Agenda item

The Panel had requested a detailed report on the declining performance of Stage 2 Children’s Social Care complaints completed within 65 days and Stage 2 Corporate complaints completed within 25 days.  The Panel had also requested an explanation of the concerns raised in the 2019/20 Annual Letter from the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGO).

By way of introduction, the Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Transformation and Commissioning reminded the Panel that the work of the Comments, Compliments and Complaints Team was the result of input from local residents.  She welcomed the interest of the Panel in this work.

The Chairman recognised the balance between the number of complaints received and the complexity of those complaints.  He was conscious that a small number of very complex complaints could distort the figures.

The Complaints Manager introduced the report and made the following main points:

·       The Consumer Relations Unit took the Panel’s concerns very seriously as the performance indicators offered a key insight into the perception of the service.

·       As Members were aware, the complaints process overall was very complex.  Individual complaints could also be very complex.

·       The figures showed that the number of complaints received was on the whole declining.  For both Children’s Social Care and Corporate, there had been an improvement in the resolution of complaints at Stage 1.

·       Difficulties remained at Stage 2 where recruitment had been a challenge, both for Consumer Relations Officers, and Independent Investigators and Independent Persons.  The pool of Independent Investigators and Independent Persons was currently insufficient and a further recruitment campaign was planned for 2021.

·       Anonymised extracts from compliments received were included in the agenda report.  The Complaints Manager was proud of the volume and variety of compliments received and found them humbling.

·       The concerns of the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman were taken very seriously.  The largest issue raised was compliance with LGO recommendations.  Of the 12 cases referred to, only one had not complied with recommendations and this was due to the complexity of the case.  She acknowledged that there were lessons to learn and a need to make sure that the process was as good as it could be.

The Chairman noted that performance in relation to Statutory Children’s Social Care complaints had deteriorated in the last year.  He thanked the Complaints Manager for her summary of the report and noted that the detail provided helped to quantify the challenges.  He went on to ask about the improvement programme, including what was being done to improve and when improvements would be seen.

The Strategic Director of Commercial and Change suggested that there was a need to look at the overall process including the available resources.  There had already been pleasing progress at Stage 1.  65 days for completion of Stage 2 may sound like a long time but these were the most complex complaints.  He suggested that there was a need to focus on conflict resolution, staffing and the creation of a complaints database.

The Complaints Manager suggested that the service was already seeing some progress and reminded the Panel that figures for the first half of the current year had improved, with 25% of complaints now being completed within 65 days.  Discussions had been held with Independent Investigators and Independent Persons to get their views on why timescales were not being met and they had raised the following points:

·       Access to client files had proved difficult during the Covid pandemic.  Normally Independent colleagues would have come into County Hall to look at confidential files.  As a result of social distancing requirements, access to County Hall was now restricted and they were reliant on office staff to undertake a file read for them.  This was not an efficient way to work.

·       Universally, Independent colleagues found it difficult to set up interviews with complainants within the timescales.

·       There was often a delay in receiving interview notes from staff.

·       Service provision was more complex and often involved multi-organisational working.

Members were given an opportunity to ask questions and the following main points were raised:

·       It was noted that the 65 working days to complete a Stage 2 investigation was set nationally by legislation.  A question was asked about who were the best performing local authorities, how they were achieving this and whether there was an IT solution to case management.  In response, the Strategic Director of Commercial and Change assured the Panel that IT solutions were being looked at.  He went on to agree that it would be useful to compare approaches with ‘best of breed’ authorities and assess whether they had the same issues.  Peer review and benchmarking would be helpful.

·       Members were reminded that the Consumer Relations Unit was working with other partners and was often reliant on them to provide information in a timely manner.  The Complaints Manager suggested that further work could be done with partner organisations to identify areas for improvement.  Deadlines were given to partners but it was difficult to instruct and control their response.

·       Complaints about highways were part of Corporate complaints and, although this was the largest area of complaints, fewer progressed to Stage 2.  Something that the public might see as a complaint was in reality a request for a service, such as a pothole repair or a faulty streetlight.

·       It was suggested that the Member Case Management System may also help with intelligence on what was being reported to Councillors.  In response the Complaints Manager informed the Panel that she received very few complaints via Councillors and she suggested that, on the whole, elected Members would go direct to Highways Officers to resolve issues.  Members of the Panel confirmed that, in general, they would approach the Highways Liaison Officer with issues of this kind.

·       It was noted that one of the staffing issues related to an officer going on maternity leave.  It was suggested that losing a member of staff in this way could have been anticipated and cover arranged.  The Panel was informed that interviews for this post would take place in the following week.  The post was very difficult to recruit to as it required a very specific skill set.

·       Members were reminded that the service had to operate within available resources when considering how much to pay Independent Investigators.  The aim was to get as good a service as possible within budget constraints, recognising that other local authorities may be able to pay more.

·       The Chairman noted that a clear improvement plan was needed for Stage 2 Children’s Social Care complaints.  Consideration should also be given as to whether completion within 65 working days was achievable or whether central government should be lobbied to make the statutory timescales more realistic.  A Member of the Panel who had experience of Independent Review Panels suggested that the complexity of cases had grown and 65 days for completion was no longer realistic and this was demoralising for staff

It was agreed that:

• further work should be done to compare the Council’s performance with other comparable local authorities; and

·       the Panel would receive a further update, including progress against relevant performance indicators and a detailed improvement plan for Stage 2 Children’s Social Care complaints, at its next meeting in July.

The Chairman thanked the Complaints Manager for all her work in what was a challenging role.