Agenda item

(Indicative timing: 10.35am – 11.20am)

Paul Harbison, Consumer Relations Officer (IT Customer Service), summarised the main points of the Agenda report on compliments and complaints relating to Adult Social Care Services, as part of an annual update to the Panel.

The Agenda report referred to the information presented in the Adult Social Care Statutory Representations and Complaints Procedure Annual Report for 2021-2022.  Complaints had increased from the previous report’s 123 to 233, with 13 being referred to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman (LGO), 3 of which were upheld and were found maladministration with injustice. The report included a breakdown of standards of service, which was the main area for complaints fully or partially upheld.

The highest areas of complaint concerned adult social care teams and provider services.

In terms of outcomes, 62 complaints were discontinued, which could be because the complainant had been asked for further information which had not been clarified or provided.

In the discussion which took place the following main points arose:

·         The cost to the Council of dealing with a complaint or compliment was not recorded unless it was carried out by an external Investigative Officer.

·         Low to medium risk complaints were dealt with by the Service Manager whereas medium to high risk complaints or those about a care provider would be dealt with by the Consumer Relations Officer or an externally commissioned Investigator.

·         Regarding the extent to which key issues of a compliment were examined, compliments sent to individual members of staff from outside the organisation were included in monthly reports prepared by the Consumer Relations Officer, once the source had been verified as a genuine service user or representative. An area receiving particularly high numbers of compliments would be highlighted so that any learning could be shared.

·         Quarterly reports on compliments and complaints were provided to the Directorate of People Leadership Team and Senior Leadership Team (SLT).

·         The Director and Assistant Director were heartened by the volume of compliments they saw, and would send a letter of thanks to staff involved, with positive cases also being used in recruitment campaigns.

·         The Panel Chairman agreed that thanking staff who received compliments was very important.

·         The Assistant Director pointed out that issues were constantly being raised with many being dealt with by early intervention and she felt the management team was very competent in this respect.

·         Consumer Relations did not look officially at other local authorities’ reports, however it was important to consider the picture at other similar councils such as Shropshire and a networking group was due to restart, having paused during Covid.

·         When asked whether the high number of complaints was a concern or due to historically low levels, the Consumer Relations Officer advised there had been a gradual increase, though not dramatically so. Some complaints were Covid-related, some were issues with providers and reablement was another identifiable area, although this service also received high numbers of compliments. The Assistant Director added that the Reablement Service had doubled in size and subsequent recruitment challenges had increased pressures especially since the new ‘discharge to assess’ model which increased numbers being discharged from hospitals – unfortunately the pressures necessitated changes as staff were shifted to respond to pressures, however numbers of people being helped to remain in their homes remained high.

·         The Cabinet Member with Responsibility for Adult Social Care used complaint reports as a valuable source of information, including those of neighbouring local authorities, and felt that a lot recently had been driven by lack of face-to-face contact during the pandemic.

·         It was explained that in general, patients’ ongoing care needs were planned for them as they left hospital; the discharge to assess model was to ensure that assessments such as continuing healthcare (CHC) assessments took place outside of hospital.

·         The percentage of complaints which were escalated to the LGO and the themes of concerns were on a par with other local authorities. Of the 13 complaints referred, all had gone through the Council’s complaints process, with a proportion asking for compensation for what in their view should have been provided to them. On occasion the Council had already stepped in, so while the complaint was upheld, the LGO would acknowledge action taken by the Council to put things right.

·         Increased numbers of complaints for Learning Disabilities and Mental Health Services were attributed to the fact that this area had only recently moved back in house to the Council.

·         The rise in complaints about decision making was likely to be financial for example around decisions about whether a person was eligible for social care and those related to CHC assessments were not purely the Council’s decision.

·         A Panel member commented that the report did not include many examples of complaints and related evidence of change or learning, which would have been helpful to the Panel, in view of increasing numbers. Whilst acknowledging the need to avoid potentially identifying the complainant, the Panel member pointed out that some would be very happy for their issues to be highlighted, and the Consumer Relations Officer would consider this for future reports, provided he had their full consent.

·         The Assistant Director advised that quality assurance took place on all LGA complaints. The complaints received through normal channels were looked at by the Senior Leadership Team and the Council’s Principal Social Worker and were not signed off until there was evidence that action had been taken. In recognition that more service user input was needed, a quality assurance forum was being established, and details could be shared with the Panel when available.

·         The Officers present acknowledged the Panel’s comments for future reports about including more narrative to explain any significant variances for particular services or issues and advised that future formats were being looked at.

·         Comment was invited from the Healthwatch Worcestershire representative present, who asked how learning was captured from complaints that had been discontinued, and also how the Council monitored complaints dealt with by providers. The Consumer Relations Officer explained if the complaint concerned a care provider, the complainant would be directed to the provider’s complaints process but if they did not wish to do this or had not been responded to in a timely way, then the Council’s statutory complaints process would apply. Following issues in the past with some providers’ responses, the Council now requested copies responses and would work with providers on any unsatisfactory aspects. Safeguarding concerns would be highlighted to the Adult Safeguarding Team and would take precedence over the complaints process, something which was communicated to the complainant.

The Panel Chairman thanked the Officers present for their attendance and for considering the request for additional narrative in future reports on complaints and to explain any significant variances. A further report was requested in 12 months’ time.