Supplementary Agenda Document Pack - Audit and Scrutiny Committee - 20/11/2024
Moray Council · 20 November 2024
Back to Audit and Scrutiny Committee — 20 November 2024 and its agenda
Text extracted from the council's PDF. Layout and reading order may differ from the original.
Page 1
Audit and Scrutiny Committee Wednesday, 20 November 2024 SUPPLEMENTARY AGENDA The undernoted reports have been added to the Agenda for the meeting of the Audit and Scrutiny Committee to be held at Council Chambers, Council Office, High Street, Elgin, IV30 1BX on Wednesday, 20 November 2024 at 09:30. BUSINESS 9a. Scottish Public Services Ombudsman Recommendations Report Report by Chief Executive 3 - 16 Page 1
Page 2
Page 2
Page 3
REPORT TO: AUDIT AND SCRUTINY COMMITTEE ON 20 NOVEMBER 2024 SUBJECT: SCOTTISH PUBLIC SERVICES OMBUDSMAN RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT BY: CHIEF EXECUTIVE 1. REASON FOR REPORT 1.1 The Committee is asked to consider the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO) Recommendations Report. 1.2 This report is submitted to Committee in terms of Section III (A) (4) of the Council's Scheme of Administration relating to monitoring performance of the services in accordance with the Council’s performance management framework. 2. RECOMMENDATION 2.1 The Committee is invited to consider the content of the SPSO Recommendations Report in Appendix 1, seek clarification on any points arising and otherwise approve the report. 3. BACKGROUND 3.1 Complaints handling is part of the Council’s Performance Management Framework. Members receive updates on complaints performance through routine reports to service committees. 3.2 All complaints operate through a two stage complaints process. 3.3 Once a complaint has passed through the complaints process, a complainant has the option of having their complaint considered by the SPSO. Following SPSO investigation, they can make recommendations to help Councils learn from errors and implement service improvements. 3.4 The SPSO has asked authorities to confirm that SPSO complaint recommendations are reviewed at a senior level by returning an annual ‘learning and improvement statement’ confirming this. This builds on the model complaints handling procedures that set out the importance of Moray Council being able to demonstrate how they ‘systematically review complaints performance reports to improve service delivery.’ The Council’s statement includes a commitment to report on SPSO recommendations annually to this Committee. Item 9a. Page 3
Page 4
3.5 The SPSO introduced a ‘learning and improvement unit’ (LIU) to ensure public authorities take the necessary responsibility and actions to handle complaints well and reduce the occurrence of repeat errors. The aim of the LIU is to enhance the impact of their work by helping authorities improve public services through learning from complaints. 3.6 One of the main areas the LIU focus on is SPSO recommendations. A key part of this work includes providing authorities with additional support and advice on how to meet their recommendations with a view to preventing repeat service failings and complaints. In addition to this extra support, they are looking to adopt a tighter escalation process for the very few cases where their recommendations are not being implemented, with the potential to lead to a Special Report. 4. SPSO RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REPORTING PERIOD 2023-24 4.1 Table 1 (Appendix 1) shows all Moray Council complaints in the reporting period 2023/24 where we received notification of referral by complainants to the SPSO. A recommendation requires the Council to take action as directed by SPSO within a given timescale and provide evidence to SPSO that this action has been completed. SPSO made no recommendations for the cases considered. 4.2 Of the ten cases considered, SPSO provided seven minor feedback points. The Council are not required to report back to SPSO on feedback points. Case 101003133224 4.3 Case 101003133224, SPSO reference 202210459 relates to an Education complaint that the Council had failed to recognise and address additional support needs for a child. 4.4 Feedback point – One aspect of this complaint was that a social worker had provided incorrect information to the complainant that the school had submitted a Child Protection concern. The Council did not uphold this as investigation established that the school had not submitted such a concern. SPSO’s feedback was that the complaint aspect should have been upheld on the basis that incorrect information had been provided to the complainant by the social worker. Case 101003302898 4.5 Case 101003302898, SPSO reference 202201394 relates to a Finance Services complaint that the Council had failed to provide non-domestic tax relief correctly. 4.6 Feedback point – SPSO’s feedback was that they accepted that the complaint should not be upheld as the Council had adhered to a change in policy however the Council should have provided clearer information of the policy change to ratepayers. 4.7 Case 101003261189Case 101003261189, SPSO reference 202301344 relates to a Health and Social Care Moray complaint that the Council did not follow policy relating to direct payments used to employ assistants. 4.8 Feedback point – SPSO’s feedback was that although the complaint was correctly not upheld arising from the Council adhering to policy, the Council Page 4
Page 5
should have advised the complainant that their complaint stage 2 response would be delayed and provided the reasons for this in their stage 2 response. Case 101003268956 4.9 Case 101003268956, SPSO reference 202303696 relates to an Education complaint that the Council did not address child wellbeing and safety concerns for their children. 4.10 Feedback point – SPSO’s feedback was that although the complaint was correctly partially upheld arising from the Council adhering to due process, the Council should have made it clearer in their stage 2 response which aspects of the complaint were being upheld or not upheld. Case 101003268956 4.11 Case 101003268956, SPSO reference 202303696 relates to an Economic Growth and Development complaint that the Council did not address reported anti-social behaviour and that there was a lack of communication with the complainant. 4.12 Two Feedback Points – SPSO’s feedback was that the complaint was correctly partially upheld where the anti-social behaviour aspects were not upheld, and the lack of communication aspects were upheld. SPSO advised that the Council should have provided reasons for the lack of communication and where complaint aspects were upheld, apologies should have been provided which is a requirement of the Complaint Handling Procedure (CHP). Case 101003257862 4.13 Case 101003257862, SPSO reference 202305666 relates to an Education complaint that the Council did not address reported bullying incidents relating to their child. 4.14 Feedback Point – SPSO’s feedback was that the complaint was correctly investigated and resulted as partially upheld however the concluding paragraph of the Council stage 2 response signposting the complainant to SPSO had an out -of-date SPSO address and the 12-month SPSO time limit to consider a complaint should have been made clearer. 4.15 All SPSO feedback points were readily accepted by the departments concerned affording them learning and improvement opportunities. It also identified staff training aspects that the Complaints Officer will raise with respective department Complaint Administrators and also take forward when providing future CHP training to staff. 5. SUMMARY OF IMPLICATIONS (a) Corporate Plan and 10 Year Plan (Local Outcomes Improvement Plan (LOIP)) Effective handling of complaints is used to ensure the efficient and sustainable delivery of services to meet the Council’s priorities in the Corporate Plan 2024-2029. (b) Policy and Legal Page 5
Page 6
The SPSO requested a ‘Learning and Improvement statement’ in support of our statutory requirement to report to the SPSO annually on their performance indicators. (c) Financial implications It is not anticipated that there will be any financial implications. (d) Risk Implications Failure to report may result in SPSO making a declaration of non- compliance against the Council. Non-compliance with the statutory duty relating to national standards being adopted would present risk in terms of reputational damage and a loss of public confidence in our ability to deliver quality improvements based on complaints analysis, and ultimately to maintain and improve service standards. (e) Staffing Implications There are no staffing implications related to this report. (f) Property There are no property implications related to this report. (g) Equalities/Socio Economic Impact The Equal Opportunities Officer has recommended that where services are experiencing high volumes of complaints, the management of respective services should arrange to identify common complaint issues and any learning arising. This will help to ensure that complaints are not arising from situations where customer diversity needs have not been considered or addressed, e.g. disability or cultural issues. Where there is evidence or a suspicion that a complaint is related to characteristics protected under the Equality Act 2010 (race, disability, sex, religion/belief, sexual orientation, age, gender reassignment, pregnancy/maternity), services make contact the Council’s Equal Opportunity Officer. (h) Climate Change and Biodiversity Impacts There are no climate change and biodiversity impacts related to this report. (i) Consultations The Corporate Management Team has been consulted on the contents of SPSO Recommendations report. 6. CONCLUSION 6.1 The SPSO Recommendations Report presents Council action taken to address SPSO recommendations. Author of Report: John Black, Complaints Officer Background Papers: SPSO PIs Ref: Page 6
Page 7
APPENDIX 1 Case Ref/No LOG Ombudsman Referrals 01-04-2023 to 31-03-2024 DetailsSubmission Req’d/Sub Comp Ref No Department Decision/Date Action Plan Y/N 1. SPSO 201910739 10/10/2023 101002357701 Development Services Complained that: The planning department had repeatedly delayed referral to the Housing and Property tribunal. This complaint was made well outwith timescales (3 years) and was not considered by the Council. 10/10/2023 – SPSO issued a decision letter. They advised that due to the historical nature of the complaint (made in 2020) they would not investigate the complaint further. The Council were asked to provide a statement to SPSO covering the historical complaint point so that they could close their case. This was provided on 27/10/2023 to their satisfaction. N 2. SPSO 202210459 19/12/2023 101003133224 Education Complained that: The school failed to recognise behaviour in a child that required additional support. 19/12/2023 – SPSO issued a decision letter. SPSO advised that they would not be investigating the complaint and provided their reasons for doing so. Y Item 9a. Page 7
Page 8
APPENDIX 1 The school failed to address academic underperformance. The school failed to provide adequate parental support. The school provided an incorrect password preventing access to a child’s report. A social work staff member informed the complainant that the school had reported them to Child Protection. The Council upheld the complaint aspect relating to the incorrect password and did not uphold all other complaint matters. They made one feedback point. They accepted that the Council had established that the social worker had provided incorrect information to the complainant and that the school had not raised a Child Protection concern. The fact that a staff member provided the incorrect information should have resulted in that aspect of the complaint being upheld and the Council accepted this. The Council accepted the feedback point, and this was shared with the department. 3. SPSO 202201394 05/06/2023 101003302898 Finance Services Complaint that: 29/06/2023 – SPSO issued a decision letter. Y Page 8
Page 9
APPENDIX 1 Non Domestic Tax relief had been incorrectly applied. The Council did not uphold this complaint. SPSO were satisfied with how the Council conducted our investigation and the decision to not uphold the complaint. They provided one feedback point. The information on the outside of the 2023 rates bill directing the recipient to a page on the Council’s website, and the reasons for doing so, could have been clearer. The Council, specifically the Non-Domestic Rates Service, may wish to give further consideration to the importance of ensuring any future decisions regarding a change of process/procedure in relating to NDRs are clearly communicated or highlighted to ratepayers. Page 9
Page 10
APPENDIX 1 The Council accepted the feedback point, and this was shared with the department. 4. SPSO 202301344 01/06/2023 101003261189 Health and Social Care Moray Complained that: The Council did not follow policy relating to direct payments used to employ personal assistants. The Council did not uphold this complaint. 17/07/2023 – SPSO issued a decision letter. SPSO were satisfied with the Council investigation and our decision to not uphold the complaint. They provided one feedback point - It is not clear whether the Council informed the complainant that the Stage 2 response would be late. The Council are reminded of the requirement to do this. It is also, good practice and courteous to acknowledge the late response and provide reasons for it in the Stage 2 response. Page 10
Page 11
APPENDIX 1 The Council accepted the feedback point, and this was shared with the department. 5. SPSO 202303696 06/12/2023 101003268956 Education Complaint that: Their transgender child was not permitted to use the toilet of their gender choice in school. The Council investigated this matter and did not uphold the complaint. 02/08/2024 – SPSO issued a decision letter. SPSO were satisfied with how the Council conducted our investigation and the decision to not uphold the complaint. No recommendations or feedback points were made. N 6. SPSO 202303736 15/02/2024 101003336709 Education Complained that: Parent had concerns over children safety and wellbeing at school. There were a number of complaint aspects raised mainly relating to how school staff dealt with bullying incidents. 03/06/2024 – SPSO issued their decision letter. SPSO were satisfied with how the Council had investigated the complaint. They provided one feedback point. The Council should ensure they state whether each point of complaint is upheld or not Y Page 11
Page 12
APPENDIX 1 The Council did not uphold any of these aspects. There was one incident where school staff where overhead to be critical of the parents who had made complaint. This aspect was upheld. Overall, the Council recorded this complaint as partially upheld. upheld, in line with paragraph 66 of the Model Complains Handling Process. The Council accepted the feedback point, and this was shared with the department. 7. SPSO 202304302 01/11/2023 101003352893 Economic Growth and Development Complained that: The Council had failed to effectively deal with ongoing anti-social behaviour by a neighbour. The Council did not uphold the complaint aspects relating how 01/11/2023 - SPSO issued a decision letter. They were satisfied with the investigation carried out by the Council and would not be investigating this complaint further. They provided two feedback points. N Page 12
Page 13
APPENDIX 1 they responded to individual anti-social behaviour incidents. The Council did uphold that on occasions there was a lack of communication with the complainant. Overall, this was a partially upheld complaint. The complaint about a lack of communication was ‘Upheld’ but no explanation was given as to what went wrong. No apology was offered either in the complaint response and this is something that should have been included. The Council accepted these feedback points, and these were shared with the department. 8. SPSO 202305666 22/11/2023 101003257862 Education Complained that: The manner in which their child was withdrawn from a class. This was not upheld. A failure to correctly deal with a child protection incident. 01/11/2023 - SPSO issued a decision letter. SPSO were satisfied the investigation and findings of the Council and stated that they would not be investigating further. The provided one feedback point. Y Page 13
Page 14
APPENDIX 1 A failure to deal with repeated bullying incidents. Management unduly delayed implementing processes that had been agreed with parents. These three complaint aspects were upheld. Overall, the complaint was recorded as partially upheld. The Council should remind relevant staff of how to correctly signpost to SPSO in their final response (as set out at page 16 of the model Complaints Handling Procedure) and, in particular, how to refer to our time limit for making a complaint. The feedback point was accepted, and final response letters have now been amended to address this. 9. SPSO 202307603 27/11/2023 101003383337 Children and Families and Criminal Justice Complained that: Parents were unhappy with the level of support for their child and the actions of staff. The parents stated that there had been a longstanding 09/04/2024 – SPSO issued a decision letter. SPSO were satisfied with the investigation carried out by the Council and their findings. They advised that they would not investigate this complaint further and made no N Page 14
Page 15
APPENDIX 1 catalogue of bad communication, poor decision making, mistakes and delay resulting in their child being placed into care. The Council investigated 12 heads of complaint relating to this complaint and upheld 6 of these. Overall, the complaint was recorded as partially upheld. recommendations or provided feedback points. 10. SPSO 202307736 21/03/2024 101003395090 Education Complaint that: The school failed to provide adequate PSA hours to the parent’s child. The lack of support given by school staff who was unable to attend school due to complex needs. 08/03/2024 – SPSO issued a decision letter. SPSO decided that it was not within their jurisdiction to consider investigating this complaint and signposted the parent to the Additional Support Needs Tribunal. No recommendations or feedback points were made. N Page 15
Page 16
APPENDIX 1 These two complaint aspects were not upheld. There was an unnecessary delay in responding to the complaint. This complaint aspect was recorded as upheld. Overall, the complaint was recorded as partially upheld. Page 16