UPDATE 19th September 2016 —–
I’ve updated the designation crystal ball with the data published over the weekend (or very early this morning) from DCLG.
Again, I’ve just discarded the quarter of data that I don’t think will count towards designation so you can play “what if ?”. Some councils will be pleasantly surprised, others will not. There is at least one council that drops into the potential designation zone.
Lastly, anticipating the question “What is going to be the designation threshold for non-majors ?” we don’t know. Perhaps you can make a guess – there are 9 councils below 60% – does that feel about right ?
Just a quick post today. You’ll have noticed that the epic consultation document last week included a question about the level at which the new criteria for designation on non-majors should be set. [it suggests a range of between 60% and 70% to save you the legwork]
This, coupled with an estimate of when the new designation process will take place, allows councils to make a forecast of what their performance will be when designation for non-majors occurs.
To make life easy, I’ve put together a little spreadsheet that allows you to bring together the three sets of data
- The four published quarters of data from October 14 to Sept 15 (DCLG live tables)
- The quarter from Oct-Dec 15 that you already know about but isn’t published
- The three quarters from Jan – Sep 16 that you’ll need to forecast
Dealing with designation on majors is quite easy because there aren’t many of them. Dealing with designation on minors is not, and many councils at the bottom of table 153 are about to find out that they may have created an impossible mountain to climb. Too many cases, and too many applicants unprepared to enter into the EoT rigmarole.