Epping Forest awarded one-star rating

The inspection of the Essex council's waste management and street cleaning services, published yesterday (August 28), praises its recycling performance, which has seen it increase its recycling and composting rate from 23.5% in 2005-06 to 41.7% in 2007-08.

And, it also commended the council for collecting a wide range of materials via its fortnightly kerbside recycling service, which, alongside waste collection (delivered fortnightly, but weekly during the summer) and street cleansing, has been operated by SITA UK since November 2007.

But, the report criticised the local authority for having “limited success” in reducing the amount of waste collected, with the level per head of population increasing from 409 kilograms in 2006-07 to 420 kilograms in 2007-08.

Highlighting the council's relaxation of restrictions on collecting overfilled bins, in 2006, and its unlimited provision of garden waste sacks, it stated that: “the council is not proactive in diverting waste from the waste stream or promoting waste minimisation.”

At the same time, the Audit Commission's conclusion questions the value-for-money provided by Epping Forest's current five-year environmental services contract with SITA UK.

Contractor 

The council was forced to find a new contractor after its previous partner, South Herts Waste Management, went into administration in May 2006 (see letsrecycle.com story).

After that, the local authority entered into an interim agreement with Cory Environmental, before sealing its current deal with SITA UK in July 2007.

And, it is the procurement of that contract with SITA UK that comes in for criticism in the Commission's report, with the inspection concluding that: “The service as it stands does not offer good value for money.”

The contract with SITA UK was awarded at a cost of £4,427,958 per annum, and the report highlights the fact that the cost per household for waste and recycling collections in 2006-07 was £65.26, placing Epping Forest in the most expensive 25% of councils nationwide.

In particular, it claimed that the procurement process “did not benchmark or examine a range of alternative delivery methods for cost, likely outputs and environmental sustainability to inform the contract specification.”

Value for money 

It points to the current green waste collection service, the council's stockpile of up to 8,000 wheeled bins and emergency purchasing of green waste and recycling bags in March 2007 as examples of not delivering value for money.

Commenting on the report's findings, Ian Davidson, the Audit Commission's senior manager, said: “The poor performance and ultimate failure of the waste management contractor in 2006 had an effect on the council.

“However, it responded quickly, putting interim arrangements in place before awarding a new contract in November 2007. Residents are now receiving a fair service, but at a high comparative cost,” he added.

Looking to the future, the report identified the council's commitment to improving its green and food waste collections, as well as to expand the kerbside recycling service to all flats, as proposals that have the “potential to improve the service”.

But, it added: “However, without robust and approved implementation plans it is not clear what the desired outcomes will be, how far this meets the Council's high level aims and what more needs to be done.”

And, while it praised the council's investment in improvement, including a £300,000 'safer greener cleaner' initiative, the Commission called for more to do be done to improve future procurement processes, increase the accessibility of the services, and to encourage partnership working.

Mr Davidson explained that: “The council is also not showing leadership on wider environmental and climate change issues.

“This, and a lack of clear strategies, means that the prospects for future improvement are uncertain,” he added.