Issue - meetings

The attached information is for Members to note

The report concerning the Children & Young People’s Services was before the Committee.  The Chairman asked members if they had considered the report and whether they had any questions to put.  He asked how the Service had managed to dramatically reduce the number of complaints about looked-after children (from nine to four) and was told that this had been largely achieved because the Service had produced a number of leaflets which addressed the most common issues and this had helped.  The Service hoped to compile and distribute more concerning other areas which were not properly understood and hoped that that would go some way to reduce other areas of complaint across the Service with equal effectiveness.  It was noted that previously there had been no mechanism for informing parents/guardians, but this was now changing.

A question was asked about whether children could complain and if they could, were they routed the same way as adult complaints.  In response, Members were informed that children could complain and that the process was the same – though it was pointed out that an advocacy service was almost certainly going to be involved.

A Member asked whether there was a mechanism whereby a person complained about could complain about the person making a complaint against them.  In response, he was informed that this might not always be possible as in many cases complaints were anonymous.  The Service would, however, always put the child’s interests first and had produced leaflets which it hoped would “de-mystify” some of the processes which tended to be at the root of some complaints.

Questions were asked about the low number of complaints around adoptions and about the lack of information concerning ethnicity which the report showed.  In answer to the firs question, the Service replied that those were the only issues recorded and with regard to the question of the lack of ethnic data, it was due in part to a failure of the old system to record that data, but was also in part because the staff dealing with the case had failed to record it.  The new system would capture this more effectively if this field was made a mandatory one and ways of doing that were being explored.

A further question was asked about whether any mechanism existed to obtain information from schools and members were informed that none did.  Complaints came from parents and were referred back to the school if appropriate to do so.  Any feed-back usually came from the governing body.  A councillor added that Members should bear in mind that the local authority was not involved in academies.

The Committee noted the report which had already been considered and approved by Overview and Scrutiny.

Report presented by Veronica Webb

The complaints process comprised three stages:

Stage One: Local Resolution

This had a 10 day response time (which could be extended to 20 days if a letter of delay explanation was sent to the complainant).

Stage Two: Independent Investigation

Two independent people would be invited to investigate the complaint and the original complaint response.

Stage Three: Review Panel

A panel would be called to independently review the complaint and the actions taken.

In 2013-14 the level of complaints resolved at stage one had decreased from the prior year. Stage two complaints remained at a static level as per 2012/13.

The highest levels of complaints had come from Under 12’s Triage/ MASH & Assessment teams, and Looked After Children (LAC). LAC was a highly emotive area, and often resulted in a decision of one parent or another receiving care of a child. The other parent often did not agree with the decision of the Social Worker.

Information had been improved for those outcomes. Acknowledging how parents felt often improved the outcome for the aforementioned parents. The summer break could impact on timing of the complaints process as parties may not be available for interview or investigation.

At Stage 1, 24 complaints were resolved within the 10 day limit. Another 20 complaints were resolved within the extended limit of 20 days.

Stage 2 included face to face meetings and were mainly with regards to welfare of the children within the social care intervention spectrum. This was found to work very well. Communication was vitally important, but the wishes of the children had to be taken into account.

One complaint in 2013/14 reached stage three and one action was upheld by the Regional Practitioner. An amendment had been made to the records.

In 2013/14, less than 16% of complaints were corporate. In 2012/13 the level of corporate complaints was significantly higher.

A small number of entries were categorised incorrectly to Children’s Services. Complaint numbers in the previous year had an unusual peak due to the closure of children’s centres. 2014/15 data may have been unfairly benchmarked against that data.

The expenditure on 2012/13 complaints was zero.

The expenditure on 2013/14 complaints was £9652.90. Some of this was for complaints that did not complete in the 2012/13 fiscal year.

Most complaints were received via email and telephone as these were the instant, most convenient methods.

Members correspondence had a 56% drop in 2013/14 compared to the previous year. This was largely due to the closure of children’s centres in 2012/13 having increased the volume of complaints. 67% of these were responded to within 10 days.

It was important for staff morale to receive compliments and these had been received across several teams. From the next meeting, examples of compliments would be made available. Compliment areas were mostly professionalism, practical advice given, and re helpful and understanding members of staff.

The complaints action plan showed some issues identified and areas of improvement in order to reduce that type of complaint.

The statutory timescale of complaint resolution  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47