Resource management
Strategic management
5.1 Claims administration has to be set within the broader context of a local authority’s overall strategies and responsibilities. Members, managers and staff should therefore have a clear sense of direction, purpose and focus for their work. Members and senior officers should also have assurance that HB and CTB administration is effective and secure.
Performance Standards Enablers
5.2 The council met 8 of the 14 enablers scoped into the inspection for Resource management. There are no Performance measures attached to this theme.
Managing the Benefits service
5.3 The council’s vision, priorities and pledges were set out in its Corporate Plan 2005-2006.
5.4 Details of the council’s targets and performance against Best Value Performance Indicators were published in the council’s:
- Best Value Performance Plan 2005/06
- draft Corporate Services Directorate Plan 2006/07-2008/09
- Revenues and Benefits Team Action Plan 2005/06
- Comprehensive Performance Assessment Improvement Plan 2005-2008.
5.5 The council had set itself targets that were comprehensive, stretching, and sought continuous improvement. These targets were reviewed annually, and agreed by Members and senior officers before being adopted.
5.6 The council monitored its
achievement against plans and targets.
A corporate performance management system was used to collate information
and generate reports of performance against key Benefits service targets for
Members and senior officers. These reports had previously been submitted on
a quarterly basis. However, in view of increased concern over worsening levels
of performance in the Benefits service, these reports had been made on a monthly
basis since December 2005.
5.7 We were told that any failure to meet targets was taken seriously, with service managers required to explain to Members and senior officers the reasons for the failure, and the actions taken to remedy the problem.
5.8 Figure 5.1 shows the council’s processing performance for 2004/05 and 2005/06, as well as targets set for 2005/06, 2006/07 and 2007/08.
| Performance indicator | 2004/05 actual | 2005/06 target | 2005/06 actual* | 2006/07 target | 2007/08 target |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Time to process new claims (standard 36 days) | 69 days | 45 days | 70 days | 36 days | 33 days |
| Time to process changes of circumstances (standard 9 days) | 21 days | 17 days | 35 days | 13 days | 9 days |
Source: Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council
* estimated as at March 2006
5.9 Figure 5.1 shows that in March 2006 the council anticipated that it was on course to fail its 2005/06 targets by 25 days for new claims and 18 days for changes of circumstances. The targets it set for 2006/07 and 2007/08 were therefore very stretching requiring significant improvements in performance.
5.10 While we were on site in March 2006 the council had still not produced detailed action plans showing how it intended to achieve these targets. Following its decision to withdraw from the Putting the Citizen First corporate outsourcing partnership in February 2006, the council planned to carry out an options appraisal on the best way to run its Revenues and Benefits service. We were told that the preparation of detailed action plans had been postponed pending the outcome of the options appraisal and the council’s decision on how best to proceed.
5.11 The council expected to make a decision in May 2006 having evaluated its various options including outsourcing the Benefits service either in full or in part. If the council is to have any chance of meeting the stretching targets set for 2006/07, it is vital that it draws up realistic, detailed plans ready to implement as soon as the decision has been made. (See recommendation 8)
5.12 We have already reported that the council had difficulty recruiting permanent staff and consequently had to use significant numbers of temporary staff. In November 2005, the council released most of its temporary staff as planned. This meant that the service had to operate with a higher level of vacancies. This reduced capacity clearly adversely affected the council’s ability to reduce the backlog as previously planned.
5.13 The council acknowledged that
although it had done some risk assessment work in the Benefits service, further
work was required in this area to ensure business continuity during change
programmes. We were told that the council planned to develop business continuity
plans in 2006/2007.
(See recommendation 11)
Monitoring performance
5.14 The
council submitted statistical returns to the Department and the Housing Benefit
Matching Service on time. It also completed annual
self-assessments against Performance Standards.
5.15 As we have previously mentioned the council was carrying out some data cleansing activities as it realised that there were some problems with the accuracy of data input on the Benefits IT system. During the on-site phase of our inspection however, our analysis of the complete benefits processing data from June 2005 to January 2006, revealed the extent of the problem. For example we found problems with:
- duplicate entries of individual cases causing processing times to be recorded as many as 6 times on statistical returns
- incorrect classification of cases, for example, new claims recorded as changes of circumstances and vice versa
- multiple entries for single changes of circumstances for the same customer.
5.16 These problems with data input have undoubtedly adversely affected the reliability of the council’s reported performance on processing new claims and changes of circumstances. (See recommendation 2)
5.17 The council monitored and documented its achievement against targets, together with suggested explanations for any failure to meet targets in its monthly Performance Action Plan. Details of actions taken or planned to improve performance were also documented to keep senior officers and Members informed of developments. If the council’s Executive Management Team or Cabinet required further assurance, service managers were called to appear before them to provide further information.
5.18 We were told that the improvement of the Benefits service was a high priority for the council. Senior managers and Members took a keen interest in its performance. However, in light of our findings, there is considerable work to be done.
Providing for a skilled and competent workforce
5.19
The council followed a strict
protocol of recruiting staff only when
pre-employment checks had been carried out and ensured that agency staff met
the same criteria.
5.20 The induction process for new recruits was well structured. It included details of the council’s:
- code of conduct
- declaration of interest procedures
- training programme.
5.21 The council had a structured training plan that supported the training and development needs of Revenues and Benefits staff. It was prepared annually, available to staff on the Intranet and reviewed as appropriate.
5.22 The council also had an Annual Corporate Skills and Knowledge Training Programme August 2005 – July 2006. This was available to all staff through its Intranet and provided guidance on personal development, including details of internal and external training courses.
5.23 The Revenues and Benefits Service had its own Training and Improvement Team, staffed by 5 Training Officers and 2 Training Assistants.
5.24 This team maintained a database of all training undertaken by staff. Procedural and technical updates were issued by way of benefit notes to appropriate staff. Team Leaders and Coaches ensured that staff read and understood these, for example, by holding briefing sessions. A record was kept of these sessions and was passed to the training unit to update the database. This provided assurance that staff had received and read technical updates.
5.25 Once staff are recruited to fill the vacancies there will be a considerable training requirement.
Value for money
IT systems
5.26 In
June 2005, the council implemented a new Benefits IT system. The system was
of a type used in many other local authorities and was able to support all
aspects of benefits administration and interfaced with its other
IT systems.
5.27 We were told that the implementation of the new Benefits IT system had been delivered on time and to budget. The implementation project was due to be formally signed off shortly after the on-site phase of our inspection, once some minor queries had been resolved with the IT systems supplier.
5.28 The Benefits IT system included a facility for running reports. Management told us that they had concerns over their ability to extract management information from this system, and were making arrangements to work in partnership with other local authorities using this system to develop their own suite of management and exception reports.
5.29 The fact that we were able to obtain reports from the Benefits IT system to use as a basis for analysis, shows that management information was readily available and a very valuable tool, which should be used to manage the Benefits service.
Assurance
5.30 Large numbers of HB and CTB payments pass through the accounting and payment systems operated by a local authority. It is therefore essential that there are rigorous internal control mechanisms in place to provide assurance on the security of the Benefits system.
Internal control mechanisms
5.31 Following the implementation of the new Benefits IT system it was necessary for the council to review its procedures for testing systems releases and ensuring a secure user environment through password controlled access.
5.32 The council had a mechanism for testing and implementing software releases which involved liaison with the software supplier and extensive testing within a secure environment.
5.33 The Revenues and Benefits Systems Support Team controlled access to the Benefits IT system through a password and user identity. Passwords and user identities would be issued to staff on receipt of an authorised request from the relevant line manager or team leader. This request would also detail the level of access to the system required by the user according to their job role.
5.34 We found that the issuing of user identities and passwords was generally well controlled. However, there was no process to ensure that the levels of access granted to users had remained relevant, despite a restructure in December 2005, which had resulted in staff taking on changing roles and responsibilities. (See recommendation 12)
5.35 We also noted that the Revenues and Benefits Systems Support Team had unrestricted access to the system. This would enable them to create new claims and to set up, delete and amend all passwords and identities, including their own.
5.36 While we recognise the need for
this access to be available, we consider that it should be tightly controlled
and subjected to regular checks to provide assurance to the council that these
access rights are not abused.
(See recommendation 13)
5.37 We reviewed the council’s procedures for handling and opening post securely. Generally, the post-opening arrangements were found to be secure. However, we found a few minor weaknesses. 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 ..The lack of control placed the valuables at risk.
5.38 The council acknowledged these weaknesses and the need to review its post-opening procedures. (See recommendation 14)
5.39 Performance Standards require
that councils carry out a check, which includes a sample case check, on its
quarterly performance measure data to validate user input before submitting
it to the Department. The council told us that it did not carry out this check
and therefore had no assurance that the performance it reported to the Department
was accurate.
(See recommendation 9)
5.40 As we have already reported, our analysis of the claims processed since June 2005 highlighted a number of discrepancies, which were caused by user input error. These undoubtedly will have had an adverse impact on the accuracy of the council’s reported performance in processing new claims and changes of circumstances. (See recommendation 2)
Secure administration
5.41 The council’s Internal Audit service operated to a 5-year strategic plan, ensuring coverage of every function of the council on a rolling basis. An operational audit plan was approved by senior managers and Members and agreed by service managers on an annual basis.
5.42 Figure 5.2 shows the number of planned and actual Internal Audit days for all services within Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council from 2003/04 to 2005/06 as estimated in March 2006.
| Description | 2003/04 | 2004/05 | 2005/06* |
|---|---|---|---|
| Total number of Internal Audit days allocated (all services/departments) |
2,458 | 2,347 | 2,376 |
| Total number of Internal Audit days used (all services/departments) |
2,506 | 2,588 | 2,505 |
| Number of Internal Audit days allocated to HB and CTB administration |
70 | 84 | 65 |
| Number of Internal Audit days used on HB and CTB administration |
70 | 84 | 65 |
Source: Walsall Metropolitan Borough Council
*as estimated in March 2006
5.43 Figure 5.2 shows that the number of planned Internal Audit days for all services within the council did not differ substantially from the number of days actually spent. Each year the Internal Audit service fulfilled exactly the number of days it planned to spend on the Benefits service.
5.44 The council’s Internal Audit service adopted a risk-based approach to auditing its services. The Benefits service was classed as a core system and therefore considered high risk and resourced accordingly.
5.45 Audit of the Benefits service covered a range of activities including:
- sampling benefit claims to check if these were processed correctly and in accordance with procedural guidance and legislation
- reviewing the security of and access to IT systems
- conducting residency checks by visiting customers in their homes, passing details of any problems found to the council’s fraud team
- reviewing the council’s self-assessment against Performance Standards and the evidence provided in support.
5.46 The Benefits service and Internal Audit service had built up good relationships with the Audit Commission.
5.47 The Audit Commission told
us that its main work in the Benefits service related to the annual subsidy
claim. The 2004/2005 subsidy claim proved problematic due to the number of
errors made by the council and involved
100 days of the Audit Commission’s time before the claim could be signed off.
This was a significant increase in the number of days the Audit Commission
told us it would expect to have to spend auditing a council’s subsidy claim.
5.48 The Audit Commission made a number of recommendations following its audit of the subsidy claim. While we were on site, the council was in the process of agreeing an action plan to implement these recommendations.
5.49 The council had adopted a mechanism to monitor the implementation of recommendations from internal and external auditors. Internal Audit operated a follow-up system to track the implementation of outstanding recommendations by individual service managers. This was reported to and monitored by the council’s Audit Committee, which met 7 times each year.
5.50 Managers who failed to implement audit recommendations faced the prospect of being called to appear before the Audit Committee to explain themselves. We were told that there had been no such problems with the Benefits service as it had implemented any recommendations made.
5.51 The council reported a success rate of implementing around
70% of internal audit recommendations across the whole council for 2005/06.
It has
set a target of a 90% success rate for 2006/07.
[Next]