Skip to main content

Our Progress

The Greater Manchester Strategy (GMS) progress reports are produced every six months to update on progress against the ambitions set out in the Strategy.  They draw on the latest data as reported in the updated GMS performance dashboards.

Greater Manchester Strategy progress reporting

We produce a progress report every six months to update on our work towards the ambitions set out in the Greater Manchester Strategy (GMS).  The progress reports draw on data provided in the accompanying GMS performance dashboards, also updated every six months.  Detail on the dashboard indicators is provided in the GMS Performance Framework.

Indicators and targets

The Performance Framework includes a set of shared outcome indicators – these are higher-level, 'state of the city region' contextual measures, on which change will only become demonstrated over the medium to longer-term.  As wider factors may inform performance against them, and therefore the potential for Greater Manchester activity to influence this performance may be limited, they do not have targets. 

The shared commitments have indicators that align closely with the commitment wording and intent.  Although they are specific to particular shared commitments, the indicators should be treated as cross-cutting and linked – in the same way that the shared commitments are ‘owned’ collectively across different thematic areas and organisations, performance against the indicators is a shared responsibility.  A number of the shared commitment indicators have defined targets, to be achieved by 2024 – targets have been set where indicators are likely to demonstrate change as a result of what we do within Greater Manchester, rather than simply reflecting wider factors, and where there this change should be demonstrated within the shorter-term.  We have produced a summary dashboard showing the latest progress against indicators with Greater Manchester-level targets.

Understanding variation and inequality

Reflecting the GMS ‘A fairer Greater Manchester’ priority, we are committed to understanding inequality across the city-region, in terms of both spatial and demographic variation.

The Performance Framework includes three indicators with ‘neighbourhood floor targets’, which set a baseline level below which no area in Greater Manchester should fall, with a commitment to prioritising a collective response where this should occur.  A summary dashboard is available to show the latest performance against the neighbourhood floor target indicators.

We also want to understand how outcomes vary for our diverse communities, including variance by age, sex, ethnicity, disability, sexual orientation / gender identity, and religious affiliation.  In particular, we want to highlight the disproportionately poor outcomes experienced by some of our communities, and have included indicators that can give us insight into performance ‘gaps’ with the wider population and how these gaps are changing over time. 

There are challenges in developing comprehensive intelligence on variable performance across Greater Manchester, both spatial and demographic, due to the lack of sources that provide the necessary level of detail.  Where possible, we have drawn on local data to expand our understanding, particularly through local surveys.  However, much of the reporting remains relatively high-level, and currently only a minority of the indicators provide breakdowns by demographic group.  Even where they do, we can generally only report for relatively high-level categories (such as broad ethnic group, rather than for people from within specific racially minoritised communities), as the data are not robust enough when the numbers become smaller.  Over time, we aim to build sample sizes and identify alternative indicators to improve our ability to differentiate the data for a wider range of communities.

We use the term ‘from within racially minoritised communities’ to refer to people experiencing racial inequality.  The term recognises that individuals have been minoritised through social processes rather than just existing as distinct minorities, although it is important to acknowledge the negative consequence of grouping all minoritised individuals together under one term, as there are significant differences both between and within these groups.  ‘From within’ has been added to recognise that not all people in these communities will identify as minoritised.