Agenda item

1.                                                    Ms Kennard introduced the report and, with Mrs Beer, Ms Cooke and Mr Watts, responded to comments and questions from the committee, including the following:-

a)    asked about the sustained high volume of calls about the blue badge scheme, Mrs Beer advised that there was both a backlog of queries about the scheme and an ongoing challenge around the volume of calls received, which were both being managed through the Contact Point but being delayed by the volume of calls and the ongoing struggle, which the committee had heard about on previous occasions, to recruit, train and retain sufficient call centre staff. Members sympathised with the issues faced by call handlers coping with a demanding volume of calls; 

b)    asked if similar problems might be encountered when a large number of bus passes became due for renewal at the same time, Mrs Beer advised that this could be predicted so had been planned for, and managers would ensure that there was a mechanism to deal with questions effectively; 

c)    asked why the number of visits to the Kent County Council website had been ‘above expectation’, and what the expected level was, Mrs Beer undertook to check the target and advise the questioner outside the meeting;

d)    the report referred to ‘partnership’ with Agilisys and the point was made that the Council commissioned a service from them and was therefore surely a customer rather than a partner. Mrs Beer advised that Agilisys provided the service but the company and the Council managed the impact of various issues together. It was up to the Council to help by doing all it could to deliver timely services and give clear information to minimise the volume of queries and complaints coming to the call centre.  Call handlers were well supported to deal with angry and distressed callers and Agilisys had good customer satisfaction ratings;

e)    asked about the level of overpayment to people in receipt of ASCH services, and how much it would cost to recover the overpaid money, Ms Cooke undertook to provide figures to the questioner outside the meeting. The cost of recovery was in terms of staff time, which would be absorbed by the team as part of daily work;

f)     referring to target FN05, asked how the ability to collect funds was assessed, and if arrangements to recover any overspend were built into the process in advance, Ms Cooke advised that the overspend was an issue of the timing of the transfer of funds and had arisen very recently. Monitoring of payments was rigorous but also necessarily sensitive when helping vulnerable service users to manage potential debt;

g)    asked about progress on target GL03, and when this might be brought back on track, Mr Watts advised that most subject access requests came from the CYPE subject area and undertook to liaise with the Director to discuss how this performance might be improved. He advised, however, that he had no spare resources available to address this immediately.  The target response time assumed that the information requested would be easy to access, but many requests referred to historic information which needed to be found in paper files, and the nature of many such requests meant that sensitive information would also need to be reviewed by social workers before being released;

h)    one committee member advised that the legislation which established the blue badge assessment process gave rise to an anomaly which made applications complex. The process worked on a point system, with 10 points being the threshold. Applicants scoring 11 or 12 points, however, may not necessarily be eligible and would need to enter a separate stage of assessment. This may account for the high number of repeat calls, as applicants struggled to understand their eligibility.  A simple re-wording of the legislation to set the threshold as ’10 or more points’ would remove this problem. Mr Watts undertook to look into this issue with officers and the relevant Cabinet Member, advise the committee of the outcome outside the meeting and assess the need for any further and more detailed report on the blue badge scheme;

i)     many people needing to renew a blue badge or bus pass would not have digital skills or access to computer equipment so would need to ring the call centre for help, and were likely to be frustrated and distressed by the time they did so. If access to the blue badge scheme could be improved, the number of complaints to the call centre about it would be reduced, addressing two performance targets in one.  Mrs Beer advised that Council had digital champions who could help users to access systems. To reduce complaints, the Council would need to optimise access to its services via all possible routes, not just digital; and

j)     a view was expressed that the data presented in the dashboard would be more useful if there were a shorter time between it being gathered and being presented to the committee, and a suggestion that the dashboard be reported instead to every meeting to allow the committee to see more up to date information. Ms Kennard advised that most data would not change between meetings and a report to every meeting would therefore see the same data being repeated. The pattern of reporting had been disrupted a little by the postponement of meeting dates in autumn 2022 as a result of the period of national mourning. Mr Watts suggested that the issue of dashboard reporting be discussed at the next agenda setting.

2.        It was RESOLVED that the performance position for the Chief Executive's Department and Deputy Chief Executive's Department be noted, with thanks, and the issues raised about the blue badge scheme, set out above, be addressed as indicated.