Commission for Local Administration in England s1

COMMISSION FOR LOCAL ADMINISTRATION IN ENGLAND

Minutes of the meeting of the Commission held at Millbank Tower, Millbank, London SW1P 4QP on Tuesday 11 July 2006 at 12.00pm

Present: Mr T Redmond (Chairman) Mr J R White (Vice Chairman) Ms A Seex

In attendance: Mr C Swinson (items 6, 7, 10) Mr N J Karney Mr M King Mr N H Jones Mr P MacMahon Ms K Dowse Ms J Feeney Mr S D Jones (items 4-6) Ms C Trynka (item 7) Mr A L Creech

1. Apologies

Apologies were received from Ann Abraham and Neil Hobbs.

2. Matters arising from the minutes of 10 May Commission meeting

The minutes of the 14 March meeting were confirmed as an accurate record, and signed by Tony Redmond.

There were no matters arising from the minutes.

3. Commission PIs: June 2006

CLA 1538 had been circulated. The following points were noted/agreed:

 Table A: the number of complaints received in the last 12 months (18,272) continued its downwards trend, a decrease of 1.8% compared with the previous 12 month period.

 Table B: housing complaints had decreased by over 400 (-6.9%) compared with the previous 12 months. Also, the number of planning complaints received in the last 12 months appeared to have stabilised, after a period which had seen steady increases in this category. It was possible that these decreases could be a reflection of the improvements/investments local authorities were making to their systems and procedures for dealing with housing and planning matters.

 Table C: 294 complaints were unallocated as at 30 June 2006 in the London office, five of which had been unallocated for longer than four weeks (72 unallocated in Coventry; 54 in York). Peter MacMahon reported that the London Management Team were due to discuss this at their meeting later that week. Also, 214 complaints were stockpiled in the York office (none in the other offices). This led the Commission to compare/contrast how “unallocated” and “stockpiled” case are defined, which stemmed from internal differences in treatment in respect of office procedure, and with some differences in approach between the offices.

1  Table D

o The total number of complaints decided over the last 12 months (18,025) was 706 below the planned figure. Anne Seex reported that the York office had a programme in hand to address the York shortfall (135 cases). She also pointed out that the York office received a proportionately higher number of social services complaints, which previous researches indicated tend to be more complex/take longer to decide than other categories of cases.

o The total number of premature and OJ complaints decided by the offices was similar, but there were large differences in the mix of premature/OJ complaints. Also, the Commission considered that it would be helpful if, in future, Table D could include data on the number of resubmitted premature complaints. KD; DP

4. Budgetary control report: May 2006

CLA 1539 had been circulated.

Stephen Jones drew attention to:

 the importance of monitoring the salaries budget and the underlying 2% vacancy rate: this would be kept under close review at the quarterly budget holders meetings with the Chairman.

 the potential capital commitments listed in the commentary, which would be funded direct from the reserves.

The Commission commented that it found the summary helpful.

The Deputies made the following comments on the control reports:

 Peter MacMahon reported that the overtime worked in the London office had stopped at the end of May. Also that the 2% vacancy rate would be achieved by delays in filling posts that become vacant during the year.

 Neville Jones said that he was in discussion with Stephen Jones about the reasons for the projected overspend in salaries, despite having the budgeted number of staff in post in Coventry (less one part-time vacancy). He also updated the Commission on the latest position in respect of the Coventry office’s air-conditioning unit; this might mean that the capital expenditure on the replacement unit could be put on hold. He would keep the Commission informed of progress. NHJ The Commission noted the report.

5. Detailed outturn team budgets 2005/06

CLA 1540 had been circulated. Stephen Jones explained that the final 2005/06 outturn showed a variance of only £3,000 between the amount of grant received and expenditure. It was evident that the budget holders meetings were helping to improve financial controls over expenditure and more effective use of resources.

2 Tony Redmond commented that this was a very satisfactory result, although there were some notable variances in individual budget headings.

The Commission noted the outturn budgets.

6. Annual Accounts 2005/06

CLA 1541 had been circulated. The Commission noted that the Audit Committee had discussed the Accounts earlier that day and had agreed an amendment (to refer to the new title of the sponsoring department – the Department for Communities and Local Government).

The Commission AGREED to approve the Annual Accounts (subject to the amendment), and to note the audit opinion.

7. Equality and Diversity

CLA 1542 (Deputies’ report on Diversity issues), CLA 1543 (Equality and Diversity in employment), and CLA 1544 (Equal Opportunities in service delivery: monitoring data for 2005/06) had been circulated.

Introducing the papers, Nigel Karney explained that:

 The Commission’s Race Relations Action Plan, voluntarily produced in accordance with the terms of the race relations legislation, had been based on an impact analysis led by the Commission’s Diversity Adviser, Chris Trynka, and conducted by the Deputies and the Equality and Diversity Group (EDG).

 The Plan had been broadened into a three-year Diversity Action Plan and Diversity Scheme, attached to CLA 1542, based on a further impact analysis carried out in 2005 in relation to disability issues. He suggested that these were the key documents for the Commission to consider, informed by the employment and service delivery monitoring reports.

 Further impact analyses were planned in 2006/07 for sex, religion and sexual orientation discrimination.

 Notes of the impact analyses already carried out could be made available to the Commissioners on request.

 The EDG had made a significant contribution to the development of the Diversity Scheme and Action Plan. Its membership was due to be re-appointed in the light of the Commission’ s new Register of Skills and Interests (ROSKI), with Neil Hobbs taking over the role as lead Deputy and Chair in place of Michael King.

The following issues were raised by the Commission in its discussion:

 The Commission expressed concern over the very high proportion of non-white applicants for investigator jobs who are short listed from the applications, but are then rejected after the test (21 out of 42 in London in 2005). And whether this could be attributed to bias in testing. Nigel Karney responded that a firm of external consultants, TMS, had reviewed the Commission’s recruitment practices in 2003, and recommended changes had been made at that time. He referred to the possibility that the Commission was not attracting the right

3 calibre of BME applicants, and this was one reason for focussing on recruiting BME people with a legal background in the latest round of investigator recruitment. Chris Trynka drew attention to the proposed removal of the requirement for educational qualifications from the Commission’s Person Specifications, and their replacement by a requirement to demonstrate relevant knowledge and skills, in order to comply with the new Employment Equality (Age) regulations 2006 due to come into force in October 2006. This would be likely to have the benefit of widening the field in a range of Commission jobs, in particular investigators. The Commission concluded that there may still be an issue of cultural bias in the testing and it would ask the Head of Human Resources to report further on this issue. HoHR  The Commission was encouraged to note that it received proportionally more complaints from BME complainants than for the population as a whole, although this was to be expected, given the likely ethnic profile of the users of major council services such as housing. It was noted that the service delivery data represented a year’s performance, and it would be helpful to see the data over a span of years, so that any emerging trends can be monitored/discussed. There was a discussion about the absence of data on the current wave of Eastern European immigrants who are not separately recorded, on the basis that this is not a distinction made in the Census. Chris Trynka pointed out that other organisations faced similar difficulties in identifying whether their service delivery was being targeted effectively at BME groups, because of the difficulty of identifying suitable comparative data.

 The importance of achieving an integrated approach to Equality and Diversity throughout the organisation, with clear linkages and engagement between the EDG, office management teams and line managers.

 Whether it would be possible to obtain more detailed/quantitative data on customer satisfaction to augment previous research studies, and for this to be linked to BME complainants so as to build up a picture of their experience of using the LGO service. In this connection it was noted that both the MORI and BMG researches had ‘boosted’ BME samples.

 The Commission noted that the EO monitoring data is linked to individual cases. But the Commission’s policy (taken on the Diversity Adviser’s advice) is not to give investigators access to this information to avoid any concerns about prejudice/bias. Chris Trynka confirmed that this remained her advice in respect of EO monitoring, and she agreed that that there would be value in undertaking further research work into BME complainants’ customer satisfaction which could be linked to the case.

In conclusion, the Commission noted that the draft Action Plan in its current form was based on a series of modest/incremental improvements, and agreed that it needed to consider the possibility of taking more radical action to address the Equality and Diversity issues highlighted by the monitoring data.

The Commission therefore AGREED: i that comparative/historical monitoring data should be produced so as to enable the Commission to identify underlying/emerging trends in the figures. KD; LH

4 ii that further work should be done on how to research BME complainants’ experience of/satisfaction with the LGO service, both during and after the investigation is complete. NJK; KD iii to review the previous work that had been undertaken for the Commission on potential cultural bias in the recruitment practices for investigators. NJK; HoHR iv to revise/re-prioritise the draft Diversity Scheme and Action Plan so that it identifies and addresses key areas of concern, setting out the actions that the Commission can take which will have the maximum impact in those areas and with the resource implications clearly identified. NJK; NH v to report back to the Commission in early Autumn 2006. NJK 8. Deciding the location of the new Gateway Access and Advice Service

CLA 1545 had been circulated. The Commission began by expressing its appreciation to Michael King and Kathryn Dowse for producing such a thoroughly researched, well presented and comprehensive report, within the tight timescale they had been set.

The Commission was agreed upon the importance of clear and prompt communication of the Commission’s decision, since it was very conscious of the uncertainty and anxiety felt by staff who may be affected by the outcome.

Introducing the paper, Michael King said that he and Kathryn Dowse:

 had undertaken extensive research into the six options initially identified, and had discounted four of them because they did not fully meet the essential criteria set out in the decision methodology. Details were set out in the paper.

 were especially grateful for the advice and assistance of Neville Jones, Ricky Duveen and Stephen Jones.

 had consulted the Commission’s building consultants, Lambert Smith Hampton, as well as other external property consultants.

 had had a number of informal discussions with PHSO colleagues.

 had brought with them detailed supporting material for the options, which could be viewed by the Commission if they would find this helpful.

Michael King also asked the Commission to note that:

 he was now able to give the Commission the latest position on option (iii) “Coventry 2: take on new space on the ground floor of the Oaks”, because the ground floor tenants had just advised him that they did not intend to exercise the break clause, and so they would be there for five more years.

 when considering the results of the consultation with staff and the Staff-side, although only four formal responses were received, he and Kathryn Dowse had also received informal feedback on the project at the presentations they had given to staff earlier in the year, which they had not considered either necessary or appropriate to set out in the paper.

5  he had arranged to meet the Advice Service Assistants early the following day, so that the Commission’s decision could be communicated to them first before all Commission staff are informed. He had also offered to meet the Staff side later that day to discuss the Commission’s decision.

The Commission then gave detailed consideration to the location of the new Access and Advice Service, in the light of consultation and the analysis of the options identified in the paper. It noted in particular that accommodation restrictions in the York office would make it necessary to find a separate location for the new Service if this was to be located in York, where the costs would be higher than Coventry.

In discussion, the Commission AGREED that the new service would be located in Coventry.

In doing so, the Commission carefully considered its duty to existing staff at York, and wished to make it clear that the decision on location was not in any way a judgment on the performance of the current advice service in York.

The Commission’s decision, which it considered to be a pragmatic one, was based on the following key factors:

 Ability to accommodate the new service within the existing Coventry office space;

 Least revenue and capital costs associated with the development and the operation of the service;

 Achievement of the change and its implementation within the agreed timescale of 18 months;

 Less risk attached to the development of the service and its future operation, so placing important factors that could jeopardise the project under closer control of the Commission.

The Commission noted that a tailored package of support for the current Advice Service Assistants was being developed in consultation with the Human Resources section, and that meetings would be arranged with each of the Assistants the following week to discuss the package.

The Commission also AGREED to the extension of the fixed term contract of the Advice Team Leader, with a view to retaining her services up to the closure of the York Advice Service.

Next steps i Tony Redmond to prepare, in consultation with the other Ombudsmen, a draft statement which will communicate the Commission’s decision to all staff (but only after the Advice Service Assistants have been informed). TR ii All staff to be kept closely informed of further developments during the course of the project MK;KD

6 9. Project management

CLA 1546 had been circulated.

The Commission AGREED that the current Programme Area approach to Project Management should not continue.

The Commission then considered the Deputies’ proposals in respect of the revised approach to Project Management and AGREED the following:

1. Each project should have an assigned Project Executive: this would be a Deputy (or in some cases the Chairman). The Project Executive will be accountable to the Commission for controlling any dedicated staffing and financial resources, maintaining progress and delivery of the planned outcome.

2. The Project Executive will provide direction and guidance to the Project Manager who is the person responsible for running the project (most project managers are Heads of Service but there are also some Assistant Ombudsmen and other staff in this role).

3. The Commission will receive quarterly progress reports on the most significant projects. ‘Significance’ is based on cost, organisational impact and strategic risk.

4. Highlights of significant projects would also be reported to the Management Conference.

5. The concept of ‘lead Assistant Ombudsmen’ would not continue. AOs would be involved in some individual projects (both significant projects and those involving lesser development activity). This would be both for specific activities and to be consulted for views on behalf of their local management team.

When the Commission discussed the Deputies’ suggestions for the significant projects, as listed in the paper, it became apparent that the Commission had queries about the choice and scope of the projects. Anne Seex suggested that the Diversity Scheme/Action Plan might be a suitable significant project.

The Commission therefore AGREED that Nigel Karney would:

i arrange to speak with each of the Commissioners in turn to consider which of the projects should be regarded as significant. NJK ii report back on the resulting recommended list of projects, for consideration at a future meeting. NJK 10. Audit Committee

CLA 1547 had been circulated. The Commission noted the minutes of the March meeting. Chris Swinson drew attention to a number of issues set out in the minutes which would be the subject of further discussions with the auditors, in order to assess/improve the Audit Committee’s effectiveness.

11. Date of next meeting 11.00am, 12 September 2006 (the next scheduled meeting on 8 August was cancelled because of insufficient business).