Agenda item

5.1  The Chair welcomed Bruce Deville, Head of Governance and Business Intelligence to the meeting, also in attendance was the Chief Executive from London Borough of Hackney (LBH).

5.2  The Governance & Resources Scrutiny Commission receive the annual report for Complaints and Members Enquiries for LBH. 

5.3  The report in the agenda provides an overview of the complaints and enquiries for the Council during 2015/16 and appendix 2 provides an update on the first 6 months of 2016/17.

5.4  The report was as laid out in the agenda.  The main points highlighted from the report were:

5.4.1  The volume of complaints for 2015/16 were similar to previous years.

5.4.2  For the first half of 2016/17 there has been an increase in the number of complaints.  The increase is predominately related to benefits and temporary accommodation.  Residents appear to be using the complaints process to challenge decisions made.  The complaints have not been about the service received but are challenging decisions to improve their points or scoring.

5.4.3  Housing related complaints remains the highest volume of complaints received.  In the housing complaints category approximately 50% relate to housing management and 50% relate to housing repairs.  There has been some progress in getting complaints to a swifter resolution.  In the housing repair cases the main issue seems to be related to contractors.

5.4.4  Children Social Care complaints are slightly down and Adults Social Care complaints have increased.

5.4.5  The main challenge in relation to complaints is the turnaround time.  This is due to the focus being on resolution and not just on getting a response to the complaint.

5.4.6  The quality of complaints remains an issue for some service areas.  The Governance and Business Intelligence team have an increase in demand from services areas for the performance and quality information of their complaints.  The team is talking to management teams about areas of improvement.

5.5  Discussion, Questions and Answers

(i)  Members referred to page 21 in the agenda and asked for confirmation of the areas under the category ‘other’ and enquired if the Governance and Business Intelligence team were satisfied with the progress service areas were making in relation to complaints.

The Head of Governance and Business Intelligence advised he did not have that information at the meeting but would provide the breakdown to the category ‘other’ after the meeting.  It was pointed out the percentage of complaints for service areas in the other category would be less than 5%.

The Head of Governance and Business Intelligence informed Members he was satisfied with the progress being made considering the reduction in resources faced by the Council to date.  However, there was always still room for improvement.

(ii)  Member commented that good managers would use the complaints information as a source of data to support service improvement, therefore viewing complaints in a positive way.  Members were of the view that complaints were not improving and the response times were not at acceptable levels. 

The Head of Governance and Business Intelligence explained the Council could have quicker response times if the council imposed hard target for response.  It was pointed out that some complaints were more complex and to reach the resolution stage required a longer period of time.  Housing repair cases were not closed until the repair was completed.  Previously the complaints case would be closed once the repair ticket was raised.  However the council has found that repairs were not being followed through and came back into the complaints system.

(iii)  Members expressed concern about having a standard / target that the Council could not meet.

The Head of Governance and Business Intelligence highlighted the focus on resolution meant the council calculated the average response time with the caveat of case complexity.  The council publicises its aim to resolve a complaint within 15 working days.  This is not a hard target due to the complexity of cases, particularly housing repair cases.  The key is the complaint will not get closed until the job is completed.

(iv)  Members asked for the officer’s comment on the service area feedback taken to management teams.

The Head of Governance and Business Intelligence explained the score for record keeping was a requirement from his team and related to the system they use to capture the information about complaints.  The team want service areas to fill in all the fields on the system not just the required fields.  This in their view will help the service area to learn more from the complaint.  This requirement is an internal process not a standard to be met.

The feedback to service areas does not necessarily mean the complaint was not being managed appropriately.  The feedback could be related to record keeping of fields that allow the service are to learn more from the complaint.  Feedback on this area is being requested by the service.

(v)  Members enquired if the volume of housing complaints had changed since the service moved back in-house?

(vi)  Members referred to the Adult Social Care complaints and enquired about the type of complaints coming in, in relation to the categories of complaint especially the quality of care.

The Head of Governance and Business Intelligence informed Members the figures for the first 2 quarters showed a slight decrease in the number of complaint for housing since the service moved back in-house.  There has been a difference in approach with more direct action since housing services moved back in; especially for complaints related to contractors.  This is alongside a more robust approach to management.

The Head of Governance and Business Intelligence advised he could not provide the information about the breakdown of complaints in the categories for Adult Social Care.  The officer confirmed he would provide the information after the meeting.

(vii)  Members enquired how much of the increase in complaints for 2016/17 related to answering complaints to a resolution and what percentage related to resources.  Members were of the view there were less resources to deal with complaints.

The Head of Governance and Business Intelligence advised it was a mixture of both.  There are some areas that have struggled in terms of turning around information.  This is areas like benefits and housing needs.  This is associated to the volume of case work and dealing with response to complaints.

It was highlighted that for housing repairs unresolved cases that were closed, but not completed, re-entered the complaints system.  There were over 100 cases like this, it is now down to 8/9 outstanding cases.  It was pointed out when cases like this get closed, it leads to a higher volume of complaint cases.

(viii)  Members referred to Member Enquiry process and asked about the distinction between a normal case and an urgent case.  Members enquired if there was the ability to flag up different needs of particular cases.  If not is the distinction of cases being considered?

The Head of Governance and Business Intelligence explained the team has 3 officers that managed over 3000 cases last year.  If Members have an urgent case which needs an answer within 24/48 hours.  The officer advised Members to bring cases like this to his attention or to a member of his team and to state why the case was urgent and this would be followed it up.  The officer expressed this action needed to be used appropriately and should not be used for all casework.  The officer encouraged Councillors to raise any concerns with him if they were experiencing issues with casework resolution.

The Chief Executive added this involved trust.  He hoped that Councillors would trust officers to respond to urgent cases appropriately.

(ix)  Members enquired if the key issue was poor response and the standard of response.

(x)  Members for information to be distributed to Councillors about the process for different case work.

In response the Chief Executive explained there is a step change in relation to complaints.  The officer referred to live data and highlighted the current improvement in complaints: for housing repairs the council currently has 3 outstanding responses and for housing management the council currently has 1 outstanding response.

(xi)  Members enquired if Hackney Council had received any recommendations from the Local Government Ombudsman in relation to its handling of complaints?  If yes, what were the recommendations and have they been implemented?

The Head of Governance and Business Intelligence informed the Commission LBH had received 1 report from the LGO and this was 2 months ago for a long standing case for many years.  This related to a planning case.  Prior to this the last report was 9 years ago.

(xii)  Members were still concern about the increase in response times.

The Head of Governance and Business Intelligence advised this is largely due to historic housing cases.  At the start of the year the council had over 100 outstanding housing cases.  This has been reduced to less than 10.