User focus
4.1 Councils should aim to:
- support vulnerable people and tackle all forms of social exclusion
- reduce barriers to work, particularly in relation to benefit and rent policy
- deliver modern, efficient and secure customer-focused public services, and empower individuals to influence them
- ensure that customers are not deterred from claiming because the Benefits service does not address their particular needs
- make sure that relationships with stakeholders support good customer service while reducing administrative costs and fraud and error
- deal with appeals and complaints quickly and effectively.
4.2 The council was not at Standard for any of the 3 performance measures, and achieved 8 of the 11 enablers scoped into this inspection for User focus.
Take-up
4.3 Councils have a responsibility to actively encourage benefit take-up and associated initiatives should be part of a wider anti-poverty strategy.
4.4 Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council had a Revenues and Benefits Customer Services Policy that aimed to:
- provide a customer focused service through maximising benefit take-up
- provide support to vulnerable customers
- ensure that personal information was communicated to those parties with appropriate authorisation
- comply with its Equal Opportunities Policy.
4.5 This policy was due for an annual review at the time of our on-site visit. The policy document was made available to all staff on the Intranet.
4.6 The council had a proactive Welfare Rights Service whose role was to maximise benefit take-up and undertake customer surveys. It had a high profile and worked in partnership with external stakeholders including the local Citizens Advice Bureau, Housing Trusts, Registered Social Landlords and The Pension Service. The Welfare Rights Service was the winner of the council’s Annual Partnership Award 2005 for the success of the Pensions Take-up Project.
4.7 Benefit take-up had a high profile within the council. We were told that for this financial year (2005/06), Members had approved an increase in core funding from £222,000 to £449,000.
4.8 Benefit maximisation targets were set and progress against them was reviewed at monthly senior management meetings. For the period April 2005 to January 2006, the council had achieved £2,142,818 against its target of £2,080,000.
4.9 The council, in partnership with the Department had created a joint team to take a co-ordinated approach to:
- benefit take-up and maximisation
- fairer charging assessments
- Verification Framework visits
- Welfare Rights.
4.10 The team was called the Financial Assessment and Benefits (FAB) Team and was due to go live from 27 March 2006. It was made up of visiting staff from the Benefits service, Welfare Rights Service and the Department.
Decision Notices
4.11 We examined a selection of decision notices used by the council. These were clear and easy to follow.
4.12 Decision notices included a reminder to customers to report changes of circumstances and a comprehensive list of the type of changes which should be reported.
4.13 The council also sent customers a Jargonbuster leaflet with all decision notices which provided explanations of technical terms included.
4.14 The decision notices were issued automatically by the Benefits IT system following completion of an assessment of a claim or change of circumstances.
Dealing With Enquiries
4.15 In June 2005 the council introduced its First Stop Shop facility for personal callers. This modern facility provided Intranet access, private interview areas and an electronic system for monitoring queue levels and performance in attending to personal callers. The council set itself a target to see all personal callers within 15 minutes. The Customer Services Manager monitored performance and adjusted staffing levels to ensure that this target was achieved.
4.16 The council also set itself
a target to answer telephone calls within
4 rings, but we were told that performance against this target was not monitored.
Additionally, performance in responding to postal or e-mailed enquiries was
not monitored either.
4.17 The council also provided a service for personal callers to the First Stop Shop, who were able to bring in completed claim forms along with supporting documentation. These would be checked to the standard of the Verification Framework and returned immediately. A special fast-track queue had been set up for such claims and this was an important component of the council’s Walsall Promise. While this was good practice, this service was not used to its full capacity bearing in mind the low proportion (14% from our sample) of claims supported by all evidence at the outset.
Partnership working
4.18 The council had up-to-date service level agreements based on the national models, with all its key external stakeholders, including:
- Jobcentre Plus
- The Pension Service
- the Rent Service
- the Appeals Service
- Debt Management.
4.19 Staff were aware of the council’s liaison arrangements with its stakeholders and were encouraged to raise agenda items for liaison meetings. The council’s liaison officer provided feedback to staff following the meetings.
4.20 Although the council reported that there were no outstanding issues with its external stakeholders, and that it had good day-to-day working relationships with them, it was unable to provide any evidence to show that it had monitored the services provided.
4.21 We contacted some of the
external stakeholders and were told that
day-to-day relationships were good. However, the feedback we received from
the Rent Service suggested that the backlog of new claims was having an adverse
impact on the time taken to send Rent Officer referrals.
4.22 The council has a legal requirement to issue referrals to the Rent Service within:
- 3 working days of either receiving the claim, relevant information regarding the claim, or notification of a change relating to Rent Allowance, or of the day on which the period has elapsed or as soon as practicable thereafter
- 2 working days of receiving a request for a pre-tenancy determination.
4.23 Our analysis of the data from June 2005 to January 2006 from the Benefits IT system showed that the time taken to issue a referral to the Rent Service ranged between 46 and 95 days.
4.24 The Rent Service also told us that the quality of information provided on the referral form was variable.
4.25 As the council did not monitor
its service level agreements it would be unable to state categorically that
the services provided matched those agreed. Therefore it would also be difficult
for the council to sign off the end of year certificate of performance with
any degree of certainty.
(See recommendation 17)
4.26 When a customer is in receipt of HB and IS/JSA, the Department should set an indicator on its Benefits IT system. This ensures that an electronic notification is issued to the council should the customer notify a change in their circumstances.
4.27 In our sample of 20 new claims there were 13 claims where the customer was in receipt of IS/JSA. We checked the Department’s remote access terminal to confirm if the HB indicators were set appropriately. We found that out of the 13 claims checked, indicators were incorrectly set on 4 of them. While we were on site the Benefits service took immediate corrective action and notified the Department of these claims.
4.28 The Benefits service held regular meetings with its Registered Social Landlords, Citizens Advice Bureau contacts and the local Social Services. Agendas were drawn up and minutes were recorded and made available to staff.
Appeals and complaints
4.29 Fig 4.1 shows the council’s performance in respect of appeals and complaints for the quarter to 31 December 2005.
| Performance Measure | Description | Standard | Performance October to December 2005 | At Standard |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| PM 17 | Percentage of requests for reconsideration actioned and notified within 4 weeks | 65% | 30% | No |
| PM 18 | Percentage of appeals submitted to the Appeals Service in 4 weeks | 65% | 6% | No |
| PM 19 | Percentage of appeals submitted to the Appeals Service (including those in PM18) in 3 months | 95% | 38% | No |
Source: Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council
4.30 Complaints and appeals were handled by the Revenues and Benefits Appeals and Complaints Team, which had experienced a number of issues affecting performance.
4.31 Following the transfer of the local authority housing stock, Registered Social Landlords gained rights of appeal as affected parties. This resulted in an increase in the number of appeals received by the council, for example decisions on overpayment recovery.
4.32 Delays in claims processing caused by the implementation of the new Benefits IT system resulted in an increase in complaints from customers. This meant that in effect the team were acting as full-time complaints officers, with little resource available for the handling of appeals.
4.33 The council had taken steps to improve performance in this area, for example in March 2006 it was recruiting an Appeals Support Officer.
4.34 The council had nominated skilled staff who were responsible for handling queries, disputes, applications for reconsideration or revision and appeals referrals. They also ensured that such referrals were correct in law, and were able to represent the local authority case at tribunal hearings.
4.35 However, we found that there were delays in implementing decisions from appeals tribunals. The council set its own target of 28 days for implementing decisions and had a procedure in place to track decisions, to ensure that they were implemented on time. However, when we analysed the council’s performance for 2005/06, we found that it took an average of 43 days to implement a decision. (See recommendation 7)
Complaints
4.36 When they receive complaints, councils need to:
- deal with complaints promptly and ensure the complainant is given an informative explanation and if appropriate, an apology and rectification
- resolve disputes as quickly as possible
- use management information to inform and improve the effectiveness of the handling of disputes and appeals
- undertake analysis to identify trends and address common failures.
4.37 The council’s corporate complaints procedure Tell Us was also used for complaints about the Benefits service. Targets were set that included:
- 5 working days to acknowledge receipt of the complaint
- 15 working days to provide a full response to the customer.
4.38 Complaints were logged, monitored and analysed for trends. Results of the analysis were used to identify staff training needs and procedural changes. The council had received 85 complaints about its Benefits service between April 2005 and February 2006. This was an increase of 55% on the previous figure of 47 for the period 2004/05.
4.39 The main reason for complaints
received in 2005/06 concerned delays in processing, which accounted for 27
(32%) of the 85 received. While we were on site, the council reported that
it had processed 54 (64%) of the complaints within the target of 15 days,
with 12 (14%) exceeding the target and
19 complaints remained outstanding.