London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham

OVERVIEW & SCRUTINY COMMITTEE 24th September 2013

ANNUAL COMPLAINTS REPORT Report of the Head of Executive Classification: For Scrutiny Review & Comment Key Decision: No Wards Affected: All Accountable Executive Director: Jane West, Executive Director of Finance & Corporate Governance Report Author: Lyn Anthony, Head of Executive Services

Contact Details: Tel: 020 753 1011 E-mail: lyn.anthony@lbhf.gov.uk

1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.1 The Annual Complaints report for 2012/13 is attached at Appendix 1. For

the first time the report also covers, Compliments to staff, Requests for Information (RFIs), Councillors and MP Enquiries (CMET) and Subject Access Requests (SARs). I hope this gives the Board a useful and comprehensive overview.

2. ANNUAL COMPLAINTS REPORT 2.1 There has been a10% reduction on the overall number of complaints

recorded. 1612 complaints were recorded during the reporting period across all three Stages of the complaints procedure. 1499 of these complaints were considered at Stage 1, 93 at Stage 2 and 20 at Stage 3.

2.2 Complaints against Housing & Regeneration (HRD) accounted for 66% of

the total complaints made across all three Stages of the complaints procedure. Finance and Corporate Services (FCS) accounts for the second largest proportion of complaints at 17%, this is consistent with the previous year’s figures.

2.3 The proportion of complaints upheld, or partially upheld, has remained consistent at 53% (previously 56%) – meaning that 47% of complaints were not upheld (previously 45%).

2.4 Across all services, 80% of Stage 1 complaints were responded to within

deadline, this is consistent with the previous reporting year (81%). 51% of Stage 2 complaints were responded to within deadline, which is a significant decrease on last year (71%).

2.5 Where complaints were independently investigated at Stage 3 of the

complaints procedure, by the h&f InTouch team, 79% of complaints were again responded to within deadline (the same figure for the previous year).

2.6 As a result of poor performance in acknowledging complaints (previously

only 40% of complaints were acknowledged), this function was transferred to h&f InTouch. All complaints are now acknowledged (i.e. 100%).

2.7 The percentage of complaints made at Stage 1 that escalated to Stage 2

has decreased from 7% to 6% during this reporting period. The number of Stage 2 complaints escalating to Stage 3 has also decreased from 35% to 22%.

2.8 The Local Government Ombudsman made 93 enquiries of the Council

during the reporting year. This is a decrease on the 108 enquiries made in the previous year. The number of complaints ‘locally settled’ as a result of the Ombudsman’s involvement, increased from 8% to 17%; however, this is still well below the national average of 27%.

2.9 The Head of Executive Services and Officers from the h&f InTouch team

met with the Local Government Ombudsman and received very positive feedback about the service and the delivery model, which the Ombudsman advised is being adopted by other Local Authorities. Four of the four performance measures used to monitor the complaints procedure were achieved. The Council: • Acknowledged all of the complaints made in a timely manner (within

3 days); • Responded to 80% of new complaints made on time; • Recorded that 48% of customers stated that they were satisfied

with the complaints procedure (which is far in excess of the 30% target); and,

• Had no maladministration decisions made against it by the Ombudsman.

2.10 On 1 April 2013, the Council introduced a new two-stage complaints

procedure, supported by an updated Corporate Complaints Policy. Stage

2 complaints are now managed by the h&f InTouch team, with the aim of bringing about swifter resolutions for our residents and customers.

2.11 As a result of the business intelligence from iCasework, the h&f InTouch

team is now working with a number of teams to review and change how services are delivered in order to deliver improvements for our residents and customers and to reduce the likelihood of complaints made.

3. COMPLIMENTS 3.1 The Council began keeping a corporate record of compliments on 1 July

2012. Between 1 July 2012 and 31 March 2013, the h&f InTouch team has recorded a total of 72 compliments from our residents and customers.

3.2 Transportation and Technical Services (TTS) received the majority of

compliments (39%), with Environment, Leisure and Residents Services (ELRS) receiving the second largest proportion (31%).

3.3 Development Management (TTS) and Community Safety, Operations and

Emergency Services teams (ELRD) were the most complimented. 4. COUNCILLOR AND MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT ENQUIRIES 4.1 2247 enquiries were recorded during the reporting period. 527 enquiries

were made by Cabinet Members, 757 by Councillors and 946 by Members of Parliament. In 17 cases, the type of enquiry was not recorded. Overall there has been a 26% decrease in the number of enquiries recorded against the previous reporting period.

4.2 The timeliness of the Council’s responses to Councillor and Member of

Parliament enquiries has increased from 41% to 57%. As with Corporate Complaints and Requests for information; a new, devolved management process – the New Ways of Working – was introduced during the reporting period (July 2012). If the reporting period included only those enquiries managed under the new process, the overall timeliness would be 65%.

5. REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION (FREEDOM OF INFORMATION /

ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION REGULATIONS / SUBJECT ACCESS REQUESTS)

5.1 This is the first full reporting period where the management of requests for

information has been the responsibility of the h&f InTouch team and a new, devolved and risk-based management process – the New Ways of Working – was introduced during the reporting period (July 2012). In addition, a new, searchable disclosure log was launched to further improve transparency.

5.2 During the reporting period, 1199 requests for information were responded

to by the Council. This is largely consistent with the 1267 requests processed in 2011-12. 93% of the requests were responded to on time, which is a slight performance improvement on the previous year (92%).

5.3 The expectation from the regulator (the Information Commissioner) is that

public authorities will have a compliance rate of greater than 85%, which the Council is more than achieving.

5.4 Requests for information held by Transportation and Technical Services

(TTS) accounted for 26% of the total responded to, with Finance and Corporate Services (FCS) accounting for the second largest proportion at 24%. The main categories of request were: Parking and Penalty Charge Notices (TTS), Housing Benefits and Council Tax (FCS), and Human Resources (FCS).

5.5 Information was disclosed in 76% of cases; in the remaining cases the

requested information was either considered exempt (i.e. not suitable disclosure) or was not held by the Council. Where information was considered exempt, in the majority of cases this was either because it was already readily available (i.e. on the Council’s websites), or was personal in nature.

5.6 23 internal reviews were requested by customers who were not satisfied

with how their request for information was handled – this is a decrease from the last year’s 29 reviews. The Information Management Team, who review the case independently of the h&f InTouch team, found fault against the Council in 11 cases (48% of 23 reviews), which is a decrease on last year’s 23 reviews (80% of 29 reviews).

5.7 As a result of the business intelligence from iCasework, the h&f InTouch

team is now working with a number of services with the aim of proactively publishing information with the aim of reducing the number of requests for information made to the Council and to further improve transparency.

5.8 The Corporate Services Improvement Group will look at lessons learned

over the reporting period and will work with services to drive up service standards and increase residents satisfaction.

6. BENCHMARKING 6.1 The Board meeting on the 29th January asked if it was possible to look at

Tri Borough benchmarking.

6.2 Consideration of this issue was discussed at HFBB. It was agreed that there was no consistency with regards to the policy and processes as to how complaints are managed across the three Boroughs and that the differences in services provided – i.e. the housing function in RBK&C and WCC is external – would make comparisons difficult. However, it was agreed that complaints made to the Local Government Ombudsman could be used as a benchmark as the LGO criteria was consistent. This will be included in the next report.

6.3 Please also note, that as a Council, we actively encourage the

Ombudsman’s involvement to close matters sooner, if we are confident that we have got it right the first time. As such, simple comparisons about the number of complaints made to the Ombudsman would be a misleading measure of success (or failure). It has been proposed that the number of settlements reached as a proportion of the total of complaints made to the Ombudsman would be a better indicator, as such decisions are normally made when fault is found by the Ombudsman.

7. RECOMMENDATIONS 7.1 That the Board comments and notes the report.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 2000 LIST OF BACKGROUND PAPERS USED IN PREPARING THIS REPORT

No.

Description of Background Papers

Name/Ext of holder of file/copy

Department/ Location

1. None

Appendix 1

HAMMERSMITH & FULHAM COUNCIL

Annual Complaints Performance Report

1 April 2012 to 31 March 2013

Lyn Anthony Head of Executive Services For further information James Filus Corporate Customer & Complaints Manager EXT 2020

Appendix Contents Page 1. Corporate Complaints 7 1.1 Complaints received 7 1.2 Method of receipt 9 1.3 Reasons for rejection 9 1.4 Timeliness 9 1.5 Delay reasons 10 1.6 Outcomes 11 1.7 Categories 11 1.8 Ombudsman complaints 12 1.9 Compensation 13 1.10 Customer satisfaction 14 1.11 Overall performance against policy targets 14 2. Compliments 16 2.1 Compliments 16 3. Councillor and Member of Parliament enquiries 17 3.1 Enquiries 17 3.2 Timeliness 17 3.3 Categories 18 4. Requests for Information 20 4.1 Responses within statutory time limits 20 4.2 Requests for Information 20 4.3 Percentage of RFIs responded to within statutory

time limits by Department for financial year 2012/13 20 4.4 Classifications 20 4.5 Outcomes 21 4.6 Refusals and exemptions 21 4.7 Internal reviews 22 4.8 Number of internal reviews by Department by financial year since April 2011 23 4.9 Internal reviews outcomes by financial year

since April 2011 23 4.10 Information Commissioner’s Office complaints 24 4.11 Subject access requests (SARs) 25

1. Corporate Complaints 1.1 Complaints received For the reporting period, a total of 1612 complaints have been recorded by the h&f InTouch team across the three Stages of the Council’s complaints procedure. The complaints can be broken down, across the Stages, as follows: Period Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Total 2011/12 2010/11 1 Apr – 30 Jun (Q1) 334 26 5 365 476 554 1 Jul – 31 Sept (Q2) 356 14 1 371 469 528 1 Oct – 31 Dec (Q3) 352 21 3 376 415 562 1 Jan – 31 Mar (Q4) 457 32 11 500 433 477 Total 1499 93 20 1612 1793 2121 2011/12 1631 120 42 1793 2010/11 1884 180 57 2121 There has been a 10% reduction in the number of complaints recorded by the Council during the reporting period compared to the previous municipal year. The recording of complaints against each of the Council’s service areas can be shown as follows: Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3

Department 2012

-13

2011

-12

2012

-13

2011

-12

2012

-13

2011

-12

Chief Executives (CE) 27 92 0 0 1 0 Childrens Services (CHS) 3 13 1 3 0 1 Adult Social Care (ASC) 3 3 0 0 0 0 Environment, Leisure and Residents Services (ELRS) 90 86 1 1 0 0 Finance and Corporate Services (FCS) 270 281 10 19 3 8 Housing and Regeneration (HRD) 975 1024 76 87 13 31 Transportation and Technical Services (TTS) 131 132 5 10 3 2 Grand Total 1499 1631 93 120 20 42 *Please note that complaints recorded against ‘Chief Executives’’ are those that were considered to have insufficient information, or should be dealt with outside of the complaints procedure (e.g. a Housing Benefit appeal) and were registered against the h&f InTouch team for record keeping purposes. The Service areas reflect the Council’s structure at 1 April 2011. A table showing the number of Stage 1 complaints received, by service, each month is provided below:

1.2 Method of receipt Complaints can be made to the Council via various methods. The table below shows the number of matters recorded by the h&f InTouch team and the method of receipt: Contact method 2012/13 % 11/12 % Email 341 18 25 Form 161 8 19 In person 7 0 0 Letter 231 12 22 Ombudsman 3 0 0 Phone 608 32 34 Self service 549 29 0 Fax 1 0 0 Total 1901 100 100 There has been a significant shift towards self-service, since this was introduced in July 2012. 1.3 Reasons for rejection Although the increase in self-service has been positive in reducing administrative work for the InTouch team and promoting transparency for our customers, the h&f InTouch team has – as a consequence – had to reject a number of matters that would not have ordinarily been recorded. The below table shows the number of matters that have been rejected and the recorded reason: Reason for rejection Total % Insufficient information provided by customer 32 8 Issue adequately responded to previously 8 2 Issue not dealt with under complaints procedure 299 73 Issue not for this organisation 20 5 Not a council service 6 1 Other 43 11 Representative not authorised to act on behalf of client 1 0 Total 409 100 The predominant reason for rejection is ‘issue not dealt with under the complaints procedure’ – this is used when matters such as PCN appeals, or comments on planning applications, etc., have been recorded by the customer via the self-service portal. 1.4 Timeliness The timeliness of the complaints (see 2.1) that were recorded for investigation, by service, can be shown as follows:

2012/13 2011/12 2012/13 2011/12 Service area Stage 1 Stage 2 Children's Services (CHS) 100% 83% 100% 33% Adult Social Care (ASC) 0% 100% n/a 0% Transportation and Technical Services (TTS) 71% 82% 60% 73% Finance and Corporate Services (FCS) 71% 67% 33% 52% Housing & Regeneration (HRD) 80% 84% 54% 79% Environment, Leisure and Residents Services (ELRS) 93% 89% n/a 100% Across all services, 80.4% of Stage 1 complaints were responded to within deadline, this is largely consistent with the 81% of the previous municipal year. 51% of Stage 2 complaints were responded to within deadline, which is a reduction on the previous municipal year (71%). Where complaints were independently investigated at Stage 3 of the complaints procedure by the h&f InTouch team, 79% of complaints were responded to within deadline. This is consistent with last years 79%. The Corporate Complaints Policy has a target timeliness of 80% for all complaints. This has been achieved for the first time this year for Stage 1 complaints. For Stage 2 improvements are necessary. 1.5 Delay reasons Since 1 July 2012, whenever a complaint is responded to outside of the Council’s published timescale, it has been necessary to record a reason for the delay. A table of the reasons given is provided below: Reason Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Total % Complex case 41 4 1 46 19% Other reason 66 13 0 79 33% Workload 50 4 1 55 23% Internal information or records missing 9 0 1 10 4% Staff absent or unavailable 40 3 0 43 18% More information required from customer 4 0 0 4 2% Customer unavailable 1 0 0 1 0% Total 211 24 3 238

1.6 Outcomes Outcome Stage 1 Stage 2 Stage 3 Total 12/13% 11/12% Not Upheld 695 23 5 723 47 45 Partially upheld 300 28 5 333 22 24 Upheld 452 29 4 485 31 32 Resolved immediately 7 0 0 7 0 0 Total 1454 80 14 1548 *Please note that the number of decisions will not match the number of complaints received, some of these complaints are currently ongoing and therefore an outcome has not been determined. The outcomes recorded across the last two reporting years have stayed consistent. 1.7 Categories iCasework allows the Council to ‘categorise’ a complaint, meaning that we can record what particular service/team was the subject of the complaint and what ‘problem’ lead to the complaint being made. The table below shows the top 10 categories of complaints for the reporting period: Total Category 2012/13 2011/12 2011/10 Responsive repairs - leaks and floods (plumbing) 139 121 97 Repairs - general 111 202 185 Individual account enquiries (council tax) 82 108 76 Estate management - car parking 70 148 94 Housing benefit current claim 47 51 39 Responsive repairs - roof 35 n/a n/a Responsive repairs - surveying 27 n/a n/a Parking - fines 26 n/a n/a Responsive repairs - information and advice 19 n/a n/a Programme of maintenance 11 138 226

The table below illustrates the top ten ‘problems’ that residents and customers informed the h&f InTouch team that they had experienced: Total Problem 2012/13 2012/11 2011/10 Delay in doing something 315 329 369 Communication cause 196 n/a n/a Service quality 183 n/a n/a Failure to do something 138 80 43 Inappropriate action or service 86 21 21 Staff conduct cause 77 n/a n/a Other cause 75 n/a n/a Other service and care cause 55 n/a n/a Environmental cause 19 n/a n/a Cancellation or withdrawal of service 9 n/a n/a

*n/a – caused by upgrade of system introduced new category and problem types, meaning there are less direct comparisons against the previous reporting years. The problem type ‘Delay in doing something’ again remains dominant. 1.8 Ombudsman complaints In addition to recording all Corporate Complaints, the h&f InTouch team also manage the Council’s responses to the Local Government Ombudsman. During the reporting period, a total of 91 complaints were referred by the Ombudsman for investigation. This is a small decrease on the previous year’s total of 108. 2012/13 2011/12 2011/10 1 Apr - 30 Jun (Q1) 23 29 19 1 Jul - 31 Sept (Q2) 13 29 27 1 Oct - 31 Dec (Q3) 28 28 23 1 Jan - 31 Mar (Q4) 27 22 34 Grand Total 91 108 103 During the reporting period, the Ombudsman determined 89 complaints against the Council, which is a decrease on the 116 decisions made in the previous year. The decisions can be shown, as follows: Outcome 12/13 % 11/12 % 11/10 % To discontinue investigation injustice remedied 15 17 10 8 31 32 Not to initiate an investigation 29 33 38 33 31 32 To discontinue investigation 16 18 45 39 21 21 Investigation complete, satisfied with authority’s actions 3 3 8 7 n/a n/a Outside jurisdiction 26 49 15 13 15 15 Maladministration 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 89 100 116 100 98 100 Although it should not be seen as negative to settle a complaint, it can be costly to do this at the point the Ombudsman is involved. Nationally, the average percentage of Local settlement decisions, against the total number of decisions, is around 27%, the Council is well below this average at 17%. Information on the amount of compensation paid following complaints to the Ombudsman and the Council can be found later in this report.

1.9 Compensation iCasework enables the Council to record and report on the volume of compensation being offered at each Stage of the complaints procedure and those complaints made to the Ombudsman. For the reporting period, a total of £11,705.52 compensation is recorded as being offered. This is a significant increase on the £7,094.07 recorded as being paid in the previous reporting year. The following table shows the amounts paid in the previous two reporting years, against the amount offered during the current reporting period, across each of the Council’s services: 2012/13 2011/12 2011/10 Service Amount (£) Chief Executives (CE) 0.00 0.00 0.00 Childrens Services (CHS) 0.00 0.00 0.00 Adult Social Care (ASC) 250.00 0.00 175.00 Environment, Leisure and Residents Services (ELRS) 0.00 1,960.00 1,524.49 Finance and Corporate Services (FCS) 2,081.52 275.00 75.00 Housing and Regeneration (HRD) 9,299.00 4,750.00 10,258.39 Transportation and Technical Services (TTS) 75.00 109.07 30.00 Total 11,705.52 7,094.07 12,062.88 Note: Following an upgrade on iCasework in July 2012, how compensation payments are recorded has changed to allow the separate recording of offers against amounts paid. It will be necessary to audit the amounts offered to determine how much of this has resulted in a payment. A table showing the summary of the reasons for offering compensation can be seen below: 2012/13 2011/12 2011/10 Reason Amount (£) Delay 2,280.00 3,735.00 5,834.39 Distress and inconvenience 3,425.00 1,140.00 3,388.99 Goodwill 2,145.00 2,119.07 655.00 Other 3,515.52 0.00 1,400.50 Refund 60.00 0.00 0.00 Reimbursement 280.00 0.00 0.00 Right to Repair 0.00 0.00 124.00 Time and trouble 0.00 100.00 660.00 Total 11,705.52 7,094.07 12,062.88

1.10 Customer satisfaction There are two measures of satisfaction with the Council’s complaints procedure: the Council’s Annual Residents Survey, and the automated customer satisfaction process in iCasework – which has been in use since 1 July 2012. The Annual Residents Survey confirmed that 55% of residents said that they were very or fairly well informed about how to complain to the Council. This is an increase on last year’s figure of 52%. In addition, 22% of respondents had contacted the Council with a complaint in the last 12 months. This is a decrease on last years figure of 24%. With regard to overall satisfaction, 48% of those who complained were satisfied with how their complaint was handled. This is a significant increase on last year’s figure of 32% and is consistent with the results from iCasework: Overall satisfaction Total % Very satisfied 26 18 Fairly satisfied 23 16 Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied 16 11 Fairly dissatisfied 17 12 Very dissatisfied 60 42 Total 142 100 The above table shows that 34% of respondents provided a positive response, 11% a neutral response and 54% a negative response. If the iCasework results were considered as simply positive or negative, the results would be 45% positive and 54% negative – which is consistent with the results of the Annual Residents Survey. 1.11 Overall performance against policy targets The Corporate Complaints Policy sets out four corporate targets for the measurement of performance on how complaints are managed. These are as follows:

1. Complaints acknowledged within timescale – 80% 2. Complaints fully responded to within timescale – 80% 3. Complainant’s satisfaction with the complaints process – 30% 4. Number of Ombudsman maladministration decisions – 0%

So how did we do against these measures? Complaints acknowledged within timescale – 80% (achieved) As a result of sustained poor performance on this measure, all complaints are now acknowledged by a member of the h&f InTouch team at the point that the complaint is transferred to an appropriate service for investigation. This has no doubt contributed to the significant increase in overall satisfaction with the service. Complaints fully responded to within timescale – 80% (achieved) The overall timeliness of responses is as follows: Stage 1: 80% Stage 2: 51% Stage 3: 79% The Council has maintained its record of timeliness for Stage 1 complaints. See Executive Summary for information on how the timeliness of Stage 2 complaints will be improved. Complainant’s satisfaction with the complaints process – 30% (achieved) The Annual Residents Survey confirmed that 48% of those who complained were satisfied with how their complaint was handled. This figured is also supported by a separate customer satisfaction survey that is automated via iCasework. Number of Ombudsman maladministration decisions – 0% (achieved) There has been no maladministration decisions made against the Council.

2. Compliments 2.1 Compliments The Council began keeping a corporate record of compliments on 1 July 2012. Between 1 July 2012 and 31 March 2013, the h&f InTouch team has recorded a total of 72 compliments from our residents and customers. The compliments recorded can be broken down, against each of the Council’s service areas, as follows: Total Compliment % Chief Executives (CE) 3 4 Childrens Services (CHS) 3 4 Community Services (CSD) 0 0 Environment, Leisure and Residents Services (ELRS) 22 31 Finance and Corporate Services (FCS) 6 8 Housing and Regeneration (HRD) 10 14 Transportation and Technical Services (TTS) 28 39 Total 72 100 Transportation and Technical Services (TTS) received the majority of compliments, with Environment, Leisure and Residents Services (ELRS) receiving the second largest propotion. Development Management (TTS) and Community Safety, Operations and Emergency Services teams (ELRS) were the most complimented.

3. Councillor and Member of Parliament enquiries 3.1 Enquiries For the reporting period a total of 2247 enquiries were recorded by the Councillor and MP enquiry team. These can be broken down against each of the Council’s service areas and by type of enquiry, as follows:

Service Blan

k

Cabi

net

Coun

cillo

r

MP

Tota

l

2012

/13%

2011

/12%

Chief Executives (CE) 10 197 100 122 429 19 1 Childrens Services (CHS) 4 17 45 66 3 3 Community Services (CSD) 1 4 25 30 1 3 Environment, Leisure and Residents Services (ELRS) 5 42 45 92 4 8 Finance and Corporate Services (FCS) 1 4 20 70 95 4 9 Housing and Regeneration (HRD) 2 28 182 411 623 28 43 Transportation and Technical Services (TTS) 3 38 200 120 361 16 25 Chief Executives (CE) - old 1 250 192 108 551 25 8 Grand Total 17 527 757 946 2247 100 100

Note: Where ‘Blank’ is stated, the type of enquiry – i.e. Councillor’ has not been recorded.

Chief Executive (CE) – old refers to cases managed prior to 1 July 2012 – i.e. the introduction of the New Ways of Working (see 3.2 for more information).

There has been a 26% decrease in the number of enquiries recorded during the reporting period compared to the previous municipal year (3045 in 2011/12). 3.2 Timeliness Enquiries from Councillors and Members of Parliament should be responded to within 8 days and Cabinet Members within 3 days. Timeliness by type of enquiry can be shown as follows: In time Out of time Total Councillor 232 525 757 2012/13% 31 69 +2% 2011/12% 33 67 Cabinet 410 117 527 2012/13% 78 22 -23% 2011/12% 55 45 MP 313 633 946 2012/13% 33 67 +9% 2011/12% 42 58 Blank 1 16 17 2012/13% 6 94 n/a 2011/12% 0 0 Total 956 1291 2247

There has been a slight improvement (2%) in the timeliness of Councillor enquiries and a larger improvement in Member of Parliament enquiries (9%). However, there has been a decrease in the timeliness of Cabinet member enquiries (23%). Overall, timeliness has improved from 41% to 57%. 12/13% 11/12% Overall in time 1291 57 41 Overall out of time 956 43 59 Total 2247 100 100 As with Corporate Complaints and Requests for Information, the New Ways of Working (NWOW) were introduced in July 2012 for Councillor and Member of Parliament enquiries. If the reporting period included only those enquries managed under the NWOW, the overall timeliness would be 65%: NWOW% 12/13% Overall in time 65 57 Overall out of time 35 43 Total 100 100 Timeliness by Council service can be show as follows:

Service Out

of t

ime

%

On

time

%

Tota

l

Chief Executives (CE) 281 66 148 34 429 Childrens Services (CHS) 17 26 49 74 66 Community Services (CSD) 18 60 12 40 30 Environment, Leisure and Residents Services (ELRS) 13 14 79 86 92 Finance and Corporate Services (FCS) 25 26 70 74 95 Housing and Regeneration (HRD) 182 29 441 71 623 Transportation and Technical Services (TTS) 86 24 275 76 361 Chief Executives (CE) - old 334 61 217 39 551 Grand Total 956 - 1291 - 2247 3.3 Categories iCasework allows the Council to ‘categorise’ an enquiry, meaning that we can record what particular service/team was the subject of the enquiry. The table below shows the top 10 categories of enquiry for the reporting period:

Category Total Application processing - planning applications 98 Allocations - advice and support 88 Registering for a council property 79 Homelessness - short term accommodation 71 Housing needs assessment 66 Responsive repairs - leaks and floods (plumbing) 52 Planned maintenance - programme of maintenance 36 Housing benefit current claim 33 Individual account enquiries (Council Tax) 29 Parking - fines 23

4. Requests for Information 4.1 Responses within statutory time limits Public authorities must reply to requests for information (RFIs) under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and the Environmental Information Regulations (EIR) promptly, but within 20 working days. In certain circumstances, this may be extended to within 40 working days where the legislation allows for an extension. 4.2 Requests for Information Between April 2012 and March 2013 the Council responded to a total of 1199 RFIs. 93% of RFIs were responded to within the statutory time limits. The table below shows how this compares to previous years:

4.3 Percentage of RFIs responded to within statutory time limits by

Department for financial year 2012/13 The table below shows the 2012/13 performance to the statutory time limits by department. All RFIs that are either complex, or require input from more than one department, are included here under ‘Chief Executive’ – these requests are managed by the h&f InTouch team. Department No. of RFIs % on time Chief Executive’s 203 94% Childrens Services (CHS) 162 96% Adult Social Care (ASC) 61 89% Environment, Leisure and Residents Services (ELRS) 63 98% Finance and Corporate Services (FCS) 291 94% Housing and Regeneration (HRD) 109 83% Transportation and Technical Services (TTS) 310 92%

* Processed = All RFIs due in that month (This will not include RFIs which are on hold awaiting clarification or those which have been withdrawn. 4.4 Classifications Classification Total Parking - Penalty Charge Notices 82 Housing benefit / Council Tax / Business rates enquiries 54 Commissioning (Adult and Children social care) 47 Human resources 40

Year No. of RFIs % on time 2012-2013 1199 93% 2011-2012 1267 92% 2010-2011 984 66%

Transport and infrastructure (Highways) 39 Housing 38 Corporate finance 35 Children and families 27 Requests for information (FOI/EIR) 21 Development control - Planning applications 21 Consumer affairs 16 Land registration - Local land charges search 15 Education and skills 15 Regeneration 12 Leisure and culture 11 Legal services 11 Procurement and contract management 9 Food safety - inspections 8 School admissions and exclusions 8 4.5 Outcomes The figures given below are for all RFIs received under the FOIA and which were due in financial year 2012/13:

RFI Outcome No of cases 2011/12 Information given 682 711 Information not held 93 82 Information not given, exempt 115 90 Information not given, cost 43 21 Information not given, repeat request 14 1 Information not given, request lapsed 37 27 Partial information given, part exempt 155 131 Partial information given, part not held 116 204 Total 1255 1267

4.6 Refusals and exemptions The FOIA contains exemptions (known as exceptions under the EIRs) that allow public authorities to withhold information in certain cases. The number of times which a particular exemption or exception was applied for cases closed during the reporting period are given below. In some cases more than one exemption/exception will have been applied: Exemption/Exception 2012-13 2011-12 Freedom of Information Act 2000 Section 21 – Information accessible by some other means 67 69 Section 22 – Intended for future publication 10 6 Section 31 – Law enforcement 40 38 Section 34 – Parliamentary privilege 0 1

Section 36 – Prejudicial to the effective conduct of public affairs 2 1 Section 38 – Health and safety 2 1 Section 40 – Personal Information 111 99 Section 41 – Provided in confidence 27 28 Section 42 – Legal Professional privilege 8 3 Section 43 – Commercial Interests 44 38 Section 44 – Legal prohibitions on disclosure 3 1 Environmental Information Regulations 2004 12(4)(b) - Manifestly unreasonable 0 4 12(4)(e) - Internal communications 1 1 12(5)(d) - Confidentiality of proceedings 0 1 12(5)(e) - Confidentiality of commercial or industrial information 5 1 13 – Personal Information 0 2 4.7 Internal reviews If a customer is unhappy with the content of the response that they have received to their RFI or they are dissatisfied with the length of time it has taken to process, they can ask for an internal review of their requests. All internal reviews should be responded to within 40 working days and are carried out by the Information Management Team. Wherever possible, the Information Management Team will aim to provide a response within 20 working days, providing a full explanation where this is not possible and the optimum amount of 40 working days is used. Number of internal reviews processed by financial year since April 2010: Year Internal reviews % On time 2012-13 23* 91% 2011-12 29 76% 2010-11 40 45%

* 1 withdrawn so not included in the final figure Note: Figures are based on internal reviews due in 2012/13 There has been a consistent reduction in the number of internal reviews received since the iCasework system was introduced. However, many of the internal reviews received in 2010-11 were in relation to RFIs not being processed within the statutory time limits and beyond the ICO’s benchmark target of 85%. During 2011, this area of complaint almost disappeared with the majority of internal reviews focusing on the application of exemptions, with-holding information and compliance with other requirements of the Act and Regulations, such as the Council’s duty to assist the requestor.

4.8 Number of internal reviews by Department by financial year since April 2011

Department 12-13 % on time 11-12 % on time Chief Executive's 2 100% 1 0% Children’s Services 1* 100% 3 100% Adult Social Care 0 100% 2 100% Environment, Leisure & Residents Services 0 100% 2 100% Finance & Corporate Services 8 100% 8 75% Housing & Regeneration 2 100% 6 50% Transport & Technical Services 10 80% 7 86% Total 23* n/a 29 n/a

* 1 withdrawn so not included in the final figure 4.9 Internal reviews outcomes by financial year since April 2011 Decision 2012-13 2011-12 Not Upheld 12 6 Partly Upheld 5 14 Upheld 6 9 Withdrawn 1 -

Of the 23 internal reviews dealt with in 2012/13, in 12 of the cases the original decision was confirmed or no fault was found. The Information Management Team found fault in 11 cases – this is a significant reduction on the previous year. Partly upheld An internal review is “partly upheld” where the Information Management Team agrees that the Council was partly at fault in the way it dealt with the request. For example, most RFIs ask for more than one piece of information, the Information Management Team may partly uphold a complaint where sufficient information was provided to address most, but not all, of the request. Department 2012-13 Reasons Chief Executive's 1 Lack of clarification re: questions at the outset

Transport & Technical Services 4 Lack of clarification re: questions at the outset; insufficient refusal notice; not all questions answered; information inappropriately withheld; information inappropriately disclosed

Total 5

Upheld An internal review is “upheld” where the Information Management Team agrees with the complainant that the Council did not process the RFI according to the Act or Regulations. For example, an exemption for non-disclosure was inappropriately applied. Department 2012-13 Reasons Chief Executive's 2 Information inappropriately withheld; information

withheld without an exemption Transport & Technical Services 4

Not all information requested disclosed; poorly explained response; processed under wrong statute; information disclosed was not accessible

Total 6 4.10 Information Commissioner’s Office complaints If the requester remains dissatisfied with the Council’s response to their internal review request or their complaint they can approach the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to ask them to review the decision. Statutory time-limits are not applicable with these complaints and all were processed according the agreed deadlines with the ICO. All ICO complaints are handled by the Information Manager. Number of ICO complaints processed by financial year since April 2011 Year ICO Complaints 2012-13 2 2011-12 1

Number of ICO complaints by Department by financial year since April 2011 Department 2012-13 2011-12 Finance & Corporate Services 1 - Housing & Regeneration 1 - Transport & Technical Services 1 Total 2 1

ICO complaint outcomes by financial year since April 2011 Decision 2012-13 2011-12 Partly Upheld 1 Withdrawn 1* No decision to date 1

* Withdrawn by the ICO

When the ICO does not uphold the internal review response, they: • either work with the organisation and the complainant to reach an informal

and mutually agreeable solution or • issue a Decision Notice which the organisation then either complies with

or challenges at the Information Tribunal. 4.11 Subject access requests (SARs) The Council introduced a corporate management process for all Subject Access Requests (i.e. requests for personal data under the Data Protection Act 1998) in October 2012. During the reporting period (October to April 2013), the Council has received 53 SARs. However, in the majority of cases, the necessary proof of identification and address is not received, meaning that the request cannot be progressed. Where proof of identification and address is received, the Council has 40 calendar days in order to comply with the request. 13 SARs have been closed during the reporting period, and 12 of these were within the statutory deadline (92%).