Issue Responsibility Target Date Post Canterbury earthquake risk re- Development & Planning 2012 onwards evaluation Engineer/Risk Manager Adopt appropriate best practice and Development & Planning 2013 onwards learnings from SCIRT Engineer 6.3 Monitoring and Review Procedures The asset management plan is compilation of day to day planning and management by the engineering managers and other senior Asset & Services staff. Subsequently the asset management is ‘live’ and under constant review. The asset management plan is formally reviewed and updated every three years. The review is timed to coincide with the development of the Long Term Plan. The draft plan is submitted to an external consultant for peer review. The asset management plans are made available to the auditors of the Office of Auditor General during the audit of the Long Term Plan and the intervening Annual Plans. Asset valuation is undertaken annually and the valuations and all supporting calculations submitted to an external valuer for independent verification. Levels of Service performance indicators are monitored at six monthly intervals and reported to the Council’s Executive Management Team. The Performance Indicators are published in the Annual Report for public comment. It is the intention to elevate the status of performance measures and supplement them with other internal benchmark measures. These will be under constant review and published on the internal intranet. Progress has already been made towards this goal. 6.4 Performance Measures Rules introduced through the Local Government (Amendment) Act introduced national non- financial performance measures for water, wastewater, stormwater, roading and flood protection. The introduced measures are broadly similar to the existing level of service measures on environmental pollution, flooding, response to customer issues and the number of customer complaints. Performance measures have been thoroughly scrutinised following the adoption of AG4 (revised) The Audit of Service Performance Reports by the Office of Auditor General which added emphasised the importance of the quality of local authorities’ services as well as financial performance. Some water performance measures used by Council were found to be difficult to measure and there was no defined interpretation of the method of measurement. A detailed methodology is now documented for every measure to ensure consistency and accuracy. Recommendations by the OAG to improve the control environment including the data collection and storage mechanisms have been actioned. The introduction of the Water Repairs Database has provided greater rigour to the collection of service request data. Internal controls of data quality have been implemented. Performance measures are collected and reported internally at half-yearly intervals. The Water Repairs Database was superseded by the customer request management module of the new AMIS in December 2014. The efficiency of the new system will be monitored to ensure accuracy and consistency. Page 91