BFI findings
Strategic Management
|
Fig. 2.1: Results of BFI’s assessment for Strategic management |
|
|
Source: BFI analysis
For an explanation about how to read this radar chart see Executive summary.
2.1 Benefits administration has to be set within the much broader context of a local authority’s overall strategies and responsibilities towards, for example, neighbourhood renewal, alleviating poverty, preventing homelessness, helping people into work and enhancing consumer choice.
2.2 Figure 2.1 above shows that City of York Council is not at Standard in any of the elements of Strategic management.
The Vision
2.3 A statement expressing the strategic vision for the Benefits service enables Members, managers and staff to have a clear sense of direction, purpose and focus for their work. It also allows the public to understand where the key priorities for the service lie and how these fit into the overall vision and strategic objectives of the council.
2.4 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of the Vision.
2.5 The City of York Council Plan 2003/04 introduced a new planning framework, called the York Management System, which identified the need for a new city vision and community strategy, underpinned by the council’s vision statement and corporate objectives. City of York Council told us that its Local Strategic Partnership, Without Walls, developed the new city vision and community strategy, launched in the City of York Council Plan 2004/05.
2.6 City of York Council’s vision statement was:
Working for the city as it makes history, we will play our part by:
· delivering what our customers want
· providing strong leadership
· supporting and developing people
· encouraging improvement in everything we do.
2.7 The vision statement was supported by 8 corporate aims and objectives:
· the Environment - Take pride in the city, by improving quality and sustainability, creating a clean and safe environment
· Education and Achievement - Improve opportunities for learning and raise educational achievement for everybody in York
· the Economy - Strengthen and diversify York’s economy and improve employment opportunities for residents
· Crime and Security - Create a safe City through transparent partnership working with other agencies and the local community
· Health and Well-being - Work with others to improve the health, well-being and independence of York residents
· Social Inclusion - Ensure that all council services are accessible and inclusive, and build strong proud local communities
· Culture - Work with others to develop opportunities for residents and visitors to experience York as a vibrant and eventful city
· Corporate Health - Transform City of York Council into an excellent, customer-focused "can do" authority.
2.8 City of York Council’s Benefits service vision statement was developed following a management team training event in December 2002. However, this did not involve staff, customers or interested third parties.
2.9 The Benefits service vision statement was not at Standard, but included a commitment to service delivery that:
· was speedy and accurate
· provided the resources required to deliver the intended service
· was accessible to everyone in the community
· ensured customers received benefit to which they were entitled
· punished fraud.
2.10 Through our interviews with staff, we found good levels of awareness of the Benefits service vision statement. Copies of the vision statement were displayed on staff notice boards. Regular reminders from the Revenues and Benefits Management Team supported this level of awareness.
2.11 The corporate objective relating to Social Inclusion, included the key priorities Promote the take-up of welfare benefits and Improve access to welfare benefits. However, there was no direct link in the Benefits service vision statement to the council’s corporate objectives.
2.12 The Benefits service vision statement had not been endorsed by Members as required by Performance Standards. However, while we were on site in June 2004, we were told that the vision would be put to Members for approval in July 2004.
2.13 To achieve Standard, City of York Council needs to review its Benefits service vision statement to include a commitment to:
· being customer-focused, modern and efficient
· reducing the risk and level of fraud and error
· minimising barriers to work
· recovering overpayments
· investigating potential fraud
· helping customers live in decent housing.
2.14 Having a vision statement at Standard helps ensure that Members and senior officers give the Benefits service the clear recognition and profile it needs, and the support and funds needed to deliver the service effectively and securely. It also helps ensure that managers and staff have a clear sense of direction, purpose and focus for their work.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council:
|
Policy objectives
2.15 Authorities should support the strategic vision with high-level policies and clear objectives for the Benefits service. Together these should:
· eliminate the need for senior managers to make recurring or routine decisions
· provide a systematic way of delegating operational decisions in a manner that will sustain consistency of approach and equity of service
· be linked to its high level strategic and business plans.
2.16 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of policy objectives.
2.17 In its self-assessment against Performance Standards, City
of York Council told us that it did not have explicit policies for its Benefits
service. Although City of York Council had a comprehensive corporate equalities
policy, endorsed by Members in November 2002 and a written prosecution policy,
endorsed by Members in January 2003, other policies either did not exist or
were not formally adopted council policies. For example, City of York Council
provided us with a copy of its training policy. Although this document was
produced in December 2002, it had not been distributed to staff until
April 2004, and had not been approved by senior officers or endorsed by Members
up to the time of our inspection. City of York Council identified the need
for a corporate anti-poverty and social inclusion policy in the Best Value
Review in 2002, but it had still not been produced by June 2004.
2.18 City of York Council had not produced a business plan for its Benefits service in 2003/04, nor did it have an approved plan in place for 2004/05 whilst we were on site in June 2004. However, City of York Council had produced a draft Benefits Service Plan 2004/05 for its Benefits service that it intended to present to Members for approval in July 2004.
2.19 The draft Benefits Service Plan contained 11 priorities each underpinned by service objectives linked to the council’s 8 corporate objectives.
2.20 The draft Benefits Service Plan identified the lack of policies. It contained targets to review all policy documents, identifying gaps where there was no policy document, or the policy document was inadequate and to produce new or revised policy documents.
2.21 Although the draft Benefits Service Plan 2004/05 contained an objective to ‘improve performance in all aspects of service delivery in Resources’, there was no objective to meet the full range of Performance Standards.
2.22 The draft plan did not include interim milestones to achieve
the service objectives, and a managed approach had not been used. For example,
the key service priority was to achieve the Public Service Agreement target
of processing new claims in 30 days, by March 2005. No interim objectives
were detailed to show the step change required to meet the target, even though
City of York Council’s performance in processing new claims was an average
of
86 days in 2003/04, and 81 days for the period from April 2004 to June 2004.
2.23 The draft Benefits Service Plan included a copy of the vision statement, but there were no clear links between the vision statement and the service objectives, nor did it bridge the gap between the vision statement and the current position regarding service delivery. Therefore City of York Council had no assurance that its vision statement could be realised.
2.24 The draft Benefits Service Plan did not set any targets for dealing with the significant backlog of processing work that existed, whilst we were on site in June 2004.
2.25 To achieve Standard, City of York Council needs to develop explicit policies and objectives for its HB and CTB service that:
· are drawn directly from its HB and CTB vision statement
· bridge the gap between the vision and its current position
· include objectives to meet, over time, the full range of Performance Standards
· are endorsed annually by Members
· are reviewed as part of the council’s annual planning cycle
· set interim objectives where a managed approach is required to achieve high-level objectives
· seek efficiency savings and value for money improvements in line with Best Value principles
· specifically seek to minimise backlogs.
2.26 Having policy objectives at Standard helps ensure that there is a clear link between the vision, operational policies, corporate policies, corporate objectives and operational policies for HB and CTB administration. It also helps ensure that managers and staff work to achieve the common objectives in a comprehensive and co-ordinated way, resulting in efficient use of resources and a reduction in costs, and that the service receives recognition as a front line service.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council develops explicit policies and objectives for its HB and CTB service that: · are drawn directly from its HB and CTB vision statement · bridge the gap between the vision and the current position · include objectives to meet, over time, the full range of Performance Standards · are endorsed annually by Members · are reviewed as part of the council’s annual planning cycle · set
interim targets where a step change approach is required to achieve
· seek efficiency savings and value for money improvements in line with Best Value principles · specifically seek to minimise backlogs. |
Operational planning
2.27 Operational planning ensures that resources are effectively managed and monitored to deliver service standards and performance targets.
2.28 An operational plan for administering HB and CTB translates the vision, policies and objectives into practical ways of providing a service. Effective operational plans will allow any changes that are required to improve the HB and CTB service to be managed.
2.29 Plans can only be effective if they are developed, used, monitored and adapted to meet changing circumstances. Managers and staff need to be convinced that the plans are realistic and achievable.
2.30 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of operational planning. We were concerned that City of York Council’s failure to plan its operations had, and was, seriously compromising the effective delivery of its Benefits service.
2.31 There was evidence of effective business planning at a strategic level. For example, the Council Plan 2003/04 and the Council Plan 2004/05 were available on the council’s website. The 8 corporate aims and objectives contained in the Council Plan 2004/05 were linked to the 11 priorities in the draft Benefits Service Plan 2004/05.
2.32 However, there had been no business plan for the Resources Directorate or service plan for the Benefits Service in 2003/04. The draft Benefits Service Plan 2004/05 was completed after we had left site and was due to be endorsed by Members in July 2004. This meant that over 3 months of the plan year had passed before the Benefits Service Plan was due to be approved.
2.33 The draft Benefits Service Plan contained 11 priorities, which:
· sought continued improvement in all aspects service delivery performance
· identified clear lines of responsibility and accountability for progress reporting.
2.34 However, the draft plan lacked essential details. City of York Council needs to include in its Benefits Service Plan:
· local aims and targets derived from the council’s HB and CTB vision statement
· peaks and troughs in resource availability and workload
· the resources needed to meet the prioritised objectives and implement change
· the step changes needed to achieve improvements in service delivery
· key milestone dates
· the impact on all stakeholders.
2.35 The plan should be communicated to all stakeholders after it has been adopted.
2.36 City of York Council had appointed a project manager to lead the implementation of a replacement integrated IT system in 2003. However, the project team did not include a representative from the Benefits service. In a draft post implementation review produced in June 2004, the council acknowledged that this was a serious weakness, and had led to a poor understanding of the requirements and particular problems faced by the Benefits service. We were told that the performance of the Benefits IT system had adversely affected performance from its implementation in September 2003 to the date of our inspection.
2.37 City of York Council produced reports
to Members through the quarterly Executive Leader Meeting and Advisory Panel.
Reports to the Advisory Panel included updates on progress towards implementing
the changes contained in the Continuous Service Improvement Programme
2002 - 2007. This document was produced in 2002 following
the Best Value Review. However, we found that the first review of progress
did not take place until January 2004, some
2 years after it was produced. At the time of our on-site inspection in
June 2004, there were 15 outstanding changes relating to the Benefits service,
of which 10 should have been implemented by 30 September 2002 and a further
4 by 31 March 2004.
2.38 Those outstanding included the following areas of high priority:
· prepare training plans for individual staff
· conduct staff training in accordance with annual training programmes
· implement a 6 monthly appraisal process
· establish performance measures and staff productivity targets
· implement systems and mechanisms for business planning and performance monitoring
· contribute to the development of a corporate anti-poverty and social inclusion policy for the council
· prepare a 3 year business plan
· seek membership of benchmarking clubs.
2.39 In March 2004, City of York Council embarked on a Council Tax Benefit take-up campaign to make its residents aware that they could receive reductions to their bills either through benefits or discounts. This initiative was launched to coincide with the issue of its 2004/05 Council Tax bills.
2.40 A progress report delivered to Members in May 2004 detailed that as at the 23 April 2004, over 1,600 telephone enquiries had been received from potential Benefits recipients. This resulted in the issue of over 1,100 forms of which 269 Benefit claim forms and 27 Council Tax discount forms had been returned.
2.41 Whilst this campaign was commendable we were concerned that this brought additional work to the Benefits service at a time when it was still working hard to clear an existing backlog of work and without additional staff resources. The results of this exercise were still being collated and analysed at the time of our inspection in June 2004.
2.42 City of York Council had not been able to monitor or report regularly on progress to Members and senior officers in a systematic way, as no Benefits Service Plan existed for 2003/04. We acknowledge that information had been passed regularly to Members throughout the year. No Service Plan had been approved for 2004/05 up to the time we were on site in June 2004.
2.43 City of York Council did not have a documented business continuity plan, although this was included as a target in the draft Benefits Service Plan 2004/05 to be achieved by the Assistant Director of Resources – Public Services by March 2005.
2.44 To achieve Standard, City of York Council needs to:
· monitor progress against a Benefits Service Plan
· report regularly on progress to Members and senior officers develop a documented business continuity plan that:
- states how the council will respond to disruptions that impact on normal HB and CTB administration
- is tested and reviewed at least annually
- all staff are familiar with.
2.45 Having effective operational plans helps ensure that policy objectives are met, changes are managed effectively and the quality of the Benefits service improves.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council:
· communicates its plans to all stakeholders · ensures that Members and senior officers support plans with resources to meet identified objectives · monitors progress against the plan, reporting regularly to Members and senior officers · has a documented and effective business continuity plan designed to cover responses to disruptions that impact on normal HB and CTB administration · regularly tests and reviews its business continuity and operational plans · ensures all Benefits service and other associated staff are familiar with the contents of the business continuity and operational plans. |
Performance targets
2.46 Performance targets underpin policy objectives and service standards and give staff a clear view of the desired outcome, and management clear accountability for providing effective and secure administration.
2.47 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of performance targets.
2.48 City of York Council had reached an agreement with the Government to achieve 12 key performance indicators across a range of services in 2004/05, of which 5 were chosen as local targets. These included Local Public Service Agreement targets for processing new claims within 30 days on average and achieving 85% customer satisfaction for the Benefits service. These targets were included as the first service objectives in its draft Benefits Service Plan 2004/05 and as Local Public Service Agreement targets in the Council Plan 2004/05.
2.49 The council had agreed to increase its performance in the 12 areas in return for a government grant totalling £4.3 million. The majority of this grant, £3.9 million, was payable at the end of March 2005, on a performance related basis. City of York Council told us that it would receive an additional £280,000 government grant, provided it achieved these targets.
2.50 We were particularly concerned that City of York Council had incorporated performance targets into its draft Benefits Service Plan, which it was almost inevitable, would not be achieved. For example, when this draft plan was presented to Members in June 2004 performance for new claims was recorded at more than 80 days against a target of 30 days. No stepped approach to recovery or contingency planning to address the significant gap in performance against targets was included as part of the planning process.
2.51 Best Value performance indicators for Benefits and counter-fraud work were reported in the Council Plan 2003/04. The draft Benefits Service Plan 2004/05 contained the target meet the local targets for processing all other work types. The Best Value performance indicators for claims processing were also included.
2.52 The Council Plan 2003/04 set annual incremental targets towards achieving top quartile performance for the Best Value performance indicators by the end of the 2005/06 financial year. For example, it included a new claims processing target of 40 days in 2002/03 and 2003/04, 36 days in 2004/05 and 30 days in 2005/06. However, the new claims processing target had been replaced by the Public Service Agreement target of 30 days for 2004/05 and the draft Benefits Service Plan 2004/05 did not provide a stepped approach towards achieving this target by 31 March 2005.
2.53 The Council Plan 2003/04 and the Council Plan 2004/05 were published in paper form and were available on the council’s website. However, there was no performance information on display in the public waiting areas at the council’s main reception or at the Acomb caller office.
2.54 Targets existed for dealing with customers, but the target for dealing with customers within 10 minutes of their arrival at the Benefits reception counter could not be monitored, as no record was kept of the time of the customer’s arrival.
2.55 The draft Benefits Service Plan 2004/05 contained targets for a range of activities covering:
· front office customer services
· back office claims processing
· document management administration and indexing
· overpayments
· claim interventions
· welfare advice
· business management.
2.56 Our interviews with staff and examination of documents provided
by City of York Council confirmed that all staff had job descriptions. However,
not all job descriptions accurately reflected current duties and none contained
key work objectives that were Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant or
Time-bound.
2.57 City of York Council told us that it used historic productivity measures based on performance levels achieved using the previous Benefits IT system that had been replaced in September 2003. These historic targets for standard claims only were:
· one hour to process a new rent allowance claim
· 0.8 hours to process a new rent rebate claim
· 0.7 hours to process a new claim for CTB only.
2.58 These targets had not been reviewed following the introduction of the new Benefits IT system.
2.59 The historic targets were not included in staff job descriptions. City of York Council’s failure to develop up-to-date individual processing targets based on its revised processes and new Benefits IT system compromised its ability to monitor performance effectively.
2.60 The Fraud team had a target to achieve 5 prosecutions and
15 sanctions in 2003/04 and 12 prosecutions and 24 sanctions in 2004/05. However,
these were team targets. No individual targets were set for 2003/04, nor were
any planned for 2004/05.
2.61 To achieve Standard City of York Council needs to set performance targets for its HB and CTB service that:
· are Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound
· cover the whole range of the council’s relevant policy objectives
· include all relevant national Best Value performance indicators
· provide a baseline of current performance from which progress can be measured
· are communicated to stakeholders
· are understood by managers and staff
· are reflected in work programmes and job descriptions.
2.62 Having performance targets that are at Standard helps ensure that the Benefits service meets its stated vision, and that the vision is linked to the plans and work performed by middle managers and staff. It also helps to ensure that staff are focused, have a clear view of the desired outcomes and Members and managers can measure performance against targets.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council sets performance targets for its HB and CTB service that: · are Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound · cover the whole range of the council’s relevant policy objectives · include all relevant national Best Value performance indicators · provide a baseline of current performance from which progress can be measured · are communicated to stakeholders · understood by managers and staff · reflected in work programmes and job descriptions. |
Performance monitoring
2.63 Performance monitoring provides assurance to Members and senior officers that HB and CTB administration is effective and secure. It is important that Members and senior officers receive reports on performance against the vision, objectives and plans to make the accountability process transparent. Performance monitoring can also encourage the development of a culture of continuous improvement.
2.64 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of performance monitoring.
2.65 From April 2004, monthly reports in a revised format had been produced containing details of performance across a range of indicators. The reports also contained month-by-month comparisons.
2.66 The monthly reports showed details of:
· new claims and changes of circumstances processing times
· caseload
· outstanding new claims and changes of circumstances
· customer satisfaction surveys
· outstanding work by document type.
2.67 The reports were circulated to managers within the Benefits service Management Team and discussed at the fortnightly Management Team meetings.
2.68 City of York Council told us that there
were errors in reporting new claims processing times, and that it doubted
the accuracy of the reported performance levels in the monthly statistics
produced for April, May and
June 2004. City of York Council had included a warning about this possible
error in the introduction to the monthly performance reports since April 2004.
City of York Council told us that double counting had caused the error, where
new claims had been made prior to 31 March 2004. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX
2.69 The effect of the errors could be potentially serious. City of York Council’s main target was to achieve the 30-day processing time for new claims. There would also be a risk that the new claims Best Value performance indicator would be inaccurate.
2.70 City of York Council had been struggling to obtain reliable and accurate data to adequately measure productivity. The council was producing limited management information for processing of claims, but was not using it to show:
· how many claims were being processed each day
· how many claims each processor had assessed each day.
2.71 This was a serious weakness as it meant that City of York Council was unable to monitor output by its own and agency staff, nor could it distinguish performance between Benefits assessment staff and home-based Benefits assessment staff. This meant that City of York Council was unable to evaluate productivity levels between different processors.
2.72 Whilst we were on site in June 2004, City
of York Council asked one of its external providers of staff to supply details
of the number of claims processed by each individual per day. The external
provider supplied statistics that showed for the period October 2003 to May
2004 an average of
5.5 claims had been processed, per assessor, per day. At the time of our
on-site inspection in June 2004, this had dropped to below 3 claims per assessor
per day. City of York Council acknowledged this was an issue as this performance
fell well below expected productivity levels and was discussing this with
the external provider.
2.73 City of York Council told us that it had recently asked its Benefits IT supplier to find out whether it was possible to obtain detailed performance information from its Benefits IT system, but at the time of our on site inspection in June 2004, this issue was still outstanding. We were concerned that City of York Council had not ensured that the provision of full and accurate management information was provided when it implemented its replacement Benefits IT system in September 2003.
2.74 However, whilst we were on site in June 2004 the council told us that it had identified a report that could be produced from the Benefits IT system. It was hoped that this would distinguish cases assessed the previous day and identify staff who had performed the assessment. At the time of our on site inspection in June 2004 it was not clear if this report would be suitable for this purpose. We cover this in more detail under Management and accuracy checks in the Processing of claims section.
2.75 In the absence of detailed performance information, City of York Council told us that it used information from the document management system to establish and monitor performance levels. The council told us that it could monitor individual performance by looking at the number of documents handled by individuals on a daily basis. In spite of the availability of this information, no systematic analysis had been undertaken.
2.76 City of York Council told us that the implementation of the replacement Benefits IT system had caused problems in producing timely information for the council’s subsidy claim to the Department. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X subsidy queries had not been resolved on a month-by-month basis since the replacement Benefits IT system had been implemented in September 2003.
2.77 Whilst on site in June 2004 we were told
that there were
750 outstanding backdated claim queries, which would affect the amount of
subsidy City of York Council could claim from the Department. The council
told us that to produce the subsidy claim, by 31 July 2004, it would have
to scale down parts of the claim, because it did not have accurate and reliable
information. It told us that the impact of outstanding queries could reduce
its claim by up to £80,000.
2.78 City of York Council told us that although comprehensive monthly reports were produced, they were not issued to Members. We were told that Members did not want detailed information, but were satisfied with fortnightly meetings with senior management.
2.79 Although the monthly performance reports were discussed at the fortnightly Revenues and Benefits Management Team meetings, we were told that the two cycles did not always coincide. City of York Council needs to ensure that the cycle of meetings reflects the production of performance information. In view of the importance of the 30-day new claims processing target, and given the significant backlogs of work we found while on site, we considered that City of York Council needs to produce performance figures at more frequent intervals.
2.80 Performance monitoring of customer services was undertaken on a monthly basis. However, because City of York Council did not issue timed tickets to customers waiting to be seen at its main Benefits reception counter, it did not know how long its customers had actually waited. Therefore, although the council reported a performance of 100% of customers seen within its customer first target of 10 minutes of arrival at the Benefits reception counter, this figure was unreliable.
2.81 City of York Council told us that it had submitted a bid to the Department in 2003 for the funding of a timed ticket machine from the Performance Standards fund. The council told us that because the bid had been unsuccessful, no timed ticket machine had been installed. To provide reliable and accurate customer waiting time information it is important that City of York Council develops the means to measure the total customer waiting time, from arrival to being seen.
2.82 The revised monthly performance report produced by City of York Council since April 2004 did not include:
· customer first performance targets
· all Best Value performance indicators
· year-to-date Best Value performance indicators
· overpayments data.
2.83 Through our interviews with staff, we found that not all performance levels were discussed or cascaded down to individual staff by managers. For example, the 30-day new claims processing target was seen as the key priority for the Benefits service by Members and senior managers. However, processing staff were not aware of the actual level of claims processing performance. Senior managers told us that this was deliberate, because they considered that release of the processing performance information would have a negative effect on staff morale. The failure to share claims processing performance with the processing staff meant that staff were not engaged in achieving the target nor in improving processing performance.
2.84 City of York Council provided us with details of all complaints received by the Benefits service in 2003/04. This showed that no complaints had been received since June 2003. However, while we were on site in June 2004, we were told that this information was incorrect. We asked City of York Council to provide us with the correct information for the number of complaints received in 2003/04. However, the council provided us with 3 conflicting sets of statistics for the number of complaints it received in 2003/04. We cover this in more detail under Addressing complaints about the service effectively in the Customer services section.
2.85 To achieve Standard, City of York Council needs to:
· collect sufficient accurate management information to monitor all performance targets, including the national Best Value performance indicators
· produce accurate and timely subsidy and management information returns
· use the management information collected to provide reports to Members that underpin the vision, policy objectives and strategic plans
· produce performance reports at weekly intervals
· ensure that managers and staff are aware of the ongoing levels of performance in their own areas of responsibility.
2.86 Having effective performance monitoring helps ensure that Members and senior managers are informed of progress, are provided with a realistic assessment of performance, and have meaningful ownership of targets and the opportunity to act to support their achievement.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council: · collects sufficient accurate management information to monitor all performance targets, including the national Best Value performance indicators · produces accurate and timely subsidy and management information returns · uses the management information collected to provide reports to Members that underpin the vision, policy objectives and strategic plans · produces performance reports at weekly intervals · ensures that managers and staff are aware of the ongoing levels of performance in their own areas of responsibility. |
Organisational structure
2.87 Organisational structure plays an important part in the performance of a local authority administering HB and CTB. It is important that staff and other resources are structured in a manner that provides an effective Benefits service. Organisational design will be influenced by council-wide policy on issues such as:
· service centralisation or decentralisation
· outsourcing
· the size and geography of the local authority
· the siting of benefits and counter-fraud work.
2.88 It is important that the organisational structure adopted should not have an adverse impact on the administration of benefits. The Institute of Revenues, Rating and Valuation recommends the benefits manager should occupy a senior position within the authority with a direct reporting line to the Section 151 Officer, the chief financial officer under the Local Government Act 1972.
2.89 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of organisational structure.
2.90 To be at Standard, City of York Council needs to:
· provide a Benefits service within which individual roles and responsibilities are clearly defined and understood
· ensure that management lines of responsibility within the service are clear and logical
· implement an organisational structure that promotes the establishment of clear service standards for the effective and secure management of the service
· maintain management control over the resources available to deliver the service
· provide clear lines of communication between the Benefits staff and other parts of the council.
2.91 City of York Council completed a Best Value review of its Revenues and Benefits services in March 2002. An interim report in April 2001 proposed integrating the existing Revenues and Benefits services, Local Taxation services, cashiers, Housing and Council Tax services, Benefits Advice and Business Management support functions.
2.92 This was achieved in September 2001, and was intended to deliver:
· a 30% reduction in overall management costs
· a new Business Management team responsible for all business planning, performance, quality management, subsidy returns and IT systems maintenance across the new structure
· an increase in the efficiency of the new structure through the creation of a document management systems support service
· an increase in the overall efficiency and productivity of the new Benefits service as a result of refocusing and streamlining customer contact and assessment processes in one team located in one building.
2.93 The restructuring in September 2001 led to estimated annual efficiency savings of £361,000 in staff salary costs.
2.94 A final options report produced in May 2002 recommended a revised organisational and staffing structure that was intended to deliver:
· improved levels of service
· sufficient resources to fund revised grades and posts for the final establishment
· further estimated efficiency savings of £75,000 a year in staff salary costs
· an estimated increase of £65,000 in income, from subsidy and improved overpayment recovery rates
· a new career grade pay band for Benefits assessment staff, that would enable staff to progress through scale points to the top of the band, over time.
2.95 The revised organisational structure involved considerable changes to the previous structure at all levels. The revised structure was based upon:
· an anticipated reduction in workload of 10% based on 2002/03 figures
· improvements in productivity and speed of processing customer queries and claims following the planned implementation of the replacement Benefits IT system in September 2002
· the findings of a benchmarking exercise that showed that City of York Council employed 5% more resources in its Revenues and Benefits service than the average for unitary authorities in the area and 17% more than the average for other authorities in the North Yorkshire region
· full and timely implementation of the targets contained in the Continuous Service Improvement Plan.
2.96 City of York Council did not fully implement
the revised structure until January 2004. The council told us that this was
because the replacement Benefits IT system was not implemented until
September 2003, and it was not in a position to make fundamental changes to
the structure of the service until the new Benefits IT system was established.
2.97 Figures 2.2 to 2.4 show the organisational structure at City of York Council at the time of our on-site work. Figure 2.2 shows details of the senior management structure, Figure 2.3 shows details of the Resources directorate and Figure 2.4 shows details of the Revenues and Benefits service.
|
Fig. 2.2: City of York Council’s Senior Management Structure |
|
|
Source: City of York Council
|
Fig. 2.3: City of York Council’s Resources Directorate Structure |
|
|
Source: City of York Council
|
Fig. 2.4: City of York Council’s Benefits Service organisational structure |
|
|
Source: City of York Council and BFI
2.98 At City of York Council, the Director of Resources was the appointed Section 151 officer. The Director was responsible for:
· corporate finance
· IT
· property and estate management
· audit and risk management
· Revenues and Benefits service
· registration of births, marriages and deaths
· implementation of the Best Value Review.
2.99 The Assistant Director of Resources – Public Services reported to the Director of Resources, and was responsible for:
· Revenues and Benefits service
· cashiers
· registration of births, marriages and deaths
· a corporate review of public access to services
· the Revenues and Benefits service Business Management Team.
2.100 Through our interviews with staff, we found that the organisation chart provided to us by City of York Council did not fully reflect individual roles and responsibilities. We found that duties were being performed by staff from other areas of the structure, sometimes on an historic basis. For example, we found that:
· staff training was being undertaken by the:
- Welfare Advice and Appeals Manager
- Document Management System/Administration Team Leader
- Policy/Business Advisor
- Systems Support Advisor
- senior Benefits assessment staff
- assessment Team Leader
· appeals were dealt with by the:
- Benefits Manager Front Office
- Benefits Assessment Manager
- Welfare Advice and Appeals Manager
· the annual check of leaflets and claim forms was undertaken by the Welfare Advice and Appeals Manager
· benefit claims processing was carried out by:
- Benefits assessment staff
- Benefits front office staff.
2.101 The organisation chart provided by City of York Council did not clearly define individual roles and responsibilities, and we had difficulty in establishing which staff we needed to interview in particular areas of work. For example, we had difficulty in deciding which staff we needed to interview regarding staff training, because according to the organisation chart and list of duties provided by City of York Council, training was delivered exclusively by the Business Management Team.
2.102 We also found that management lines of responsibility were not clear and logical. For example, the revised structure did not contain a Benefits Manager post with responsibility for delivering the entire Benefits service. We consider that this has had a negative impact on the strategic leadership of the Benefits service, including the weaknesses we have identified in Strategic management such as:
· the production of a Benefits Service Plan and setting targets
· the collection and use of management information
· performance monitoring
· the overall control of staff training.
2.103 In May 2004, City of York Council created a new claims building team by removing 2 staff from the Customer Services team and 2 staff from the back office assessment team. This new team dealt exclusively with new claims that were deemed ready to assess. We were told that the new team reported to both the Team Leader in the Benefits assessment team and the Benefit Customer Services Manager, leading to confusion over roles and responsibilities.
2.104 Figure 2.5 shows a summary of the invoices provided by City of York Council. In addition to the £329,000 spent on staff from agencies and other external providers in 2003/04, we estimated a further £114,000 was spent between April 2004 and the end of June 2004.
|
Fig. 2.5: City of York Council expenditure on staff from agencies and external providers |
||
|
Company |
2003/04 |
April 2004 – June 2004 |
|
Supplier A |
136,000 |
62,000 |
|
Supplier B |
151,000 |
42,000 |
|
Other suppliers |
42,000 |
10,000 |
|
Total |
329,000 |
114,000 |
Source: City of York Council and BFI analysis
Note: the amounts take account of rounding
2.105 The majority of the expenditure in 2003/04 (87%) was spent
on 2 suppliers
(A and B). We were concerned that neither arrangement was supported by a formal
contract or had been tendered appropriately, as the annual expenditure on
each supplier exceeded the council’s £100,000 threshold.
2.106 When we brought these breaches to City of York Council’s attention it acknowledged that its officers had ‘…acted in breach of the council’s financial regulations…’ and had failed ‘…to observe City of York Council procurement rules and practices…’. These matters were also recorded as a breach of regulations and were intended to be reported to Members as part of its annual breaches and waivers report for 2004/05.
2.107 The council told us there was no risk of it breaching European Community Directives for supplier A, as it was sourced using the European Community compliant catalogue based procurement scheme. This provided public sector organisations with a list of suppliers that it could use, without undertaking specific European Community tendering exercises. However, we were concerned to find that supplier B was not listed. City of York Council was therefore at risk of breaching European Community Regulations.
2.108 Internal audit’s annual report on the breaches and waivers of financial regulations 2003/04, found that no contract or proper tendering arrangements were in place for the recruitment of staff from agencies and other external providers. Corporately City of York Council spent £1.7 million procuring staff from agencies and other external providers in 2003/04. This was found to be in excess of council thresholds and at risk of breaching European Community Regulations.
2.109 We were concerned that procurement weaknesses reported in 2003/04 had not been addressed, as the same weaknesses were intended to be reported again in 2004/05.
2.110 City of York Council told us that it was now working to establish formal contracts with its suppliers, which it anticipated completing by December 2004. However, we were concerned to find that for the first quarter of 2004/05, the Benefits service had already spent over £100,000 on its 2 main suppliers.
2.111 As there were no formal tendering or contractual arrangements:
· no explicit performance targets existed and performance was inadequately monitored
· the work had not been subject to any external competitive tendering exercise
· the costs of the arrangements exceeded City of York Council’s tendering thresholds.
2.112 City of York Council therefore had no assurance that it was obtaining value for money and these serious financial failings demonstrated an absence of good management principles and budgetary control.
2.113 City of York Council was not exercising adequate management planning and control over the resources available to deliver the Benefits service. For example, there had been no increase in the resources available to carry out risk-based interventions, even though the level of work had increased significantly. The abolition of benefit periods in April 2004 meant that the council no longer needed to process renewal claims. City of York Council told us that it had received approximately 11,700 renewal claims in 2003/04. We were concerned that Benefits assessment staff had not been re-deployed to deal with risk based interventions that replaced renewal claims. Despite this fundamental change we were told that Service Managers had decided on the basis of workload and resourcing issues not to reduce the number of Benefits assessment staff deployed for processing claims.
2.114 Having an effective organisational structure helps ensure that resources are efficiently allocated and managed, change is easily co-ordinated and implemented, and administration of HB and CTB is effective, efficient and secure. It also helps to ensure that financial penalties and additional costs are avoided.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council: · provides a Benefits service within which individual roles and responsibilities are clearly defined and understood · ensures that management lines of responsibility within the service are clear and logical · implements an organisational structure that promotes the establishment of clear service standards for the effective and secure management of the service · maintains management control over the resources available to deliver the service · provides clear lines of communication between the Benefits assessment staff and other parts of the council. |
Procedural guidance
2.115 HB and CTB are important components of the national Benefits system and it is important that staff and managers responsible for their administration are supported and guided by good procedures.
2.116 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of procedural guidance.
2.117 To achieve Standard, City of York Council needs to:
· develop and document delivery procedures that cover all aspects of the service and which include all requirements of the Acts, regulations, the Department’s circulars, BFI and Audit Commission good practice
· ensure that procedures provide an accurate and up-to-date guide to actual practice
· incorporate changes into procedures and documentation within 10 days of their receipt by the council.
2.118 City of York Council did not have a comprehensive benefits procedures manual. However, there were various individual electronic procedural notes that could be accessed by all Benefits assessment staff. City of York Council told us that it had engaged a consultant in December 2003, to compile these procedural notes into one electronic procedures manual. The council had anticipated that the work would have been completed by May 2004, however, this had not been the case and the procedures manual had not been completed up to the time we were on site in June 2004.
2.119 Through interviews with Benefits assessment staff and managers we confirmed that they had access to City of York Council’s procedural guidance relating to the Verification Framework, the Department’s circulars and the Guide to Housing Benefit and Council Tax Benefit by Zebedee, Ward and Lister.
2.120 City of York Council had written procedural instructions for post opening that were reviewed every 6 months.
2.121 City of York Council’s Fraud team had access to:
· the Department’s Fraud Procedures and Instruction Manual
· the Department’s HB and CTB Fraud circulars
· material from Professionalism in Security training
· City of York Council’s Benefit Investigation Handbook.
2.122 However, the Benefit Investigation Handbook required updating to reflect changes in the Department and the Counter-Fraud Investigation Service. We cover this in more detail under Policies and procedures in the Counter-fraud section.
2.123 City of York Council did not have a comprehensive overpayments procedures manual, although Benefits assessment staff did have access to a document entitled Benefits Training Notes – Overpayments and ‘underlying’ entitlement issued in November 2001. We cover this in more detail under Overpayment policies and procedures in the Overpayments section.
2.124 City of York Council had procedures for dealing with changes to regulations and procedures contained in the Department’s circulars and for ensuring that changes were reflected in local procedures. We were told that the Department’s circulars were referred to the Policy and Information Advisor in the Business Management Team, who checked all new circulars and produced training notes and updated guidance where appropriate.
2.125 The implementation of comprehensive procedural instructions enables staff to access accurate and consistent guidance they require and helps to ensure full compliance with the regulations.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council:
· incorporates changes into the procedures and documentation within 10 days of receipt. |
Management assurance
2.126 It is important that staff and managers responsible for the administration of HB and CTB are provided with management assurance.
2.127 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of management assurance.
2.128 We found that City of York Council performed Best Value accuracy checks across its caseload every quarter in accordance with the Department’s instructions.
2.129 To achieve Standard City of York Council needs to undertake management checking of assessor’s work including overpayment decisions and unsuccessful claims to benefit and to report the results of management checking to senior officers and Members and ensure the results are fed into staff training and development plans.
2.130 Our interviews with City of York Council’s Benefits service management team confirmed that the authority lacked a comprehensive programme of management checking to provide it with assurance about the security and effectiveness of its Benefits service. No single member of City of York Council’s Benefits service management team had responsibility for providing management assurance. We found a lack of clarity and an inconsistent approach to management checking.
2.131 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 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX
2.132 In addition to the high value checks a separate check had been introduced in January 2004. Between January 2004 and May 2004 a percentage of claims were checked in more detail against a management accuracy checklist and any errors or incorrect payments were coded for future analysis. We were told, whilst we were on site in June 2004, that none of these additional management checks had been done for several weeks because of the volume of outstanding work and other priorities.
2.133 However, even when these additional checks were being performed the volume undertaken was less than the recommended 10% and the checks were performed after the cases had been processed. We cover the level of management checking in more detail under Management and accuracy checks in the Processing of claims section. We found no evidence that the results of management checking were analysed or fed back to senior officers and Members. Nor were the results of management checking used to inform staff training and development.
2.134 Our sample of 30 new claims confirmed that the principles of the Verification Framework were embedded and Benefits staff were generally following procedures correctly. However, City of York Council was unable to provide us with the results of any management checking of its own to support our analysis.
2.135 City of York Council’s inadequate management assurance is a serious barrier to providing senior officers and Members with confirmation that the Benefits service is achieving the aims and objectives set out in its draft Benefits Service Plan and vision statement.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council: · undertakes management checking of cases processed including overpayment decisions and unsuccessful claims to benefit · reports the results of management checking to senior officers and Members and ensures the results are fed into staff training and development plans. |
Management information
2.136 Management information provides a sound base for managers to evaluate the effectiveness and security of the Benefits system and is a useful tool for management to make informed decisions on the day-to-day running of their sections and to keep Members informed of performance. It should not be used simply to generate a local authority’s current set of performance indicators.
2.137 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of management information.
2.138 City of York Council told us it was able to produce limited management information but had doubts about its completeness and reliability. This information was not used to monitor performance or inform decision making for significant aspects of its Benefits service. Our discussions with managers and staff highlighted a lack of awareness of the management information available from its IT systems. It was unclear whether this stemmed from system capability, a lack of understanding of the reports available or the low priority afforded to this issue.
2.139 From April 2004 City of York Council had revised the format of its monthly performance report to inform senior managers. This document contained the following information:
· processing performance for new claims, renewals and changes of circumstances
· details of the authority’s caseload
· the volumes of outstanding work
· a breakdown of outstanding work
· results from the monthly customer satisfaction survey.
2.140 Much of the information was obtained from the document management system rather than the Benefits IT system and we were told that the processing figures were still being validated for accuracy.
2.141 To achieve Standard City of York Council needs to:
· use its internal management information to:
- predict trends and identify patterns
- inform management decision making
- identify procedural weaknesses
- adjust work priorities and resource allocations
- establish the reasons for deviations from plans and targets
- help inform training and development plans.
2.142 We found that City of York Council was using management information to only a limited extent to manage the performance of its Benefits service. Managers told us that there were problems extracting adequate and detailed management information from the Benefits IT system. Shortfalls in the data were overcome by using information from the document management system and by manual counting. This was time-consuming and left managers with little time to make changes to improve performance.
2.143 To speed up its processing performance City of York Council had reorganised its claim builders and amended its procedures from 1 May 2004. However, even when these changes were made to improve the Benefits service, whilst we were on site in June 2004 management information was not available to confirm that these changes had proved successful and targets were being achieved. It is important to establish that targets had been met and that an analysis of management information is used.
2.144 There were also problems in obtaining information regarding the service offered to Benefits customers. We were told that abandoned telephone calls could not be measured and there was no reliable measure of customer waiting times. We cover this in more detail under Timely, helpful response to public enquiries in the Customer services section.
2.145 We were told that the present fraud IT system had been recognised as in need of replacement as it had no user guide or procedural manual and did not provide even basic management information. Any management information required had to be clerically generated. This was time consuming and did not make best use of the resources available to the fraud team.
2.146 The present fraud IT system had been operated in parallel with the fraud module of its new Benefits IT system from April 2004. We were told that the effectiveness and suitability of the new fraud module had not been evaluated since its implementation. It is important that City of York Council establish that the fraud module is capable of producing reports that contain a sufficient level of data to enable management and control of the business.
2.147 City of York Council told us that it was unable to extract some overpayment data from the Benefits IT system. In particular it was unable to provide details of the amount of fraud overpayments in 2003/04. We were told that they had been included in, but could not be separated from the total overpayments classified as customer error or other overpayments. We cover this in more detail under Management of debt in the Overpayments section.
2.148 Management information should be collated and analysed from all areas of the Benefits service to help inform senior managers and Members. City of York Council had many potential sources of management information that could be used to monitor its performance such as:
· analysing complaints
· appeals and reconsiderations
· fraud referrals
· changes of circumstances
· the reasons for overpayments occurring.
2.149 The provision of comprehensive and effective management information is a priority for the Benefits service that needs to be addressed urgently. When used effectively, management information provides a vital tool for senior managers to monitor the effectiveness of the Benefits service.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council reviews the availability of its management information and then uses it to: · predict trends and identify patterns · inform management decision making · identify procedural weaknesses · adjust work priorities and resource allocations · establish the reasons for deviations from plans and targets · help inform training and development plans. |
Training and development
2.150 Effective and secure delivery of HB and CTB depends on staff performance. The administration of these benefits is complex and staff retention and recruitment are major issues for managers. Local authorities should offer effective training, career and personal development activities.
2.151 Investment in the training and development of staff, plays a key role in:
· attracting new recruits
· retaining staff
· offering a career path for potential managers
· developing the management skills of more senior staff.
2.152 Investment in performance management can:
· bring greater consistency and fairness to the management of staff
· highlight where individuals need to develop or improve performance
· ensure that career advancement is based on demonstrable delivery of results and competence to take on greater responsibility.
2.153 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of training and development.
2.154 To achieve Standard City of York Council needs to:
· develop a training programme for new and existing staff that is at least to the standard of the Department’s model training plan
· provide a formal mechanism for evaluating training, that is used to review and revise the training programme
· ensure all staff have personal job descriptions that include objectives which:
- are aligned to the organisation as a whole
- properly reflect the work that jobholders are responsible for
- are Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant and Time-bound.
2.155 City of York Council did not have a training programme that was at least to the standard of the Department’s model training plan. For example, the council told us that new staff received 2 weeks induction training supplemented by some additional in-house training, whereas the Department’s induction training programme was for 13 weeks.
2.156 We have commented under Organisational structure in the Strategic management section that staff training was fragmented and that delivery of training involved various staff across all sections of the Benefits service. City of York Council acknowledged that it had weaknesses in the delivery of a comprehensive training programme, and had designated the Business Manager as responsible for the co-ordination and management of staff training following his appointment in April 2004.
2.157 City of York Council did not have an ongoing training programme for existing staff, however, local training sessions were provided to cover procedural and legislative changes and changes arising from the Department’s circulars. These were supported by locally produced guidance notes and instructions. As we have commented under Procedural guidance in the Strategic management section, there was no comprehensive procedure manual for Benefits assessment staff to refer to. However, there was no specialist management training provided or planned for managers. With the exception of fraud no other specialist training had been provided.
2.158 We were told that no members of staff were currently being sponsored to undertake professional training provided by the Institute of Revenues, Rating and Valuation.
2.159 Fraud staff had completed Professionalism in Security training to become accredited counter-fraud officers. However, there was no formal policy document to ensure that all appropriate training for fraud staff would be identified and provided at the right time. We cover this in more detail under Training for fraud investigators in the Counter-fraud section.
2.160 City of York Council did not have a formal evaluation process for training provided. Feedback sheets were issued after training sessions but there was no process to collate individual sheets, nor was the feedback used to inform future training. We found that while some staff maintained up-to-date training logs, others did not. There was no process to ensure that all staff training logs were maintained and up-to-date.
2.161 The majority of the City of York Council staff we interviewed did not have personal job descriptions. In some instances, generic job descriptions were used across a wide range of staff, performing different duties. For example, customer contact staff had the same job descriptions as the Benefits assessment staff.
2.162 We also found that the job descriptions used by City of York Council did not contain personal and work-related objectives. Those relating to the Fraud team were out-of-date and in need of review.
2.163 City of York Council staff told us that all staff should have received an annual appraisal and a mid-year review. However, from interviews with staff we found that this was not the case for all staff.
2.164 City of York Council planned staff training to minimise disruption to the assessment process and avoid backlogs. For example, training on the replacement Benefits IT system was provided to Benefits assessment staff during the 7-week shutdown period to minimise the impact on the service and to make optimum use of this available time.
2.165 The council recognised that training was a key area and employed an external provider to undertake a professional skills evaluation of its Benefits assessment staff in June 2004. This was designed to identify any training needs and to recognise the strengths and weaknesses within the Benefits service. The results of this exercise were still being analysed whilst we were on site in June 2004.
2.166 By providing adequate training and development, City of York Council can ensure that new entrants are adequately trained, experienced staff are developed and managers are able to focus on improving personal performance.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council: · provides a formal mechanism for evaluating training, that is used to review and revise the training programme
|
Information technology
2.167 The most should be made of available IT to support an effective and secure HB and CTB administration, and the technology deployed should assist the local authority in making progress against the E-government agenda.
2.168 Automation of processes should enable greater efficiency. Reliable and timely management information should be used to monitor performance and inform management decisions.
2.169 City of York Council did not meet Standard but had the following strengths in the element of information technology.
2.170 The Systems Support and Development Team provided the necessary separation of duties from the Benefits service areas.
2.171 There was a secure documented process for changes to user profiles and all changes were controlled and logged by the Systems Support and Development Team. Users were unable to change their own profiles and access levels were not changed without line manager or above authorisation. Users did not have Benefits IT system access to undertake duties they were not authorised to perform.
2.172 The Benefits IT system interfaced with the following systems:
· Council Tax
· Housing Rent
· financial management system
· document management system.
2.173 Our sampling, interviews and examination of documents confirmed that the council’s Benefits IT systems provided the necessary support for deciding and paying claims of all kinds in addition to accounting for the benefit paid. There was also adequate support for the identification and recovery of HB and CTB overpayments.
2.174 There were systematic and documented procedures for fault logging, management and correction. We were told that City of York Council tested all system releases and these procedures were also documented. When a release was received, the Business Management Team performed a series of tests, which were recorded before the Benefits IT system was updated.
2.175 To achieve Standard City of York Council needs to:
· ensure that its fraud IT systems support counter-fraud activity
· ensure that its IT systems provide sufficient data to ensure that the Department can be provided with accurate and timely subsidy and management information data returns
· maintain secure audit trails
· XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX
· XXXX XXXX XXXX X
· ensure that the Benefits IT system is managed in a controlled technical environment
· develop documented system fallback and recovery plans, which are tested at regular intervals and use the outcomes to refine and improve future plans.
2.176 In September 2001, Members gave approval to purchase a new Integrated Housing, Benefits and Revenue system, as the old system was out of date and ‘…the council needed to improve its data storage and retrieval arrangements to provide a more streamlined service to customers.’ This represented the biggest single IT project the council had ever implemented.
2.177 XXXX XXXX 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 Phase one, which included the modules for Housing, Benefits and Revenues, did not go live until September 2003.
2.178 During the transitional period changing from the old to the new Benefits IT systems, no system was available for 6 weeks. This contributed to the backlog of HB claims, which we cover in more detail under New claims – speed of processing in the Processing of claims section.
2.179 Due to the problems encountered in phase one of the project, City of York Council decided to carry out a partial post-implementation review to capture the key lessons learnt for later stages of the project and for future projects. An external consultant facilitated this review which concluded that:
· the project team was under resourced
· XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
· there was a lack of skilled project management resources.
2.180 The review found that although project teams for Revenues and Benefits, Housing, and IT and Telecommunications Department had been established, there was no consistency in the resourcing and effectiveness of these teams. It noted that the Revenues and Benefits team was inadequately resourced.
2.181 Due to a lack of skilled project management experience within the Revenues and Benefits service, an external consultant was initially employed to fulfil the role of project manager. XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X
2.182 The review also found ‘…there was a general assumption that departments would re-engineer key business processes as part of the implementation. This assumption was not clearly communicated or understood by the Revenues and Benefits service.’
2.183 From a Benefits service perspective the success of this project
was paramount. The Benefits IT system was one of the most important service
delivery and financial systems in the council as
13,000 customers relied on it for the administration of HB and CTB.
2.184 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX 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 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 XXXX XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX
2.185 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 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 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 XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXX
2.186 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX 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 XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
2.187 City of York Council had identified the need to replace its fraud database and had started using the fraud module of its new Benefits IT system from April 2004 in parallel with its existing system for a test period. We were told that further discussions were ongoing to determine the full specification and requirements for a new fraud IT system.
2.188 The council’s counter-fraud efforts were inhibited by the fraud IT system’s inability to produce basic reports to facilitate management and control of the business. As we report under Fraud referrals in the Counter-fraud section it was not possible to extract the source and number of fraud referrals from the fraud IT system.
2.189 We were told that it had been difficult to provide the Department with accurate and timely subsidy returns 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 XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX 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 XXX
2.190 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX , the council told us it intended to examine a sample of cases and use the results to estimate the correct values for the subsidy claim, which was due by 31 July 2004. It also planned to monitor the subsidy claim each month in future to ensure that subsidy returns were accurate and provided on a timely basis.
2.191 We were told there had been a problem with new claims reporting, as claims spanning the year-end period were double counted. This occurred when claims had been entered on the Benefits IT system before 1 April 2004 but processed after that date. However, we were told management information data returns had been submitted on time, unless there had been a problem with the Benefits IT system. Management information data returns were then submitted when the fault had been resolved.
2.192 We confirmed that City of York Council did not provide the Department with accurate and timely management information data returns on every occasion. Figure 2.6 shows that out of the 27 returns due between the period of March 2003 and May 2004, 7 returns (26%) were submitted late whilst one return (4%) had not been submitted. Of the 26 returns submitted, 4 (15%) were inaccurate, 2 of which (8%) were also late.
|
Fig. 2.6: City of York Council Management Information Data Returns |
||||||
|
Departmental statistical form number |
Returns due between March 2003 and May 2004 |
Returns submitted on time |
Returns submitted late |
Returns not submitted |
Returns submitted accurately |
Returns submitted |
|
121/122 |
5 |
5 |
0 |
0 |
5 |
0 |
|
124 |
4 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
|
128 |
4 |
0 |
3 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
|
WIB 1 & 2 |
4 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
4 |
0 |
|
VF |
4 |
4 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
2 |
|
124a |
2 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
|
116 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
|
123 |
2 |
2 |
0 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
|
Total |
27 |
19 |
7 |
1 |
22 |
4 |
Source: the Department
Further details of the specific statistical forms are contained in the Departmental MIS guide
2.193 The query tool within the audit module of the new Benefits IT system had not been implemented. As a result, if there was a query on a case it had to be individually examined to determine the identity of the processor. If the query tool was enabled, a report that listed all actions undertaken in any given period could be produced. We were told this had not been activated XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX X XXXX XXXX X
2.194 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 XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XX Running the query tool outside normal office hours was also being considered.
2.195 As we report under Document management in the Internal security section, the audit trail for the document management system had also been switched off, as it affected IT server capacity and slowed performance. We were told that a new IT server had been installed in June 2004 and the audit trail had been restored.
2.196 New users on the Benefits IT system were prompted to change their passwords when they first accessed the system. Existing users were prompted to change their password every 90 days. 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 XX
2.197 Internal audit reported in its review of information systems general controls dated February 2003, that there was no ‘…overall business continuity plan covering the whole of the council…’. It recommended that these arrangements were put in place. However, at the time of our inspection in June 2004, the council still did not have a documented, co-ordinated disaster recovery plan. We were told that the Systems Support and Development Team was assigned this task and was working on an IT strategy for the directorate.
2.198 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 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 XXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX XXXX
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council:
|
Internal audit
2.199 Internal audit provides assurance to management and Members about the effectiveness and security of HB and CTB administration.
2.200 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of internal audit.
2.201 We were told that internal audit’s planned work programme for HB was designed to provide assurance on the security of benefit delivery systems as well as compliance with Benefits regulations.
2.202 Copies of all finalised internal audit reports were given to the appropriate Head of Service, Assistant Director and Director and were therefore considered by senior managers.
2.203 Members had agreed a 5-year strategic internal audit plan that balanced known risks to the authority against the resources at its disposal. Local experience was used to weight systems according to complexity, value, volume and stability of predicted business risk, and audit activity was planned accordingly. We were told that whilst reviewing any area of the Benefits service, internal audit was governed and guided by the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy control matrices.
2.204 During the strategic planning process a risk assessment had categorised areas of City of York Council’s business as high, medium or low risk and had then been used to determine the frequency of audit examination within the 5-year plan. The monetary value of HB and CTB expenditure was considered along with comparable budget expenditure for other services. The Benefits service and all major financial systems were subsequently designated as high risk areas and were subject to an annual audit with an allocation of 30 audit days in each financial year, from 2004/05 onwards.
2.205 Figure 2.7 shows the number of days internal audit had used on the Benefits service between April 2001 and March 2004. The figures for 2004/05 showed the number of days internal audit planned to use.
|
Fig. 2.7: Internal audit activity 2001/02 – 2004/05 |
||||
|
2001/02 |
2002/03 |
2003/04 |
2004/05 |
|
|
Total number of internal audit days allocated (all services/departments) |
1,090 |
1,073 |
1,259 |
1,250 |
|
Total number of internal audit days used (all services/departments) |
1,001 |
1,061 |
1,023 |
Not Known |
|
Number of internal audit days allocated to HB and CTB administration |
25 |
20 |
35 |
30 |
|
Number of internal audit days used on HB and CTB administration |
35 |
72.6 |
14.4 |
Not Known |
Source: City of York Council
2.206 The 2003/04 audit of the Benefits service was limited to the Audit Commission key controls for reasons which are explained under Internal control mechanisms in the Internal security section.
2.207 Figure 2.8 shows HB and CTB expenditure had accounted for around 11% of City of York Council’s gross revenue expenditure in 2003/04. Despite this only 2.8% of available audit days were allocated to this area. We were told by internal audit that the financial value of transactions was only one area of risk for City of York Council and that the risk assessment determined where the overall risk was the greatest. However, given the scale of failings, some serious, we have found in the course of our inspection, the allocation of audit days should be reconsidered.
|
Fig. 2.8: Gross HB expenditure as a percentage of revenue expenditure |
|||
|
2001/02 |
2002/03 |
2003/04 |
|
|
Total gross revenue expenditure (£ million) |
227.9 |
248.9 |
264.1 |
|
HB and CTB expenditure (£ million) |
29.2 |
32.7 |
29.4 |
|
HB and CTB expenditure as % of gross revenue expenditure |
12.8 |
13.1 |
11.1 |
|
Audit days allocated to HB and CTB as a % of total audit days |
2.3 |
1.9 |
2.8 |
Source: City of York Council
2.208 To achieve Standard City of York Council needs to:
· adapt its strategic audit plan to further strengthen its risk management arrangements by:
- focusing on risks to security and failures in effectiveness
- assessing performance against the Performance Standards
· introduce reporting procedures to Members on all audit findings and progress on the implementation of recommendations, to ensure that any weaknesses identified are remedied within agreed timescales.
2.209 We were concerned that there had never been any previous internal audit activity in the area of counter-fraud. We were told our findings and recommendations would be used to scope any future work in this area.
2.210 Internal audit and counter-fraud were managed within the same directorate and the Audit and Fraud Manager had direct line management responsibility for both teams. As Chief Auditor, the Audit and Fraud Manager was responsible for reviewing all internal audit reports prior to their issue. If internal audit does undertake an audit of counter-fraud there is potential scope for a conflict of interest as the current reporting arrangements will not provide assurance that the independence and objectivity of internal audit will not be compromised.
2.211 To mitigate against this risk we were told that if the fraud function is audited, the Principal Auditor, who reported directly to the Audit and Fraud Manager, will undertake some of the Chief Auditor duties. As the Principal Auditor has no direct involvement with the Fraud team the audit would be treated at arms-length. Another option would be to consider requesting an external audit provider to undertake the audit.
2.212 Internal audit made 11 recommendations in its 2002/03 audit of the Benefits service. Although all 11 recommendations were accepted, the 2003/04 audit revealed that only 5 recommendations had been implemented and 6 remained outstanding. Figure 2.9 shows recommendations made by internal audit following the 2002/03 audit of the Benefits service that were still outstanding in 2003/04. The Benefits service’s subsequent response to each recommendation is also illustrated.
|
Fig. 2.9: The Benefits service’s response to internal audit report recommendations carried forward from 2002/03 – 2003/04 |
||
|
Internal audit recommendation |
Benefits service’s response (responsibility and action by) 2002/03 |
Benefits service’s response 2003/04 |
|
Internal audit examined the organisation’s policies in respect of backdating benefit and the use of discretionary powers to increase benefits. This area needs closer monitoring and further guidance for those using this part of the process should be considered. |
Benefits Assessments Manager. December 2003. |
In hand and forms part of our overall strategy for work management during 2004/05. However, when commencing to consider this it was evident that we were unlikely to be able to have a quick fix and would revise our completion date to December 2004. |
|
The assessment team needs to revisit procedures to check whether benefit claims have been assessed within 14 days of receipt of all the required information to improve performance in this area and to avoid adverse public comment. |
Benefits Assessments Manager. With immediate effect. |
In hand. Should fall naturally out of the initiatives that we have, and are, putting in place for processing new claims. |
|
The benefit application form should enquire if the customer owns other property and if so, whether benefit is paid at that address. Benefit is normally only payable in respect of one home (with some defined exceptions). The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy recommends that customers should be required to disclose this information. |
None |
We do ask if customers own a second property, but will try to ask if
benefit is paid at that address. The benefit application form is currently
being reviewed pending a |
|
The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy recommends that specimen signatures be maintained as customers could contrive tenancies in an attempt to obtain benefit by deception. Steps should be taken to examine the possibility of using the ‘Contact File’ facility to improve this area. |
Benefits Assessments Manager. December 2003. |
Not yet actioned, but it is still intended to pursue this. Need to utilise Document Management System to facilitate this change. |
|
The warning in the benefit entitlement letter should include information regarding the consequences of deliberate or negligent disclosure/non-disclosure of vital information. |
Benefits Assessments Manager. May 2004. |
A new letters suite is due early Summer and this would give the opportunity to do this. |
|
Overpayment procedures should be finalised and a copy logged on the system for use by any relevant members of staff. |
Benefits Assessments Manager. December 2003. |
Not done. Moved into 2004/05 workplan. |
Source: City of York Council
2.213 We were concerned to find that the implementation date for 2 of the recommendations carried forward from the previous year’s audit had been delayed for a year. An implementation date had not been stated for the remaining 4 recommendations.
2.214 It is essential that any recommendations made by internal audit are implemented quickly to ensure adequate control is maintained. However, until Members receive reports of audit activity, internal audit’s impact will remain limited.
2.215 We were told that City of York Council did not have an Audit Committee, but was attempting to address the issue by consulting with the Resources Scrutiny Committee to encourage it to adopt this role. The Assistant Director of Resources (Audit and Risk Management) met with the Chair and Vice Chair of the Resources Scrutiny Committee in June 2004 to discuss the proposed Audit Committee.
2.216 Whilst we acknowledge the steps taken by internal audit to form an Audit Committee we were concerned to find that very little progress had been made at the initial meeting with Members in June 2004. We were told the Assistant Director of Resources (Audit and Risk Management) was asked to develop a forward plan on how internal audit envisaged the Audit Committee would operate. It was agreed this plan would be presented to the Resources Scrutiny Committee in September 2004.
2.217 Reporting to an Audit Committee would raise the profile of the work of internal audit and would support an effective approach to corporate governance. Committee support would also encourage the implementation of agreed recommendations, by promoting greater ownership and accountability for implementing recommendations.
2.218 A number of key appointments had recently been made in internal
audit. The Assistant Director of Resources (Audit and Risk Management) had
been appointed in September 2003. A new Principal Auditor had been appointed
in December 2003 and a new Audit and Fraud Manager in
January 2004.
2.219 At the time of our inspection in June 2004 the internal audit
department comprised only 7.5 full-time equivalents, which included both the
Audit and Fraud Manager and Principal Auditor. As a result there were only
5.5 full-time equivalents performing day-to-day internal audit activity. We
were told by internal audit that City of York Council’s internal audit department
was
under-resourced when benchmarked against authorities of a similar size.
2.220 The Benefits service is an important part of the council and could have been supported more effectively by an increased level of audit activity. It is appropriate that the council exercises its judgement over the level of resource committed to auditing the Benefits service. However, it should consider whether internal audit resources are sufficient to assure Members and senior officers that the Benefits system is secure and is being delivered effectively.
2.221 Until Members receive reports of internal audit activity, the risk that recommendations will not be implemented, or identified weaknesses addressed, are increased.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council: · adapts its strategic audit plan to focus on risks to security and failures in effectiveness · ensures that internal audit includes assessments against Performance Standards in the audit programme · reviews its reporting procedures to Members to ensure that Members receive sufficient information on the impact of audit findings and details of all audit recommendations made · informs Members of the implementation of audit recommendations to enable them to monitor progress and ensure that any weaknesses identified are remedied within agreed timescales indicated in audit reports · audits the counter-fraud function with due regard for a potential conflict of interest. |
External audit
2.222 External audit has statutory duties to report on the arrangements that the local authority has to secure economy, efficiency and effectiveness in its use of resources. It also gives independent assurance on matters relating to the accounts, and reports on the arrangements to ensure probity.
2.223 Local authorities must act on this independent advice and assurance, while having their own systems of assurance. They cannot rely on external audit alone to identify faults.
2.224 The Audit Commission provided the external audit function for City of York Council.
2.225 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of external audit.
2.226 We confirmed with the Audit Commission that senior officers assessed audit recommendations and findings, prepared action plans in response to the findings and monitored progress against agreed action plans, adjusting them accordingly. Each recommendation made by the Audit Commission was assigned to a responsible officer, who provided a response to each recommendation and agreed an implementation date with the Audit Commission.
2.227 Action plans were then used by the Audit Commission to monitor City of York Council’s progress against recommendations.
2.228 In its 2002/03 review of Housing Benefits, the Audit Commission made 6 recommendations. However, 4 of these related specifically to the old Benefits IT system and were superseded by the implementation of the new Benefits IT system. The remaining 2 recommendations will be followed up on completion of its 2003/04 audit.
2.229 The Audit Commission’s 2002/03 annual audit letter commented that internal audit had failed to meet its planned coverage due to resource problems. The Audit Commission stated ‘…while resources have been directed towards high risk areas, the repeated failure to achieve the plan demonstrates a need to improve your arrangements for obtaining assurance about your systems of internal financial control. It also increases the risk of undetected fraud and error.’
2.230 The Audit Commission also stated that City of York Council had some arrangements in place to satisfy itself that its systems of internal control were effective. However, it raised a number of concerns about the internal audit function as:
· only 69% of planned audits were completed
· it was heavily dependent on temporary staff
· the information systems used to monitor audit input were not reliable.
2.231 The Audit Commission’s 2002/03 annual audit letter remarked that the delayed agreement of reports and slow response to implementing agreed action plans indicated that the internal audit function had limited impact. This also suggests that internal audit was not adding sufficient value to the council from its activities. The Audit Commission noted that internal audit had ‘…little involvement in key projects.’ This was perhaps best demonstrated by internal audit’s lack of involvement in the implementation of the new Benefits IT system.
2.232 In addition, the Audit Commission stated that problems of audit coverage would continue into 2003/04 as the audit plan was under resourced by 100 days. However, the Audit Commission acknowledged that City of York Council intended to address this issue following the restructure of the Resources directorate and intended to make a number of key appointments. These appointments were subsequently made which we cover under Internal audit.
2.233 To achieve Standard City of York Council needs to:
· inform Members of audit findings
· obtain Members’ endorsement of action plans in response to findings
· report regularly to Members on progress against action plans.
2.234 We were concerned that the council’s HB and CTB Grant Claim for 2002/03 was qualified by the Audit Commission, as the council was unable to reconcile the total rent allowances paid to the old Benefits IT system. However, it was anticipated that the reconciliation issue would be resolved upon transfer to the new Benefits IT system.
2.235 It is important that City of York Council makes the most of Audit Commission reports by acting as soon as possible on observations and recommendations which are intended to help improve the effectiveness of its internal audit function, and the effectiveness and security of its HB and CTB administration. Member involvement may also help secure additional resources to enable remedial action to be undertaken where necessary.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council develops and implements a process, to ensure that on receipt of the annual certificates on the council’s accounts, HB and CTB subsidy, and other external reviews of its HB and CTB administration it: · informs Members of the findings · obtains Members’ endorsement of the action plans · reports regularly to Members on progress against these plans. |
Cost of benefit administration
2.236 There is no definitive costing structure for Benefits administration although local authorities should be guided by the provisions contained within the Department’s circular S1/2000.
2.237 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of cost of benefit administration.
2.238 The cost per claim was calculated each year and based on the appropriate weighting figure.
2.239 The council’s Finance Department supplied the Benefits service with the following costs:
· salaries
· other employee costs
· supplies including postage, stationery, printing, photocopying and printer consumables
· re-charges for building costs and IT.
2.240 The council’s costing structure identified both direct and
indirect costs and was designed to achieve an accurate assessment of the cost
of benefit administration per claim. Records of how costs had been assessed,
including costs apportioned between sections where duties were combined, were
maintained to allow comparison and for checking purposes. This assisted
re-performance of the calculation and also made it easier to produce costs
in future years.
2.241 Figure 2.10 shows the reported cost per weighted claim has risen steadily over the last 3 years from £58.30 to £87.94, a rise of over 50%.
|
Fig. 2.10: Average cost per weighted claim 2001 – 2004 |
|
|
Year |
Cost per claim |
|
2001/02 |
58.30 |
|
2002/03 |
70.50 |
|
2003/04 |
87.94 |
Source: City of York Council
2.242 To achieve Standard, City of York Council needs to ensure it has a cost structure that aims to achieve a reasonable assessment of the cost of Benefits administration per claim.
2.243 The assessment for 2003/04 did not include the significant costs of staff from agencies and external providers. From invoices supplied by City of York Council we estimate these costs as £329,228 for 2003/04. When we added this to the calculation, we estimated the increased cost to £102.93 per claim.
2.244 City of York Council in its Benefits Delivery Plan for
2004/05 set itself a target to produce and report a cost analysis of its
2003/04 cost per claim by
30 April 2004. This was not achieved until July 2004. We were told the delay
was due to certain accounting data being unavailable. It is important to set
realistic timescales to produce key performance measures and to ensure all
parties are able to supply the necessary information on time.
2.245 Some of the apportionment values used for the 2003/04 calculation, for example overpayments staff, had not been adjusted to take into account altered working practices and transferred responsibilities. By using historical apportionment values the overall cost per claim calculation was unreliable and resulted in the overall value being incorrect.
2.246 The correct assessment of costs enable managers to determine whether scope for efficiencies exist by analysing areas of high cost compared with other councils and identify possible savings. It would also ensure correct information was passed to the Department and avoid the risk of unreliable benchmarking.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council:
|
Compliance with the Race Relations Act
2.247 Authorities must comply with the provisions of the Race Relations Act 1976, as amended by the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000. Under this legislation authorities are required to eliminate unlawful discrimination and to promote equality of opportunity and good relations between persons of different racial groups.
2.248 Local authorities are required to publish by 31 May 2002 a race equality scheme that sets out the arrangements they have made to satisfy this general duty.
2.249 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of compliance with the Race Relations Act.
2.250 A Race Equality Scheme had been produced and was supported by a 3-year action plan.
2.251 To achieve Standard City of York Council needs to:
· assess and monitor the impact of policies on race equality, consult relevant parties and publish the results
· provide staff with cultural awareness training and training on their responsibilities within the Race Relations Act 1976
· review the needs of key ethnic minority groups on an annual basis.
2.252 City of York Council’s Race Equality Scheme was approved by Members in June 2002 and included a 3-year action plan. This was also supported by Pride In Our Communities - The Council’s interim plan for promoting equality and diversity in York, which had also been endorsed by Members. The Race Equality Scheme gives a commitment to assess new policies and to consult with the community on those policies.
2.253 A Corporate Equalities Group with representatives from all Directorates had been established and met every 2 months. City of York Council was committed to assessing existing policies and this had begun across the Directorates. The council aimed to complete an Equalities Impact Assessment on all relevant policies and procedures by May 2005.
2.254 Members of the Corporate Equalities Group and relevant managers received training on conducting Equalities Impact Assessments. We were told that the Benefits service has completed the initial assessments required as part of the Equality Impact Assessments process. Work on an equality improvement plan was ongoing and was due to be completed by May 2005.
2.255 Although a summary of the Race Equality Scheme had been circulated to Benefits staff, they were not aware of the 3-year action plan.
2.256 The Race Equality Scheme states that all staff would be provided with race awareness training by May 2007. We were told that City of York Council delivered race awareness training corporately and that it had been delivered to some Benefits staff.
2.257 City of York Council had not undertaken an annual review of the needs of its customers from key ethnic minority groups.
2.258 Compliance with the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, reduces the risk of legal proceedings against the council for racial discrimination. It also helps to ensure that under represented groups claim HB and CTB.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council: · assesses and monitors the impact of its policies on race equality and publishes the results · provides all staff with general training on their responsibilities under the Race Relations Act 1976 and cultural awareness training · reviews the needs of customers from key ethnic minority groups each year. |
Internal working arrangements
2.259 Local authorities need to manage their internal partnerships and relationships to support short and longer term policy objectives. Such management includes ensuring that common goals are set for an effective and secure HB and CTB administration.
2.260 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of internal working arrangements.
2.261 To achieve Standard City of York Council needs to:
· clearly define and specify the roles and responsibilities of others involved with benefits administration, not directly employed in the Benefits service
· specify the internal communications channels that will be used
· monitor and regularly review the effectiveness
of arrangements for
co-operation and liaison
· publish the results of the monitoring and reviews.
2.262 City of York Council told us that the Benefits Assessment Manager and the Benefits Customer Services Manager had agreed an urgent claims process in April 2004. The process required customer contact staff to identify cases with potential for eviction, with a commitment that these cases would be processed within 14 days. However, there was no formal agreement, nor were there any written criteria. In addition, there was no process for monitoring or reviewing this arrangement. This meant there was no criteria to evaluate its effectiveness.
2.263 The Benefits service did not have any formal arrangements with the Council Tax section, nor were there any designated liaison officers in either the Council Tax section or the Benefits service. However, the Revenues Manager, who was responsible for Council Tax, was a member of the Revenues and Benefits Management Team, and so was involved in regular meetings with Benefits managers.
2.264 City of York Council had a service level agreement between Resources (Finance) and Community Services, for the provision of the Benefits service that had been signed by directors in 2003. This agreed:
· to monthly minuted meetings being held between the Benefits Assessment Manager and the Housing Contract Manager
· a target time of 14 working days in which to assess 90% of claims where all the necessary information had been received
· estate managers would ‘…have recourse to any of the nominated contact officers, if they were unable to obtain timely information…’.
2.265 The service level agreement defined the roles and responsibilities of the Benefits service and the Housing Contract teams, but did not specify the methods of communication between them. For example, the service level agreement stated that ‘…Enquiries other than Court or Eviction cases will receive replies within 3 weeks…’ but it did not state what method of communication would be used.
2.266 The service level agreement also stated that it would be reviewed every 6 months and any changes deemed necessary arising from the monthly meetings between the Benefits Assessment Manager and the Housing Contract Manager, would inform the review of the service level agreement.
2.267 City of York Council provided copies of minutes from monthly meetings between the Benefits Assessment Manager and the Housing Contract Manager, which indicated that changes were necessary. For example at a meeting in February 2004, the Housing Contract Manager expressed concerns that:
· assessment staff were no longer responding to e-mails
· a private landlord guaranteed deposit scheme was in danger of collapsing due to delays in benefits processing
· there were over 600 new claims over 4 weeks old waiting to be processed.
2.268 Despite these concerns no effective action had been taken to resolve these issues.
2.269 The minutes of meetings held in October and December 2003 and in February 2004 recorded the estimated amounts of HB owed to the council’s rent account due to delays in benefits processing. These were:
· £343,760 in October 2003
· £257,600 in December 2003
· £237,000 in February 2004.
The backlog of new benefit claims for council tenants were adversely impacting on the Housing Contract Team’s performance indicator relating to minimising rent arrears.
2.270 The Benefits Assessment Manager was the contact point with the Housing Contract Team Manager. However, the senior Benefits assessor in the Customer Contact team was the nominated contact point for the council’s estate managers. We considered that a more senior manager within the Benefits service should have filled this role to give it more status.
2.271 City of York Council had an arrangement with Social Services through the funding of welfare and take-up posts that formed part of the Welfare Advice and Appeals team within the Benefits service. However, there were no formal management arrangements with:
· the Legal Department
· IT section
· Licensing Department
· Education Department
· Trading Standards Office.
2.272 Having effective internal working arrangements helps ensure that other parts of the council understand their roles and responsibilities in benefit delivery. Whilst it is important to review service level agreements, their main purpose is to set standards that will ensure effective relationships to provide good quality service. Activity against a service level agreement should be monitored to ensure that appropriate action is taken if agreed standards are not being met.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council: · clearly defines and specifies the roles and responsibilities of others involved with Benefits administration, not directly employed in the Benefits service · specifies the internal communications channels that will be used · monitors
and regularly reviews the effectiveness of arrangements for · publishes the results of the monitoring and reviews. |
External working arrangements
2.273 Local authorities function within their own network of relationships with customers, stakeholders and other bodies in their communities. Effective partnerships with these organisations will provide mutual benefits through savings in administrative costs and benefit expenditure and reduce the amount of fraud and error. Some stakeholders such as the Rent Service and Jobcentre Plus play a key part in handling HB and CTB claims effectively and securely.
2.274 City of York Council did not meet Standard in the element of external working arrangements.
2.275 To achieve Standard City of York Council needs to have:
· formalised working arrangements with other organisations, for example Debt Management, Registered Social Landlords and the Crown Prosecution Service
· regular documented contact with other external organisations, where formal working agreements had not been established, such as Citizen’s Advice and the local police.
2.276 City of York Council had signed service
level agreements with Jobcentre Plus, The Pension Service, the Rent Service
and the
Counter-Fraud Investigation Service. However, whilst national model service
level agreements had been used, this meant they were not modified or tailored
to meet local circumstances. City of York Council did not have a service level
agreement with the Department’s Debt Management Group despite its efforts
to establish one.
2.277 The Benefits Assessment Manager was the designated liaison contact with Jobcentre Plus and The Pension Service and attended joint quarterly meetings with Jobcentre Plus and The Pension Service.
2.278 The minutes of these quarterly meetings showed that performance was monitored by Jobcentre Plus on a regular basis, according to the service level agreement and that it was signed annually by the Benefits Assessment Manager.
2.279 City of York Council and Jobcentre Plus both reported a close and effective working relationship. Regular liaison meetings had taken place every 6 to 8 weeks as a result of the Department implementing the Customer Management System in one of the York Jobcentres. City of York Council had provided regular and constructive feedback about the new system and operational problems were being resolved at the lowest practicable level.
2.280 Telephone lists and contact points were regularly updated and exchange and awareness visits had been arranged at a local level. In addition City of York Council and Jobcentre Plus were involved in a joint review of the shared use of the Remote Access Terminal. We look at the relationship with The Pension Service in more detail under Pension Credit in the Processing of claims section.
2.281 The Fraud Team Leader was the designated liaison contact with the Counter-Fraud Investigation Service, and attended Yorkshire and Humber Joint Operational Board meetings with the Counter-Fraud Investigation Service.
2.282 The minutes of the Joint Operational Board meetings showed that performance was monitored on a regular basis and that the service level agreement was signed annually by the Fraud Team Leader.
2.283 City of York Council adopted the national Business Partnership Agreement with the Inland Revenue in April 2003. This set out the minimum standards to be achieved by each party. However, managers in City of York Council told us that it had not established a formal working relationship with the Inland Revenue. There were no local arrangements for liaison or the exchange of information and any contact between the authority and the Inland Revenue was by the Tax Credit Contact Line.
2.284 City of York Council did not have formalised working arrangements with other organisations such as Registered Social Landlords and the Crown Prosecution Service. Nor did it have regular documented contact with other external organisations, where formal working agreements had not been established, such as Citizen’s Advice and the local police.
2.285 City of York Council mounted a CTB take-up campaign in March
2004. However, it failed to involve representatives from Jobcentre Plus or
The Pension Service. We cover this in more detail under Encouraging benefit
take-up, reducing poverty in the Customer services section.
2.286 Having effective external working arrangements helps to ensure that other organisations understand their connecting roles and responsibilities in benefit delivery.
|
Recommendations |
|
We recommend that City of York Council: · establishes formalised working arrangements with other organisations, for example Debt Management, Registered Social Landlords and the Crown Prosecution Service · agrees a Business Partnership Agreement with the Inland Revenue to establish a local working relationship · maintains regular documented contact with other external organisations, where formal working agreements have not been established, such as Citizen’s Advice and the local police. |