wide range of initiatives and projects underway, is recognised by those people we met. The North Paddington Partnership Board has been established, including representatives from education, health, local business and the police plus a range of community leaders. The focus that is being provided on traditionally ‘under-served’ communities has been positively received by the local residents and there are positive relationships between local communities and ward councillors. Stakeholders highlighted lots of incredible and passionate people working for the council to deliver the agenda in North Paddington but that this is actually leading to overlap in engagement and delivery.

People we met highlighted the North Paddington programme as feeling very large-scale and being challenged in terms of join up across the council; between activities and initiatives; and in relation to engagement. There is recognition that the council needs time to change its approach, with the ‘keys to success’ going forward including ensuring the right people are in the room from the start and throughout to provide for shared understanding and true co-production. An example was provided of a piece of engagement activity with residents exploring the type and location of street furniture but what was ultimately delivered being different following separate engagement with another stakeholder. People we met highlighted that they are looking for honest conversations, regular feedback and delivery against realistic expectations and timescales as jointly agreed. One participant in the focus group summarised their feelings and experience to date as being “I can feel the council’s presence but I can’t quite see the impact”.

Voluntary and community sector partners who participated in the North Paddington focus group emphasised their experience being too many meetings with different people from different parts of the council; a confusing funding landscape; and an unnecessary level of bureaucracy, reflected in complicated form filling. On the back of their experiences, some voluntary and community sector partners linked with the North Paddington programme are starting to walk away from the process. They are professional and confident in their expertise and currently feel that they have more to offer, including as the deliverers of services.

Looking more widely at the voluntary and community sector, based on the focus group that the peer team undertook with representatives from across the city, the over-arching conclusion is one of the council and the sector needing to jointly clarify the role of the latter in delivering the ambitions for Westminster. The council is seen by the sector to be on a journey in viewing the sector increasingly as an asset, with a clear emphasis on improving how it works with the sector but the impact not yet being seen – “the council are trying but aren’t sure how”. The council itself recognises that “we need a more strategic approach to this”. Currently, there is variable involvement of elected members with the sector at both the local and strategic level, perhaps with a lack of clarity on both sides around the role councillors can play with the sector.

Echoing a point from above, this is a professional sector and council engagement with it needs to be strengths based. There is a desire for greater consistency of engagement from within the council. A key question that emerged, linked to this, was who leads on the voluntary and community sector relationship and engagement for the council? The potential exists, in the form of the sector already meeting together on regular basis and the council having the opportunity to participate in such gatherings, for the council to enhance engagement, gain trust and build capacity. The sector sees the need and opportunity for the council to improve its commissioning and procurement with them to help deliver the ambitions for Westminster. Funding arrangements currently can be complex, with a desire to see an approach that is more proportionate, timely and effectively communicated. Finally, an overall observation from the sector through the focus group was one of the council, if it were a car, being “expensive but not accessible to all”.

The Communities Directorate, with its remit to “drive and embed best practice across the council in ways of working with residents and communities”, is viewed differently in different parts of the organisation and a review has recently been undertaken. Where the Directorate is seen as additional capacity for the organisation that can help to support, or even deliver, consultation and engagement activity on behalf of others, then it is more highly valued. Our sense is that the Directorate can be a valuable asset for more parts of the organisation, with learning to be drawn from the review and the opportunity for the collective consideration of its role and approach going forward.

In relation to the overall theme of community engagement, the key consideration for the council as we see it is determining where it wishes to see community engagement operate in the space between ‘representative democracy’ and ‘participative democracy’. We see this issue as usefully forming the basis of a set of discussions across the senior political and managerial leadership, where the ambitions can be collectively considered and used to shape future policy and practice.

The council also asked the peer team to consider organisational culture through the lens of equity, diversity and inclusion. Whilst not universal amongst the people we met, there was widespread reflection of an organisation that, in terms of its culture, is very positively different to several years ago. People spoke of having developed an increased sense of ‘psychological safety’ and the council being a place where you can ‘bring your whole self to work’. In the 2024 ‘Our Voice’ staff survey, in which more than 2,400 staff (around 70 per cent) participated, 75 per cent of respondents indicated that they felt the council is an inclusive place to work. As we highlighted earlier, the importance of enhancing the equity, diversity and inclusivity of the organisation, to directly and positively impact upon staff engagement, resident experience and the quality of service delivery is absolutely understood amongst the people we met.

The diversity of the organisation has been increasing in recent years. The council’s workforce has a roughly 60:40 split of women to men, divided reasonably evenly across levels of seniority. Around 40 per cent of staff identify as being ‘Global Majority’, which is broadly representative of Westminster’s overall population make-up. However, ‘Global Majority’ staff are less well represented at the most senior levels of the organisation, making up 28 per cent of senior leadership.

The council launched its ‘Closing the Gap’ campaign in 2023 to help reduce inequalities within the organisation and create a more equitable and inclusive council. It has three main areas of focus:

Pay and reward – an overhaul of the banding system and reward structure to ensure clear processes, transparency and equal opportunities
Talent development and succession planning – improving the development offers for staff to grow their skills, facilitating career pathways within the organisation, enabling progression and creating a culture of succession planning in teams
Resourcing and recruitment – improving processes to ensure equity and boost diversity

Pay gaps are one of the measures the council uses to understand the make-up of the organisation and disparities in gender, ethnicity, sexual orientation and disability. Findings from 2023 indicated that the gender and disability pay gaps are reducing but the ethnicity pay gap remained static.

Many people we spoke to attributed the drive and progress around EDI directly to the Chief Executive. However, they also reflected that the energy, commitment and ‘demand’ that has been generated in the wider organisation around it is generating an unstoppable momentum. The Staff Networks are playing a key role, informing policy, delivering events and providing constructive challenge. Events have included panel discussions for women’s history month, activities during cultural history month and disability history month and awareness days during national inclusion week. ‘Safe to Speak Up’ sessions and panel discussions were held as part of Race Equality Week, giving staff the opportunity to connect and speak about issues affecting them. ‘Lunch and Learn’ sessions took place on disability inclusion, including understanding reasonable adjustments and neurodiversity. A disability and neuro-inclusion workforce action plan has been developed and an anti-racism charter and action plan were also established, with anti-racism discussions also being held across the organisation. It will be important to build upon such examples and related activity in order to see things become more systemic and there is a desire to see EDI ‘lived and breathed’ by the entire managerial leadership cohort.

Governance and culture

The council seems traditionally to have emphasised being ‘fleet of foot’ in the way that it operates, with this reflected in the streamlining of its governance and reporting arrangements. We see an opportunity to revisit the approach to aspects of this in order to assist the council in two main regards. The first of these is developing an increased reporting to, and oversight from, Cabinet. As an example, whilst there is extensive reporting within the organisation on council performance, the budget and progress on the delivery of major projects, this primarily takes place at the Audit and Performance Committee and two key internal officer boards – the Change Board and the Risk and Performance Board. This generates a question for us as to where the Cabinet gains its reassurance from and demonstrates its oversight of key issues.

The second aspect emerges in a context of the council’s ‘Fairer Westminster’ ambitions and commitments around openness and transparency. The 2024 residents’ survey indicated 58 per cent of respondents think the council is open and transparent, which is a reduction of eight percentage points from the previous year. We also noted the extent to which Cabinet decisions are taken by individual Portfolio Holders, relative to decisions being made collectively at Cabinet meetings themselves. Given its ambitions, we would see benefit in the council seeking to build on recent moves to enhance public participation (including having introduced public questions at full council in July 2023) and increase the opportunities for collective decision-making in public.

Our understanding is that there is around £11m of community grant funding provided by the council annually. We would encourage the council to reassure itself that the governance arrangements around the distribution of community grants is sufficiently robust and provides the necessary safeguards both for individuals and the organisation as a whole. This includes the system of ward budgets, available to councillors to support local initiatives within their neighbourhoods. We gleaned from our discussions with elected members that, whilst this facility is beneficial at one level, it also attracts a level of responsibility and risks creating complex considerations and situations which they would welcome more support and guidance around.

A constructive and appropriate climate exists around Overview and Scrutiny, both in the relationship between the Policy and Scrutiny Committees and Cabinet and across the political groups. The Committees are strongly led by their Chairs and are confident in largely developing their own work programmes. The officer support that the Policy and Scrutiny Committees receive is highly valued. Overview and Scrutiny is fully involved in the budget-setting process at a formative stage. An area for development that we see is the opportunity for the council’s Forward Plan to inform more the thinking of the Committees on where they apply their focus and how they fulfil a key element of their remit, that of the ‘holding to account’ of Portfolio Holders and scrutinising Cabinet decisions.

The elected member induction programme following the elections in 2022 was valued by councillors. With elections coming around again next year, there is an opportunity to draw out any learning from the approach from three years ago. Based on our discussions, there is also the potential to broaden out the nature and focus of what is delivered, supplementing the core and traditional elements of induction, such as training for sitting on quasi-judicial committees; Corporate Parenting; and the Code of Conduct. This might usefully include elements such as the community leadership role of councillors; training on utilising ward budgets; access to development activity delivered by the likes of the Local Government Association, including the ‘Leadership Academy’; and the provision of mentoring support for people in key leadership positions.

The above forms part of a theme for us of ‘elected members as valuable assets’ and how the council embraces and delivers on this. This includes supplementing the initial induction activity by broadening the provision of on-going elected member development and, in so doing, tailoring the approach to individual need, including preferred learning styles and personal aspirations. Another element is maximising the community leadership role of councillors, as part of the council’s community engagement ambitions, and supporting them fully in fulfilling that complex and demanding role.

There is also importance in ensuring the organisation generally is more cognisant of the important roles of elected members and gearing their approach to them. One example of this is moving to a position whereby ward councillors are more consistently engaged and informed, at an early stage, around key developments in their area. Another example comes in the form of the outsourced IT service desk and the potential for additional training there about the role and status of councillors and the way in which their needs may differ to those of council officers.

Finally in relation to ‘elected members as valuable assets’, the roles and relationships that the leader has both within London and at the national level provide real opportunity for Westminster. It is important that the council supports him fully in this in order to enable Westminster to maximise the ‘leverage’ available through his positions of influence. Linked to this, keeping working relationships close between the external communications and public affairs functions will also be beneficial in helping the council maximise external influence.

Financial planning and management

The greatest cost pressure facing the council in recent years has been temporary accommodation. These costs have risen from £4.4m in 2021/22 to over £65m in the current financial year. There is comprehensive oversight and rigour in managing the situation and the council is investing in a temporary accommodation acquisition programme.

£20m of savings or increased income have been required in the revenue budget in the current financial year. The importance of the council enhancing its reporting of progress in delivering savings and benefits realisation has been highlighted by the external auditor. The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) Resilience Index in relation to the level of reserves in Westminster measures the council as having “low risk”.

The challenges within the external audit market nationally have not impacted Westminster in the same way that they have with many other councils across the country. The council has up-to-date audited accounts and value for money reports from the external auditors and is seen by them to demonstrate strong financial sustainability.

The Housing Revenue Account (HRA) Business Plan is being refreshed to address pressures that have been developing over a period of time around repairs and maintenance. The council has a Capital Strategy of more than £2.4 billion. Whilst it is experiencing slippage in the delivery of its capital programme, it is not unique in this respect and there are specific factors, including external impacts upon the taking forward of ambitions for Oxford Street.

Capacity for improvement

The results from last year’s ‘Our Voice’ staff survey indicated that 84 per cent of respondents are proud to work for Westminster City Council and 77 per cent would recommend it as a great place to work. There are exceptionally high levels of stated commitment to helping the council meet its goals and objectives, at 94 per cent. At the same time, less than two-thirds (63 per cent) indicated they felt a strong sense of belonging to the council.

The council launched the ‘Westminster Way’ in 2018, focusing on developing and empowering employees. It has three core pillars:

Everyone has talent – personal development
Everyone is valued – valuing our people and diversity
Everyone is a leader – the Westminster Way of working

Staff that we spoke to at different levels in the council indicated that they see it as an organisation that values and invests in its people and supports their health and well-being. The staff survey indicated that the percentage of respondents feeling valued increased by three percentage points, to 62 per cent, between 2023 and 2024. A health and well-being strategy for staff was launched in 2022 and examples of the activity undertaken include workshops on winter well-being and coping with the ‘cost of living’ crisis. Activity has also been taking place to increase awareness of the menopause and support those with experience of cancer or caring for somebody who is experiencing it.

There was positive feedback from staff that we met regarding the undertaking of 1-2-1s and appraisals and being provided with access to training. However, there is a strong desire from officers at different levels to see the council enhance the way it supports them in translating the council’s ‘purpose’ into ‘action’. A key area that was emphasised was enhancing training and development to help people translate key organisational objectives or ways of working, such as enhancing community engagement or addressing the pay gaps in their areas, into practical activity that they can deliver.

Staff we met also indicated they felt the council is an organisation that celebrates success and recognises people’s contribution. This includes the annual staff awards, which features a range of categories including ‘frontline hero’ and ‘outstanding achievement award’.

The council is currently embarking upon a ‘reimagining’ of the long-established ‘Westminster Way’, with a series of staff focus groups central to shaping and developing it. At the heart of this is the move to define a set of core values and behaviours for the organisation going forward. The council is also currently refreshing its People Strategy. As it embarks upon these activities, we would highlight staff that we met indicating an enhanced approach to succession planning in the organisation is required, along with a more systematic approach to ‘career pathways’ and enabling people to grow and progress through the organisation. Linked to this, there is also seen to be the opportunity to develop a more corporate and robust approach to skills and managerial and leadership development in the organisation.

Finally, staff highlighted a desire for more mechanisms to support the sharing of learning and collaboration across the organisation. Indeed, some of the feedback that the council received around the focus groups we undertook was that it enabled colleagues to meet people they had never spoken to before; provided the opportunity to learn about what other people do in their roles; share common issues and challenges; and explore the potential to work more collaboratively together. The work around reimagining the ‘Westminster Way’ and the People Strategy provides the opportunity to respond to these types of issues and ensure that they operate in inclusive and equitable ways.

Internal communications are seen to be strong and awareness of internal channels amongst staff that we met was high. There was a particular appreciation of the weekly ‘Loop Live’ sessions available to all staff to join remotely, assuming that their working arrangements allow this.

External communications are mature and evolving in light of the declining traditional media landscape. The council uses direct channels, including the printed magazine to all households and an E-newsletter to which around 100,000 people are subscribed. Whilst the overall figures are high, the ‘City Survey’ of residents highlighted that public satisfaction with several metrics related to council information, communication and engagement is declining. This includes 66 per cent of respondents feeling the council keeps residents well informed about its services and benefits, which is a reduction of six percentage points from 2023. The same percentage reduction has been seen around the level (65 per cent) of respondents feeling the council informs them about plans for their local area. Finally, 64 per cent of respondents indicated they felt the council keeps them informed about how they can help improve their local community or neighbourhood, which is a reduction by five percentage points from 2023.

The council is currently updating its data strategy to ensure that the necessary data architecture and systems are in place to support ambitions around customer service using new technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI). The Digital and Innovation function that has been established in the organisation has helped the council to improve digital services through meaningful business partnering. The council may wish to reflect on how best to embed council-wide digital maturity and whether this professional function is best positioned as an ‘enabler’ or ‘leader’ for the organisation.

The council has launched ‘Google Translate’ across its website and enhancements of the ‘Report It’ platform have been capitalising upon technology to enable residents to highlight issues more easily. The council has adopted a ‘fast-follow’ approach to innovation, such as AI, meaning it has deliberately chosen not to be right at the forefront of innovation but rather to follow closely behind those who are. It is one of 600 organisations world-wide to participate in an early pilot programme with Microsoft, meaning it is well placed for continuous improvement in digital. Finally, and the council would seem to have learnt from previous experiences around this, to provide the increased focus on digital with the best possible platform for success, it will be important to continue to invest in the technology and infrastructure element crucial to underpinning it.

6. Next steps

It is recognised that the council’s senior political and managerial leadership will want to consider, discuss and reflect on these findings. The LGA will continue to provide on-going support to the council. As part of the CPC, the council are also required to have a Progress Review and publish the findings from this within twelve months of the CPC. The LGA will also publish the Progress Review report on their website.

The Progress Review will provide space for the council’s senior leadership to report to peers on the progress made against each of the CPC’s recommendations, discuss early impact or learning and receive feedback on the implementation of the CPC action plan. The Progress Review will usually be delivered on-site over a day and a half.

In the meantime, Kate Herbert, Principal Adviser for your region, is the main contact between your authority and the Local Government Association. She is available to discuss any further support the council requires and can be contacted via [email protected]