Customer Services

Fig. 3.1: Results of BFI’s assessment for Customer services

Source: BFI inspection assessment

For an explanation about how to read this radar chart see Executive summary.

3.1 Customer service is important. Local authorities should aim to:

· deliver modern, efficient and secure customer focused public services, and empower individuals to influence them

· reduce barriers to work, particularly in relation to benefit and rent policy

· support vulnerable people and tackle all forms of social exclusion, including bad housing, homelessness, poverty, crime and poor health.

Clear, simple, accessible claim forms and leaflets

3.2 Clear HB and CTB claim forms can help reduce the need for requests for further information from the customer. They provide information on the types of evidence that are required, and reduce the risk of customer confusion, error and fraud. Clear advice at the time of the claim can reinforce messages about the need to provide evidence of identity and income, and resolve concerns of those with limited documentation.

3.3 The London Borough of Lambeth completed a self-assessment for this element and reported that it was at Standard. We disagree with this assessment and conclude that it is not at Standard. However, the council has a number of strengths in this area and comes close to reaching Standard.

3.4 In the first BFI inspection, we recommended that the council revised its claim form in line with BFI's model claim form. We are pleased to report that the council has adopted BFI's model claim form and that it has been awarded a Crystal Mark by the plain English campaign.

3.5 On our first inspection we recommended that:

…Lambeth introduces a single claim form for all types of HB and CTB claims, including renewal claims, thereby ensuring that all relevant information is captured…

and we are pleased to report that it has done so.

3.6 During this inspection, we looked at the design, layout and language of the council's claim form and consider that it is well designed and makes use of a grid layout, with clearly worded questions that flow logically. We compared it against BFI's Designing the HB/CTB claim form and the results of this comparison are set out in Appendix B.

3.7 In consultation with Benefits service staff and local advice agencies, the council reviews the form annually and makes changes in response to new legislation. Each edition of the form includes a version control number and print date. This is good practice as it helps to ensure that the correct version of the form is in current use and helps to identify old stocks of forms for destruction. However, samples of old forms and documentation should be kept for reference purposes.

3.8 We were pleased to find that supplies of claim forms were available from the council's office at Olive Morris House and the 2 Neighbourhood Housing Offices we visited. However, although a system is in place, Registered Social Landlords report difficulties in obtaining claim forms. This is disappointing, and the council needs to review this process.

3.9 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX

3.10 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X

3.11 All claims for HB and CTB are completed in writing, on an approved form and in accordance with the relevant regulations.

3.12 The council has conducted market research in the last 2 years to test the clarity and usefulness of its claim form. This was done by consulting with local advice agencies and customers via a Customer Satisfaction Survey. We were told that customers' views were that website access to the claim form was not their preferred mode of access. This has led to a review of council policy of making the claim form accessible in this format for customers. This review is ongoing.

Recommendations

We recommend that the London Borough of Lambeth: · ensures Registered Social Landlords obtain a regular, controlled supply of claim forms and, in consultation with the landlords, reviews its current procedure of supplying and monitoring claim forms to Registered Social Landlords · XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX

Timely, helpful response to public enquiries

3.13 This section is concerned with quantitative measures, such as opening hours and speed of response, and the quality of service that is provided.

3.14 The London Borough of Lambeth completed a self-assessment for this element and reported that it was not at Standard. We agree with this assessment, although the council has a number of strengths. These include:

· having a telephone enquiry line open for 51 hours a week

· offering one main enquiry office which is open for 40 hours a week

· offering private interview facilities to customers

· providing access to a wide range of public information leaflets

· setting a target for responding to correspondence

· carrying out customer satisfaction surveys

· staff handling enquiries are able to access the relevant information required to respond to customers' enquiries in a timely fashion.

3.15 To be at Standard, the council must ensure that:

· customer waiting times are monitored effectively

· the percentage of letters that are replied to within target times are monitored

· a consistent over-the-counter verification and receipt service for customers is provided

· effective systems are in place so that customers do not need to present verification documents more than once

· the results of customer satisfaction surveys are reported back to operational staff and are acted upon.

Telephone service

3.16 The council contract-out the call centre services to Capita. The call centre offices are located in Capita's office in Coventry and are open to the public on:

· Monday to Friday from 08:30 - 18:00

· Saturday from 09:00 - 13:00.

3.17 The contract includes a service level agreement which states that Capita will answer 80% of calls within 20 seconds and evidence provided shows this target was met on all but 2 occasions in the year 2003/04. However, results from the council's Customer Satisfaction Survey show that only 50% of customers consider that enquiries to the call centre are answered quickly.

3.18 It is the responsibility of the Finance and Contracts Manager within the Benefits service to monitor the call centre contract and ensure opening times and response targets are adhered to and met. This contract states that
3 quality audit reports in any 12 month period should be undertaken. The Finance and Contracts Manager in the Benefits service was unable to provide these reports. The Benefits service must take a more formal approach to monitoring the call centre contract with Capita and complete the stated number of quality audit reports.

3.19 A team of 18 staff handle benefit-related enquiries for the council. When there is an increase in service demand, Capita can utilise the services of a multi-skilled support team. Capita has responsibility for delivering training to staff to ensure that they are competent to respond to a wide range of enquiries. Training needs are identified by both Capita and the Special Projects Manager within the Benefits service, by:

· conducting regular one-to-one interviews with staff

· recording and listening in to responses

· analysing the types of enquiries which are forwarded on to an assessment officer from call centre staff

· undertaking mystery shopping telephone calls

· checking that information is recorded on the benefits information technology system.

3.20 We are pleased to report that the above checks represent the positive implementation of recommendations made in our first inspection, which said:

…all correspondence received is recorded on the IT system

3.21 If the call centre staff cannot respond to an enquiry it is forwarded on to an assessment officer, who will either call the customer back and give a full response over the telephone, or make an appointment with the customer.

3.22 In our first inspection we recommended that:

…Capita ensures all benefit processors return calls to callers who have requested an update on the progress of the claim and introduces procedures so that the call centre team is aware of the state of work in Lambeth…

3.23 We were told by Capita that such procedures are now in place and regular liaison meetings are held at which performance and procedural changes are discussed. The Benefits service and Capita have both identified individuals who act as a liaison officer for each organisation. The individual within the Benefits service focuses on providing Capita with legislative and procedural updates, and monitors and identifies call centre staff training needs.

Customer reception points

3.24 The council's main customer reception for HB and CTB enquiries is located in Brixton in Olive Morris House and is open to the public from:

· 08:00 - 16:30 each Monday, Tuesday and Friday

· 08:00 - 13:00 each Wednesday

· 08:00 - 19:00 each Thursday

· 09:00 - 12:00 each Saturday.

3.25 There are 15 enquiry counters, and 3 of these provide private interview facilities. There are 13 customer service officers which allows 10 counters to be staffed at any one time. The customer reception is closed on a Wednesday afternoon to facilitate staff meetings and training.

3.26 In the customer reception area a double queuing and ticket based system is in operation. Customers first go to a front reception point, where staff deal with very brief enquiries, or provide a ticket to those customers without an appointment, directing them to the correct counter within the customer reception. However, for customers with an appointment, arrival times are recorded manually, and no queuing ticket is given.

3.27 Customers who only wish to hand in a completed claim form can photocopy their own supporting documents, queue at a document counter and present original documents with photocopies already taken. This has helped speed up the process and we observed many customers taking advantage of this service.

3.28 When customers reach the enquiry counter, staff record the ticket number, arrival time and interview start and finish times onto an arrival sheet. However, monitoring of waiting times is not effective because it does not capture how long customers have waited to reach the front reception point.

3.29 We were told that customers with appointments are given a 15 minute time slot, except if an interpreter is required when a 30 minute time slot is given. Staff consider this amount of time inadequate, as customers' enquiries can often take up to one hour to deal with.

3.30 The number of callers shown in Figure 3.2 represents an increase over the number of callers identified in our first inspection, where we recommended that service delivery should be improved by reducing the average waiting time from 72 minutes. Although the data in Figure 3.2 shows that the average customer waiting time has improved from our first inspection, the council does not meet the Standard of seeing 80% of customers without an appointment within 15 minutes.

3.31 In our first inspection we recommended that:

….Lambeth identifies, records and analyses the reasons that callers visit Olive Morris House….

3.32 Although this information is now recorded, we are disappointed that there is no analysis of the results of this information or any evidence that it has been used to improve service delivery. However, we were told that monitoring of waiting times has been used to undertake queue busting exercises, and has led to an increase in the number of customer service administrators assisting customers with initial enquiries from 4 to 7 from April 2004.

Fig. 3.2: Average waiting times of callers to the customer reception point

Period	Number of ad hoc customers	Average waiting times (minutes)	Number of customers with appointments	Average waiting times (minutes)
5 Oct 2003 - 2 Nov 2003	2,316	57	700	3
9 Nov 2003 - 30 Nov 2003	1,941	63	584	3
7 Dec 2003 - 28 Dec 2003	1,881	49	436	4
4 Jan 2004 - 1 Feb 2004	2,394	41	462	4
8 Feb 2004 - 29 Feb 2004	2,449	33	309	3
7 Mar 2004 - 4 Apr 2004	3,480	33	252	3

Source: The London Borough of Lambeth

3.33 Figure 3.2 also shows that the average waiting time for customers with appointments is 3 to 4 minutes. However, the monitoring of waiting times for this group is not effective as data is recorded manually, making it unreliable.

3.34 We were told that customer service officers have a target to see
16 customers in a day and that the Customer Service Manager monitors this target by undertaking quality checks. However, the target is lowered to accommodate any interpreting needs during interviews.

3.35 If met, this target would not match the daily average number of customers who visit the customer reception during the time-period identified in Figure 3.2. This target therefore needs to be increased to reflect the average number of daily customers visiting the customer reception.

3.36 We also undertook visits to 2 Neighbourhood Housing Offices. These were:

· Waterloo and Kennington

· Upper Norwood

3.37 All Neighbourhood Housing Offices are open to the public from:

· 09:00 - 16:00 each Monday, Tuesday and Friday

· 09:00 - 13:00 each Wednesday

· 09:00 - 16:00, then 17:00 - 19:00 each Thursday

3.38 There is no formal queuing or ticket based systems at these Neighbourhood Housing Offices which the council considers appropriate for their size and customer usage. From our own observations of the existing Neighbourhood Housing Offices we agree with this view. We were told that there are plans to rationalise the Neighbourhood Housing Offices from 15 to 5 with the 5 new offices providing a wider range of services and offering HB and CTB advice surgeries. Following this rationalisation, the council should introduce a formal queuing system in the enlarged customer service offices.

3.39 Private interview facilities are available for customers at the main customer reception and the Neighbourhood Housing Offices and are used routinely. However, notices about their availability are poorly displayed at Olive Morris House, and no notices were observed at the Neighbourhood Housing Offices.

3.40 Customers can make an appointment either at the counter or by telephone. The Benefits service has an arrangement with the call centre which enables telephone staff to offer customers an appointment, and diary evidence showed appointments are being offered within a 14 day period.

3.41 The main customer reception displays a wide range of the Department's benefits leaflets, and we are pleased to report that some of these were available in languages other than English. However, more leaflets and posters with details of local advice agencies should be made available. Customer service officers are responsible for monitoring stocks of leaflets, and report this information to the Customer Service Manager who orders supplies of leaflets. A more central display of posters and leaflets within the customer reception point would improve their visibility and accessibility.

3.42 The display of leaflets and posters at the Neighbourhood Housing Offices was disappointing. Waterloo and Kennington had no HB and CTB related leaflets on display and Upper Norwood had only a limited range. However, we are pleased to report that all offices displayed notices informing customers of how to report racial harassment and of interpreting services in the council.

3.43 Posters informing customers of the council's counter-fraud strategy and fraud contact details were only seen at Waterloo and Kennington Housing Office. No counter-fraud posters were on display at the main customer reception or at Upper Norwood Housing Offices. Posters should be used to promote the council's counter-fraud strategy and to inform customers of how to report any suspected fraud.

3.44 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX

3.45 The council sets a target to respond to correspondence within
10 working days, and monitors the quality of responses made. However, the evidence provided does not specify whether the response times relate to a substantive or holding response. As the council does not monitor the percentage of letters replied to within the target, if this target is not achieved, there is a risk of creating unnecessary delays in processing claims and queries.

3.46 The council could not provide us with any evidence to ensure that staff handling a customer enquiry were able to access relevant information in a timely fashion. However, we were told that all staff on the main customer reception counters and in the call centre can access the Benefits service information technology system in a timely fashion. Staff could advise customers on the progress of their claim and of any additional documentation they needed to provide.

3.47 Customers are provided with a comprehensive receipt when they bring in a claim form and supporting documents to the main customer reception. This is used to help make customers aware of any further information required and to help inform staff of what information has been provided. However, from our observations and talks with staff in the Neighbourhood Housing Offices staff had not received verification training and did not provide receipts to customers as a matter of routine. The level of verification checks and provision of receipts to customers at the Neighbourhood Housing Offices should be of the same standard as the services at Olive Morris House.

3.48 The Benefits service maintains a record of the supporting documents provided by each customer on the information technology system, but customers and Registered Social Landlords told us that they are frequently asked to provide both the same and different information on more than one occasion during the life of a claim. Evidence provided by the council does not provide a breakdown of whether repeat requests for further information are for the same or different information.

3.49 Repeated requests for information create additional work for caller and counter enquiry services and cause delays in processing a claim. Figure 3.3 shows the impact of customers needing to provide further information on telephone and counter enquiries. In the 137 cases (62%) requiring further information, 19 cases (14%) resulted in at least one extra visit to the customer reception point. Using the amount of time allocated to an appointment, this equals a minimum of 285 minutes of extra time spent in dealing with counter visits.

Fig. 3.3: Cases checked where further information was required, October 2002 - March 2003

	Total	New claims	Renewal claims
Number of cases checked	788	222	566
% of all cases where further information was required	42.4	62.6	34.5
% of cases where further information was incomplete/incorrect	6.7	10.8	5.1
% of cases where a call was generated	12.9	21.2	9.7
% of cases where a counter visit was made	13.7	14	13.6

Source: The London Borough of Lambeth

3.50 However, this analysis is only based on the actual number of cases checked and not the total number of cases requiring further information. Therefore the actual impact on counter and telephone enquiries will be far greater than this. The Benefits service should undertake an up-to-date assessment of the frequency and number of cases where a customer is asked to provide further information and take measures to prevent this.

3.51 Figure 3.4 shows that in 57.6% of cases no requests for further information from the customer were needed. When further requests were made, the majority of customers only required one further request. However, this table demonstrates that there remains one third of cases that require additional information before an assessment for benefit can be made, and that over 10% require more than one request. The council should analyse these cases to see if trends are revealed in the type of information that is missing. These could then be addressed, for example, by adding more information to the claim form.

Fig. 3.4: Frequency of the number of requests made from a total of 788 cases checked between October 2002 - March 2003

Frequency of requests for further information	Number of cases	As % of 788
0	454	57.6
1	239	30.3
2	63	8
3	15	1.9
4	6	0.8
5	7	0.9
6	3	0.4
7	1	0.1

Source: The London Borough of Lambeth

3.52 As the information provided by the Benefits service is out of date and more recent figures are not available, it is difficult to assess whether improvements to either the claim form or other informative literature have already improved upon these figures.

3.53 The council takes active steps to find out what its customers want by using liaison groups with local advice agencies. This liaison takes the form of quarterly meetings, with written and verbal communications in between. The council also carries out customer satisfaction surveys on a 3 yearly basis. Although we were told that the results are not reported to operational staff on a regular basis, we were provided with evidence to indicate that efforts had started to pass on this information.

Recommendations

We recommend that the London Borough of Lambeth: · monitors the call centre, as specified in its contract, with Capita and produces 3 quality audit reports in any 12 month period · monitors customer waiting times at the counter more effectively and analyses the results · uses the information about the reasons why customers visit the main customer reception, to improve service delivery and to reduce the number of callers · increases the target of the number of customers to be seen by customer service officers in a day, so that it matches the daily average number of customers visiting the main customer reception · improves the display of posters and leaflets so that they are more visible and accessible to customers · ensures that posters informing the public about the council's counter-fraud strategy and contact details are placed in all customer reception areas throughout the council · introduces a formal queuing system for customers, following the rationalisation of the Neighbourhood Housing Offices · monitors the number of letters that are replied to within the target time of 10 days, and specifies whether the target of 10 working days relates to a substantive or holding response · provides a consistent over-the-counter verification and receipt service at all enquiry points/reception areas · XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X · monitors how quickly staff are able to access the relevant information when handling a customer enquiry · completes an up-to-date assessment of the frequency and number of times that a customer is asked to provide further information during the life of a single claim and: uses the analysis to put in place effective systems, so that customers are not asked to present documents more than once ensures that reception staff obtain all relevant information at the first visit · reports the results of customer satisfaction surveys to operational staff.

Effective training and development for customer service

3.54 It is important that staff are equipped to deliver good customer service. Training and development should be provided that will:

· allow staff to respond to enquiries, ensuring that the service is right first time

· ensure a continuing high standard of customer service.

3.55 The London Borough of Lambeth completed a self-assessment for this element and reported that was at Standard. We disagree with this assessment and conclude that it is not at Standard. However, the council has a number of strengths in this area.

3.56 The council has a training and development programme for staff. This includes an induction programme for new staff both at a corporate and Benefits service level. For existing technical and customer service officers there is an in-house programme of training relating to HB and CTB matters. Although this training does not extend to customer service officers completing assessments on claims, there are plans to rotate these staff onto the assessment section, which will enable them to become competent in completing full assessments on HB and CTB claims.

3.57 At a corporate level, training has been provided for customer service officers on non-technical customer service matters, such as:

· handling challenging behaviour

· meeting and greeting customers

· diversity and equality

· working with customers with poor literacy skills.

3.58 Each customer service officer has a job description, which is specific to the role of working in customer reception. These job descriptions inform staff about their responsibilities in respect of a wide range of technical and customer service matters. These include, advising customers of their potential entitlements to other benefits, identifying suspected fraudulent cases and keeping up-to-date with HB and CTB legislation. However, these job descriptions do not contain specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound objectives. To be at Standard the council needs to review the objectives in its staff’s job descriptions and ensure that they are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound.

3.59 We were told that staff at the Neighbourhood Housing Offices have not received training to help them assist customers in completing HB and CTB claim forms. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX

3.60 The council has a training programme for HB and CTB staff that is linked to personal development plans, and individual staff records are maintained in a personal learning and development folder.

Recommendations

We recommend that the London Borough of Lambeth: · ensures that all existing customer service staff have job descriptions that contain personal and work objectives that are specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and time-bound · XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

Clear, informative decision letters

3.61 Letters to customers and other people affected need to inform them clearly about decisions made, and explain the decision clearly enough for them to decide whether they might have grounds for appeal.

3.62 The London Borough of Lambeth completed a self-assessment for this element and reported that it was not at Standard. We agree with this assessment.

3.63 The council's decision letters do not meet the requirements of Schedule 6 of the Housing Benefit (General) Regulations 1987 and the similar provision in the Council Tax Benefit (General) Regulations 1992. The decision letters sent out by the council do not inform the customer of their right to a written request of the decision made by the Benefits service as required by Schedule 6 of the Act.

3.64 In the first BFI inspection, we recommended that:

…Lambeth includes all necessary information and give full and appropriate reasons for any changes in entitlement covered by the determination notice…

and we are pleased to report that this recommendation has been implemented. A full analysis of the council's decision letters can be found at Appendix C. Overpayment decision letters are discussed further in Overpayments, decision notices.

3.65 The decision letters inform customers of their responsibility to notify the council of any change in circumstances which may affect their claim. However, the wording could be improved by emphasising that customers have a legal duty to report change of circumstances and by informing customers of the consequences of not doing do.

3.66 The decision letters lack clarity of expression and should be in plain English. We were told that the style and content of decision letters is part of an ongoing review, which includes local advice agencies. Multiple letters are sent out to customers on the same day, which can cause confusion amongst customers. Procedures should be put in place which ensure that information is amalgamated into one letter.

3.67 We are pleased to report that full appeal rights are given on the reverse of each letter and contact details of independent local advice agencies are provided.

Recommendations

We recommend that the London Borough of Lambeth: · ensures that the wording in its decision letters comply with Schedule 6 of the Housing Benefit (General) Regulations 1987 and the similar provision in the Council Tax Benefit (General) Regulations 1992 by informing customers of their right to a written explanation of the decision · works towards obtaining a plain English award for its decision letters · continues to work with local advice agencies in the development of its new decision letters · ensures all decision letters and forms undergo a legal quality assurance check · puts procedures in place which ensures multiple letters are amalgamated into one.

Accessible, quality service for customers with specific needs

3.68 It is important that eligible customers are not deterred from claiming because the Benefits service does not address their specific needs.

3.69 Services need to be accessible to people:

· with disabilities

· whose first language is not English

· with communication or learning difficulties

· who are vulnerable because of their age or physical or mental health problems.

3.70 The London Borough of Lambeth completed a self-assessment for this element and reported it was not at Standard. We agree with this assessment. However, the council has a number of strengths in this area and comes close to reaching Standard.

3.71 The council is not at Standard because it does not provide a British sign language interview within three working days. We were told that the average time taken to arrange a British sign language interview is between 7 and 10 days. However, a Benefits service employee is trained in basic British sign language interpretation and is hoping to extend this training to advanced level. This will enable the Benefits service to use its own interpreter and provide a more speedy interpreting service.

3.72 Strengths in this element include:

· the council having assessed the standards of its service against the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and the Disability Rights Commission Act 1999, including assessment of public areas, and is actively reviewing the use of services that do not meet the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act

· the provision of written information in a suitable format for persons with specific needs

· the provision of textphone and hearing loop facilities for customers with speech and hearing difficulties

· having a nominated person who carries out checks on the availability and working order of special equipment and the provision of interpreting and translation services

· an awareness among staff of the interpreting services available in the council

· a skills register of staff who can assist with interpreting

· the assessment of public transport accessibility to customer service offices

· a home visiting policy and a visiting team to meet the needs of customers who have difficulty in reaching the office, due for example, to age or infirmity

· analysing the customer satisfaction survey to assess the service needs of key ethnic minority groups and customers with specific needs

· an effective translation and interpretation service, which provides a wide range of languages that is checked by a nominated person, ensuring it meets service needs

· consulting on a regular basis with a range of local advice agencies, with a nominated liaison officer who acts as a point of contact.

Accessibility

3.73 To be at Standard, those offices handling face-to-face enquiries should be readily accessible by public transport from large parts of a local authority's area. In addition, the needs of customers living in those parts of the area which do not have regular transport links to customer reception points should be addressed.

3.74 The main customer reception at Olive Morris House is in a central location in Brixton, accessible by a number of designated bus routes, and is a short walk from the London Underground Transport system. The
2 Neighbourhood Housing Offices which we visited are conveniently located near housing estates and shops and are accessible by a designated bus route.

3.75 We were told that there are plans to rationalise the Neighbourhood Housing Offices from 15 to 5. The 5 new offices will provide a wider range of services and offer HB and CTB advice surgeries. Evidence provided shows that a public transport assessment to the 5 proposed offices has been undertaken.

3.76 The council's Customer Satisfaction Survey 2003/04 reported that 80% of all respondents considered that the council's main customer reception is easily accessible. For those respondents who identified themselves as having a disability, 78% consider that the office is easily accessible.

3.77 Although the Benefits service makes use of the results of its customer satisfaction survey to assess the needs of those customers with disabilities, this assessment could be improved by asking more focused questions relating to the needs of customers with disabilities. For example, questions concerning the provision of information and access to special facilities, should be included.

Disability

3.78 The Disability Discrimination Act 1995 makes it unlawful for a service provider to discriminate against a disabled person by:

· refusing to provide or deliberately not providing any service which it provides or is prepared to provide for members of the public

· the standard of service which is provided to a disabled person or the manner in which it provides it

· the terms on which it provides a service to a disabled person.

3.79 The council has undertaken an assessment of the main offices in the borough against the standard of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 and the Disability Rights Commission Act 1999. In response to these assessments, plans have been produced which identify the work needed to bring services up to Standard. These plans are outlined in a series of Access Audit Reports, and provide a detailed assessment of the:

· approach to the building

· ability to enter and move around the building

· use of the facilities in the building

· ability to get out of the building.

3.80 A programme of work has been identified and costed over an initial
3 year period.

3.81 Hearing loops are fitted at the counters in the main customer reception point, and all the counters have low-level wheelchair access. Private interview rooms are accessible to customers who use wheelchairs. However, the
2 Neighbourhood Housing Offices we visited did not have hearing loops or
low-level counter access. There are plans to update the Neighbourhood Housing Offices when these are rationalised so that they meet the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 1995.

3.82 We are pleased to report that staff on the reception desk in the main customer reception area are advised to identify vulnerable customers and fast-track them through the queuing system. This prevents lengthy waiting times, and we commend this as good practice.

3.83 The council has a policy of offering home visits to those customers who meet its vulnerable person criteria. The Benefits service provides written guidance to its staff, which describes when to offer a home visit and offers guidance on addressing the needs of vulnerable customers. However, we were told by a local advice agency, and a Registered Social Landlord, that there has been a recent decline in the availability of home visits. We were told that the welfare home-visiting officers have joined the counter-fraud visiting service and now conduct both types of home visits. The Benefits service needs to ensure there are sufficient welfare home-visiting officers to meet the demand.

3.84 The Special Projects Manager checks and reports that the services provided address the needs of customers with disabilities, and that any special equipment provided is available and working.

People whose first language is not English

3.85 The 2001 census showed that 46% of the council's population described themselves as belonging to an ethnic minority group. The largest ethnic minority group in the council described themselves as black, and they make up 23% of the council's population.

3.86 The Benefits service has analysed the results of its customer satisfaction survey against the needs of its ethnic minority customers. This survey reported that 65% of ethnic minority respondents are satisfied with the ways in which they can contact the service. This compares favourably with the 64% of white respondents who are satisfied with how they can contact the service. However, a lower percentage (52%) of ethnic minority respondents were happy with the level of privacy in the reception area, when compared to white respondents (63%).

3.87 Although the Benefits service makes use of the results of its customer satisfaction survey to assess the needs of its ethnic minority customers, this assessment could be improved by asking more focused questions relating to the needs of ethnic minorities. For example, questions about access to interpretation and translation services should be included.

3.88 We found that the council is proactive in ensuring that adequate and appropriate interpretation and translation services are available for its customers. However, these services are not based on customer feedback from its customer satisfaction survey. Evidence provided shows that these services are reviewed regularly, both at a corporate and Benefits service level.

Recommendations

We recommend that the London Borough of Lambeth: · ensures British sign language interpreting services can be provided to customers within 3 working days · includes more focused questions in its customer satisfaction survey which relate specifically to the needs of: customers with disabilities ethnic minority customers   · monitors the usage of the home-visiting service and ensures that there are enough home-visiting officers to meet demands, within a reasonable timescale.

Customer representative groups

3.89 The Benefits service has regular informal and formal contact with a wide range of local advice agencies and has a nominated liaison officer who acts as a point of contact. Contact between the service and local advice agencies is by regular formal meetings and informal telephone and e-mail contact.

3.90 We attended a meeting between Benefits service staff and 3 local advice agencies. This meeting enabled local advice agencies to give feedback on the service. Benefits service staff use this forum to inform local advice agencies of changes to the Benefits service which will impact on service delivery to customers.

Accessible, quality service for those in work

3.91 Working people may have limited opportunities to contact the local authority. It is important that authorities provide accessible quality services for those in work.

3.92 The London Borough of Lambeth completed a self-assessment for this element and reported that it was not at Standard. We agree with this assessment but found the following strengths:

· the council has assessed the service needs of its in-work customers

· the council issues invitations to reclaim HB and CTB when IS/JSA(IB) has ceased.

3.93 The council has assessed the needs of its in-work customers by analysing the results of its Customer Satisfaction Survey 2003/04 according to the work status of respondents. This survey found that 90% of customers who work full time agree that the Benefits office is easy for them to access.

3.94 The council is not at Standard in this element because:

· it does not provide a service that meets the needs identified in its assessment of in-work customers

· there is no system in place to monitor the use of information received from Jobcentre Plus to make extended payments and the fast-tracking of claims

· XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX

3.95 The HB and CTB enquiry counter has a late opening evening until 19.00 on a Thursday and is open on a Saturday morning for appointments. These are specifically aimed at in-work customers. However, the results of the council’s Customer Satisfaction Survey reported that 52% of customers who work full-time find the enquiry counter opening hours inconvenient. The council should review its opening hours for in-work customers.

3.96 It is important that the council ensures that HB customers who start work and make a new claim are fast-tracked, given extended payments and have new claims put in payment before extended payments run out. The council does not monitor these claims. Monitoring would help ensure that procedures for fast-tracking and extended payments are effective and are working to assist the transition to work for in-work customers.

3.97 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X

Recommendations

We recommend that the London Borough of Lambeth: · reviews its opening hours for in-work customers · monitors that systems are working, to act on information received from Jobcentre Plus to make extended payments and fast-track claims.

Encouraging benefit take-up, reducing poverty

3.98 Local authority benefit staff have a role in encouraging take-up of other benefits. This work may be most effective as part of a wider anti-poverty strategy.

3.99 The London Borough of Lambeth completed a self-assessment for this element and reported that it was not at Standard. We agree that the council is not at Standard, but found some strengths including:

· a draft take-up strategy which aims to target information at underclaiming groups

· working in partnership with local advice agencies to promote the take-up of non-HB and CTB benefits

· providing details and advice on HB and CTB to new council tenants

· sending out information on CTB with Council Tax bills

· informing customers who have terminated their out-of-work claim that they may still be entitled to HB and CTB

· working with the local Inland Revenue and Child Benefit Centre staff to help with the promotion of non-HB and CTB benefits.

3.100 The council has a draft strategy describing its plans for benefit take-up work. This recognises the importance of liaison with other agencies and the need to identify and target underclaiming groups as a key part in any take-up campaigns. The strategy links into the objectives of the corporate Community Anti Poverty Strategy 2003/04. However, to be at Standard the plans outlined in this draft strategy need to be implemented.

3.101 In its new tenancy sign-up pack, the council includes an HB and CTB claim form and associated notes. We were told that Housing officers discuss information relating to HB and CTB during tenancy sign-up interviews and assist new tenants with the completion of a benefit form, when necessary.

3.102 The council informs Council Tax payers about potential help with their Council Tax by including a leaflet with their Council Tax bill. This leaflet is issued with all new Council Tax bills and informs tax payers of the availability of CTB.

3.103 The council liaises with the Inland Revenue, The Pension Service and Child Benefit Centre to promote the take-up of non-HB and CTB benefits. These organisations have held benefit take-up surgeries in the HB customer enquiry office in Olive Morris House and meet on a quarterly basis with staff from the Benefits service. As part of its liaison work, the Benefits service issued a mail shot, advising customers of the New Tax Credit and of any potential non-HB and CTB benefit entitlement.

3.104 To be at Standard the Benefits service needs to implement the plans outlined in its draft Take-up Strategy 2004 and undertake targeted HB and CTB benefit campaign work in conjunction with the local Department.

3.105 At key access points within the council we would expect to see posters and leaflets aimed at informing tenants on low incomes about HB and CTB, as well as providing information about extended payments and fast-tracking. This was not the case, and the council needs to ensure that these services are advertised at both the main customer reception, and at the Neighbourhood Housing Offices.

3.106 The Benefits service has undertaken a publicity campaign however, informing the public about claiming HB and CTB, and displaying posters on local transport and display boards located throughout the borough. Such a campaign needs to be sustained and targeted at identified underclaiming groups.

Recommendations

We recommend that the London Borough of Lambeth: · implements its benefit take-up strategy and ensures it identifies and targets underclaiming groups, such as: groups with a high chance of a successful claim groups who would be entitled to HB if they took up other benefits people in work, on low incomes · introduces take-up campaigns aimed specifically at reducing poverty · consults with the local Jobcentre Plus on specific take-up campaigns to encourage the legitimate take-up of HB and CTB · displays posters and leaflets which inform customers about the availability of HB and CTB at all appropriate council locations, targeting tenants who are traditionally hard to reach, and on low incomes.

Addressing complaints about the service effectively

3.107 It is important that complaints are dealt with promptly, and the complainant is given an informative explanation and an apology and rectification if appropriate.

3.108 The London Borough of Lambeth completed a self-assessment for this element and reported that it was at Standard. We disagree with this
self-assessment and consider the council is not at Standard. Although the council has a number of strengths in this area, it is not at Standard due to ineffective monitoring, resulting in a lack of control over response times to complaints

3.109 The council's complaints policy, the Complaint Policy Framework Document July 2001, defines a complaint as:

…any expression of dissatisfaction whether justified or not...

and outlines the procedures and targets for handling a complaint. The council operates a 3-stage process for handling complaints and sets stretching targets for dealing with complaints at each stage. The 3 stages provide guidance as to who handles and responds to the complaint. They are:

· stage 1 - local service level

· stage 2 - departmental level

· stage 3 - review by Chief Executive.

3.110 If the complainant is not satisfied with the response they have received from one stage of the process, the complaint is escalated to the next stage. The council's combined customer leaflet and form Are you happy with our services? includes contact details, and outlines the procedure for making a complaint and the expected response times for each stage of a complaint.

3.111 In our first inspection we recommended that the council amalgamate the Capita and Backlog Complaints teams. However, the Benefits service is now in-house, and all complaints relating to the Benefits service are dealt with by Benefits service staff and management.

3.112 By providing comprehensive procedural guidance for staff processing all 3 stages of complaints, the council informs staff of the complaints process. This represents a positive implementation of a recommendation made in our first inspection, which said:

…comprehensive guidance is issued to all complaints staff, and is continually updated…

3.113 In our first inspection we recommended that:

…complaints statistics are kept and analysed to monitor performance…

3.114 This recommendation has only been partially implemented as the Benefits service do not record the number of complaints acknowledged within the council's own target of 3 working days. Issuing an acknowledgement to a complainant helps reassure them that their complaint has been received, informs them of the expected full response time and can help reduce further enquiries made to the service. The Benefits service should ensure acknowledgement letters to complainants are issued, and that they monitor the number acknowledged within the target of 3 working days.

3.115 The council monitors the progress of making a full response to a complaint. However, the management information available could be used to manage the workflow more effectively and to control the number of complaints that are not responded to within the council's own target time of 15 days. This highlights a common weakness of not using management information to its full potential so that the workflow is more effectively managed.

3.116 Figure 3.5 details complaints received by the Benefits service and highlights the fact that HB complaints represent approximately a quarter of all complaints received by the council.

Fig. 3.5: Complaints received by the Benefits service

Year	Total number of complaints			As % of all complaints by the council
	Stage one	Stage 2	Stage 3	Stage one (%)	Stage 2 (%)	Stage 3 (%)
November 2001/ March 2002	570	12	1	36	8	3
2002/03	1,248	168	74	27	25	27
2003/04	1,450	168	74	27	21	20
April 2004/ May 2004	182	27	6	22	25	12

Source: The London Borough of Lambeth

3.117 Figure 3.6 shows that for the year 2003/04 the Benefits service did not respond to approximately 73% of stage one and 50% of stage 2 complaints within the target time of 15 days. This represents a deterioration in performance for handling stage one complaints, but an improvement for handling Stage 2 complaints.

Fig. 3.6: Time taken to clear complaints

	Answered in 15 days			Answered in 3 months
Year	Stage one (%)	Stage 2 (%)	Member Enquiries (%)	Stage one (%)	Stage 2 (%)	Member Enquiries (%)
2002/03	34.5	39.6	30.6*	91.2	98.4	93.4
2003/04	27.2	49.1	57.7*	81.3	97.6	98.2

Source: The London Borough of Lambeth
* Answered in 10 days

3.118 As identified in the corporate Complaints Digest October -
December 2003, the corporate target for providing a response to stage one complaints within the target time of 15 days is 90%. This target was achieved corporately for 60% of all stage one complaints received. The Complaints Digest identified that the speed of response to complaints continues to be an issue for the Corporate Complaints Network. This network is working with services within the council to assist them in achieving the corporate target.

3.119 In response to a priority identified in the Business unit business plan 2003 - 2004 for the Revenues and Benefits business unit, a restructuring of the Complaints team has taken place. At the end of March 2004 members of the Complaints team were transferred to work as part of the Private and Public Assessment teams. This transfer was in response to analysis that showed that 85% of complaints were about the speed of processing claims.

3.120 We were told that the intention of the restructuring, was to ensure that officers previously working solely on complaints would undertake assessment duties and, along with assessment officers, would process all stage one complaints. Similarly, Assessment team leaders would process stage
2 complaints. This increases the number of staff processing claims, and gives assessors a greater understanding of the reasons for complaints.

3.121 We were told that preparation for the handover of complaints had been inadequate, and that more time was needed to help assessment officers develop the necessary research and letter writing skills to process complaints. Since the restructuring, staff have received no feedback on whether the
15 day response target is being achieved.

3.122 We were told that initial results show an increase in the number of complaints escalated to stage 2 level. The total backlog of outstanding complaints had increased from 594 since the end of March 2004, to 647 in the second week of May 2004. This represents an increase of 8% in the total backlog of complaints in the 6 to 8 weeks since the transfer of the Complaints team took place.

3.123 The reasons for complaints have not been monitored since a change in the management structure in February 2004. It is important that monitoring of the reasons for complaints recommences, and that this information is made available to Assessment teams to enable the service to learn and develop its processes.

Recommendations

We recommend that the London Borough of Lambeth: · ensures that the Benefits service monitors its performance on complaints acknowledged within the target of 3 working days · ensures assessment officers have training to help them process complaints efficiently · continues to review and monitor the new process for handling complaints, ensuring that it does not have an adverse impact on the total backlog of outstanding complaints · recommences the monitoring of complaints by type, so that the service can take effective action to address and reduce the causes of complaints.

Dealing with requests for reconsideration and appeal referrals effectively

3.124 Local authorities need to ensure that they:

· resolve disputes as quickly as possible

· use management information to inform the effectiveness of their handling of disputes and appeals

· undertake analysis to ensure that any wider or common failures indicated are addressed.

3.125 The London Borough of Lambeth completed a self-assessment for this element and reported that it was at Standard. We disagree with this assessment and conclude that it is not at Standard. However, the council has a number of strengths in this area and comes close to reaching Standard.

3.126 The council is not at Standard because it does not implement decisions made by the Appeals Tribunals as quickly as possible. Evidence provided by the council shows that there are delays in implementing the decision in backdating cases when the Appeals Tribunal finds in favour of the customer. From February 2003 to October 2003 a sample of the 4 cases where the Appeals Tribunal found in favour of the customer showed that it took the council between 18 and 52 days to implement the decision.

3.127 The council has effective processes in place for actioning appeals, which are based on regulations and experience of the work. These processes take account of official guidance produced by the Department and comply with business and regulatory guidance. They are supported by comprehensive procedural guidelines which are reviewed in response to training and legislation. In our first inspection we recommended that the council provides written procedural guidance for staff working with reviews and appeals, and we are pleased to report that the council has implemented this recommendation.

3.128 A nominated team is responsible for handling appeals and consists of 2.75 full-time equivalent staff, and a full time Appeals manager who also manages a caseload. All appeals officers are experienced in HB and CTB administration and have processed appeals for several years. We were told that there are plans to disband the Appeals team to undertake both general assessment and appeals work. Both the 2001 BFI report and more recently the February 2004 Local Government Organisation report confirmed that
Appeals should remain a separate function. However, the Benefits manager

reassured us that the Benefits service has no plans to change the current arrangements. To ensure that the council continues to follow Department guidelines, a nominated Appeals team should remain in place.

3.129 In our first inspection we recommended that:

…staff are trained in the correct procedures to follow on reviews and appeals, Lambeth provides written guidance…

and we are pleased to report that this recommendation has been implemented. When the Appeals team was set-up, they received an intensive period of training, which has been followed by numerous refresher sessions by both in-house and external trainers. This has included how to present cases at a tribunal. Comprehensive procedural guidance is provided for staff which is updated in accordance with changes in legislation and work experience.

3.130 The Appeals Manager quality checks an appeals submission prior to cases being submitted to the Appeals Tribunal. These quality checks ensure submissions are correct for:

· personal details

· a schedule of evidence

· the final decision made

· the summary of facts

· the use of relevant legislation

· spelling and grammar.

3.131 In our first inspection, we recommended that:

…Lambeth improves its management information by recording all relevant information in the review process…

3.132 We are pleased to report that the council now maintains a comprehensive database of information relating to appeals processing. However, the management information available could be used to manage the workflow more effectively. This highlights a common weakness of not using management information to its full potential to help to improve the speed of processing appeals cases.

3.133 Figure 3.7 shows the number of appeals received by the council and the number outstanding. The number of appeals reconsidered and the number outstanding in the time periods shown do not match the total received for the same time period. This is because some of the appeals processed have been carried forward from an earlier time period. This information shows that over the time periods analysed, an increasing percentage of appeals have not been fully reconsidered by the Appeals team. The main increase in this backlog has occurred since October 2003 when the Appeals team reduced from 6 full time staff to 2.75 full-time equivalents. We were informed that 2 more staff are due to join the Appeals team in the near future. However, this is not a permanent increase in staffing and a review of the permanent resources needed to handle appeals work should be undertaken.

3.134 Figure 3.7 also shows that a high proportion of the cases over the last
3 years reconsidered by the Appeals team, are changed in favour of the customer. This indicates that there is a high degree of inaccuracy in the initial decision made by assessors and is indicative of a training need for assessment officers. In our first inspection we recommended that:

…to inform training needs, Lambeth analyses the outcome of first stage reviews and review boards…

3.135 Although this analysis is now undertaken and reported to the Training, Quality and Policy team at regular meetings, there appears to be an unaddressed training need for assessors.

Fig. 3.7: Numbers of appeals received and assessed by Appeals team

Date	Number of appeals received	Number of appeals outstanding		Appeals reconsidered by LA and original decision upheld
		Number	As % of total received	Decision upheld (Not in favour of appellant)	Decision not upheld (In favour of appellant)
Nov 2002 - Mar 2003	495	8	2	126 (25%)	245 (50%)
Apr 2003 - Sept. 2003	632	33	5	102 (17%)	336 (56%)
Oct. 2003 - Mar. 2004	669	284	42	81 (21%)	210 (54%)

Source: The London Borough of Lambeth

3.136 Figure 3.8 shows that the Appeals Tribunal uphold between 78% and 90% of the cases in favour of the council. Although the number of cases heard by the Appeals Tribunal is small, the high proportion found in the council’s favour indicates that the work carried out by the Appeals team is accurate and effective.

Fig. 3.8: Outcome of Appeal Tribunal

Date	Number of appeals submitted to Appeals Tribunal	Number of appeals awaiting hearing	Outcome of tribunals - numbers and (percentage) as total number heard by Appeals Tribunal
			Upheld	Revised in customers favour	Total heard by tribunal	Withdrawn by customer
Nov 2002 - Mar 2003	117	10	31 (78%)	9 (23%)	40	5
Apr 2003 - Sept 2003	133	24	27 (75%)	9 (25%)	36	2
Oct. 2003 - Mar 2004	96	18	17 (94%)	1 (6%)	18	6

Source: The London Borough of Lambeth

3.137 As indicated in Figures 3.9 and 3.10, there is a time delay at 2 stages of the process. Firstly, from receipt of an appeal by the council, to it being allocated to an appeals officer for reconsideration, and secondly the time taken to reconsider the case and then submit to the tribunal. These time delays have contributed to an increasing backlog of appeal cases.

Fig. 3.9: Time delay between date appeal received by council and date allocated to an appeals officer

	Nov 2002 - March 2003		April 2003 - September 2003		October 2003 - March 2004
	Number	As % of total received	Number	As % of total received	Number	As % of total received
0 - 7 days	22	5	33	5	90	18
8 - 15 days	38	8	74	12	75	15
16 - 30 days	92	19	215	34	73	15
31 days plus	326	68	302	48	257	52

Source: The London Borough of Lambeth

Fig. 3.10: Number of days between date received by the council and date sent to Appeals Tribunal

	April 2002 - March 2003		April 2003 - September 2003		October 2003 - March 2004
	Number	As % of total received	Number	As % of total received	Number	As % of total received
0 - 28 days	23	20	20	16	28	29
29 - 56 days	68	60	69	54	43	45
57 days plus	23	20	38	30	24	25

Source: The London Borough of Lambeth

3.138 We were told that acknowledgement letters are not sent to appellants following the receipt of an appeal. Letters of acknowledgement to an appellant can:

· help reassure them that their appeal has been received

· be used as an opportunity to inform them of the expected full response time

· be used as an opportunity to remind appellants of their appeal rights

· help reduce further enquiries made to the service.

3.139 The Benefits service should send acknowledgement letters to appellants within a target time of 3 working days on receipt of an appeal. We are pleased to report that when discussing this with the Appeals Manager, there was a positive response to this recommendation and procedures were set in place to develop an acknowledgement letter, while we were on site.

3.140 Decision letters issued by the council give information regarding the right of reconsideration and appeal, as well as providing contact details of local advice agencies. Customers can use the combined leaflet and appeal form What to do if you think the decision is wrong when submitting an appeal. Although this leaflet informs customers about their right to appeal, it does not inform the public of expected response times. The council should issue this leaflet with every decision letter which should include information about expected response times to an appeal submission.

3.141 We were told that only one case in the last year had been forwarded to the Social Security Commission Tribunal, and that there were resources available for representation at this tribunal.

Recommendations

We recommend that the London Borough of Lambeth:

· sets a target for the implementation of decisions made by the Appeals Tribunal and monitors performance against this target · maintains the presence of a dedicated Appeals team that focuses on the processing of appeal submissions · ensures that management information is used to effectively manage the workflow, reducing delays in submitting appeals to the Appeals Tribunal · reviews the staffing resources allocated to the Appeals team and makes any necessary increases · ensures that the outcomes of appeals assessments are used to effectively inform assessors' training needs · reviews the target for processing appeals work, including end-to-end clearance. Performance against targets should be monitored, and reported though the management chain and used to improve the speed of processing appeal cases

· issues an acknowledgement letter on receipt of every appeal received. This letter should include: expected speed of response to the appeal a reminder of a customer's appeal rights contact details of local advice agencies direct contact details of a member of the Appeals team a brief description of 'what happens next'. and be subjected to a legal review prior to issue · issues the appeals leaflet and form with all decision letters and includes in the leaflet expected speed of response, ensuring all forms and leaflets are subject to a legal review prior to issue.

Previous
Next