HAMPSHIRE COUNTY COUNCIL

Report for Information

Title:		Information Compliance - Complaints, Freedom of Information, Data Protection, Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act, Environmental Information Regulations
Presented to:		Governance Committee
Presented by:		Report of the Chief Executive
Date:		25 September 2008
Distributed to:		Press and media; internal
Method:		e-link
Date:		Planned for 18 September 2008
Contact name:		Judith Downing
Tel:	01962 846612		Email:	[email protected]

1) Management summary

The purpose of this report is to inform the Governance Committee on progress since June 2007, and to update the committee on plans for performance improvement across all compliance areas to:

· Support the aim of developing a single view of the customer and improve management arrangements for complaints using the customer relationship management system

· Implement the new guidelines from the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO), which will require more detailed reporting in relation to complaints.

· Update management arrangements for Freedom of Information enquiries to include involvement with disclosures from DMT's and Corporate Communications.

· Produce a new model publication scheme for Freedom of Information to be `built' and live by January 2009.

2) Recommendations

The Committee is asked to:

· Note the improved progress since June 2007

3) Background

3.1 The report is to inform the Governance Committee on the progress and changes that have taken place over the past year, including statistical data relating to complaints, Freedom on Information (FOI) , Environmental Information Regulations (EIR), Data Protection (DP) and Regulation of Investigatory Powers (RIPA).

Complaints

4) Background

4.1 The corporate complaints procedure comprises three stages, the first two stages are dealt with in departments. Stage three is when a corporate investigation takes place independent to the department. If the complainant is still dissatisfied with the outcome then the next stage is the Local Government Ombudsman (LGO).

5) Performance 2007/08

5.1 In June 2008 the LGO gave the County Council a favourable Local Authority report. The report outlines that cases investigated by the LGO had shown a further improvement in response times of 5% since the previous reporting period. They also acknowledged that the proportion of premature complaints is lower than the national average. The Ombudsman also comments that the downward trend in the volume of complaints "can be viewed with some satisfaction by the Council".

5.2 The number of complaints responded to within the 28 day time scale was 19, of which 16 were under 28 days and three were on the 28^th day.

Local Government Ombudsman report 2007-08

	Complaints made to Ombudsman	Actual investigations requested by Ombudsman	Average number of days to respond to first enquiries
2007 -08	47	22	31.6
2006 -07	58	23	33.2
2005 - 06	75	17	48.2

5.3 Between 1 April 2007 and 31 March 2008 we have received 47 new complaints from the Ombudsman. The figures also include investigations which started in 2006/07 but where the decision was made in 2007/08, 51 decisions have been made of which 16 were classed as either premature or outside jurisdiction.

5.4 Importantly there has been no finding of maladministration against the County Council during 2007 -08

5.5 Corporate Stage 3 investigations have also shown a marked improvement in response times. Although above the published corporate standard of 20 working days, the trend is still improving. Over the past six months 67% of complaints were responded to within the corporate time frame.

Stage 3 breakdown

	New corporate complaints received	Average time to investigate and respond (working days)
2007-08 (Second half year) (First half year)	3 9	16.6 25.3
2006-07 (Second half year) (First half year)	6 10	33 88.8

5.6 During 2007 the compliance team worked closely with the Hantsdirect team to establish the workflows for complaint reporting. Interim arrangements for the management of complaints in time for the launch of Hantsdirect were also achieved.

5.7 In March 2008 the policy for dealing with unreasonably persistent and unreasonable complainant behaviour was developed, and communicated to departmental complaints coordinators giving guidance and thereby ensuring clarity for officers involved in dealing with such complainants. This was complemented by a series of workshops.

5.8 A comprehensive breakdown of figures by department is shown at appendix one.

6) Complaints trends

6.1 The majority of complaints at a Stage 3 relate to the standard of service received from a particular service area. Examples of complaints are the state of footpaths, misuse of footpaths, overhanging trees, and potholes.

6.2 More than half of the Ombudsman's investigations related to Education specifically school appeals, and Transport and Highways which were various.

7) Complaints projects and issues

7.1 A project has been initiated to look into the overall complaints process and how we can integrate those practices with the customer relation management software (Lagan), used by Hantsdirect. Key areas include breaking down complaints into type of complaint, service delivery area, and geographical information enabling us to identify trends and highlight areas for improvement. This will enable a more robust reporting and performance mechanism

7.2 Work is scheduled to start after the current phased roll out of other service areas.

8) LGO changes

8.1 Changes arising from the new Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007 came into force on 1 April 2008. In summary the LGO may now make a finding of `service failure' even if there is no maladministration and can recommend action in a report where there is no injustice. Full details of the changes are outlined in detailed in appendix two.

8.2 The LGO now offers a mediation service. This is to be offered when it is felt that there is a need to rebuild trust and communication between both parties, to determine what they both want as outcomes to the complaint and identify a way forward to which they could both sign up.

8.3 If either party declines the offer of mediation then the investigator will continue in the usual manner. If a mediated agreement is reached the LGO will discontinue their investigation, If agreement is not reached, the LGO's investigation of the complaint will continue.

Freedom of Information and Environmental Information Regulations

9) Background

9.1 Since 1 January 2005 all requests for information received by a public authority, that are not "business as usual" have to be answered in accordance with the FOI Act 2000 or the EIR 2004. Once the County Council receives a request we have 20 working days to respond fully, although EIR's have a provision to extend the response time to 40 working days.

10) Achievements

10.1 The County Council continues to maintain standards albeit that the ever increasing awareness of the public and the press to the Act has led to more complex and diverse requests.

10.2 The launch of the e-learning module has been successful and the module is now part of the corporate induction programme. This has enabled most staff to access the online training.

11) Monitoring

11.1 Between 1 April 2007 and 31 March 2008 313 FOI requests were received of which 207 were either fully disclosed or had exemptions applied before disclosure. This compares with 348 requests of which 286 were either fully disclosed or had exemption applied between 1 April 206 and 31 March 2007. EIR requests during the last reporting period totalled 18 of which 12 were disclosed. The time taken to disclose can be anything from one hour to two weeks. A full breakdown by department can be seen at appendix three.

11.2 Over the same reporting period we have had two decisions made against us by the Information Commissioners Office ( ICO). The Chief Executive was asked to review the decisions and it was decided not to appeal against either. The disclosures have been made in accordance with the decision notice. The number of internal reviews held was four. All decisions made were upheld.

12) Projects and Issues

12.1 The ICO has recommended a new model publication scheme which will replace the current publication scheme. A publication scheme is a commitment to routinely and proactively provide information to the public. The scheme is a requirement of the FOI Act and it is hoped that a more user friendly version will enable the public to find information easily. The emphasis will be on a more proactive publication of official documents. Generic classes of information will be used rather than the current departmental classification. The new scheme has to be in place by January 2009. A project team is working on the new scheme.

12.2 A new management arrangement has been implemented to ensure that DMT's are engaged in FOI/EIR requests affecting their departments and that other relevant officers are involved as appropriate. The arrangement also allows the Compliance Team an overview of current FOI's. These arrangements are in line with the practice in other comparable local authorities The policy will be reviewed after six months (October 2008).

Data Protection

13) Background

13.1 The Data Protection Act gives both members of the public and staff the right to know what information is held about them, and sets out rules to make sure that this information is handled properly. It applies to paper records as well as computer records.The County Council is registered with the Information Commissioner. Notification is the process by which a data controller informs the Information Commissioner of certain details about their processing of personal information.

14) Achievements

14.1 The recent launch of the e-learning module has been very successful and the module is now part of the corporate induction programme.

15) Training and support

15.1 General awareness of DP appears to be improving amongst staff. This is reflected in an increase in advice provided. Advice can range from general guidance to more complex issues which require input from the Legal Practice.

15.2 Departmental coordinators are supported by the compliance team either at the quarterly meetings or on a daily basis.

16) Monitoring

16.1 The number of enquiries relating to personal data has shown only a slight decrease over the last reporting period, compared with 2006/07.

16.2 The processing of Subject Access Requests (SAR) generally meets the 40 day disclosure deadline. The bulk of requests are received by the Adults and Children's Services departments who have a team dedicated to disclosures. The Corporate Compliance Team coordinate SAR's on behalf of the other departments. The table below shows the number of validated enquiries, this is when the identity of a requester has been validated and the fee for the SAR has been received.

SAR number 2007/08

Year	Enquiries received	Validated enquiries	Responded to within statutory time frame (40 days)
2007/08 Corporate other than Adult and Children's	20	7	7
Adult and Children's	218	79	45
2006/07 Corporate other than Adult and Children's	33	13	13
Adult and Children's	232	88	78

16.3 The discrepancy between validated enquiries and the final response is often due to the complexity of requests. Which can involve 3^rd parties where consent is required before any disclosure can take place. The requester is kept informed when a delay seems likely.

16.4 Over the last reporting period we had one known breach of the Act. Actions were taken swiftly to inform those concerned of the breach and steps put in place to prevent recurrence. The Information Commissioners Office were informed and they recorded the breach `for information purposes only', and took no action against the council.

17) Issues

17.1 Although there is a good awareness of DP, national media has highlighted several breaches of this Act and there is an ongoing requirement to promote the correct use of personal data in the workplace.

17.2 Working with coordinators we review best practice and keep them informed of current ICO guidance. DP is also on the agenda at departmental induction programmes.

RIPA

18) Background

18.1 The Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) legislates for using methods of surveillance and information gathering to help the prevention and detection of a crime.

18.2 This can either be by directed covert surveillance or covert human intelligence source and can only be authorised by designated senior officers. Access to communications data can only be authorised and vetted by an accredited Single Point of Contact (SPOC) who have undertaken training courses approved by the Home Office.

19) Achievements

19.1 The annual report to the Office of Surveillance Commissioners (OSC) was completed and returned by the deadline which was the 31 March 2008.

19.2 In the last reporting period the number:

· Authorised directed surveillance was 43, the of majority related to counterfeit goods.

· Authorised covert human intelligence sources surveillance was 49, again the majority related to counterfeit goods.

· SPOC requests 34 of which the majority related to phone records.

20) Training, support and monitoring

20.1 There have been several changes to authorising officers and formal training took place in August 2008.

20.2 Quarterly monitoring sessions are held with the Monitoring Officer. Any feedback is given to those involved in applications for surveillance.

20.3 An officer from the Office of Surveillance Commissioners Office will visit the County Council in October 2008. The previous visit in January 2006 noted that we had "a good general understanding of the requirements of RIPA" with only minor actions to be taken.

20.4 No inspection into the procedures for accessing communications data took place during the reporting period. This inspection is carried out by the Interception of Communications Commissioner's Office.

21) Future direction

21.1 There is still scope to improve and work on a joined up approach to manage complaints. The following are a number of initiatives which will be addressed in the coming reporting period.

· To complete the complaints project, which will enable better reporting facilities and a more robust reporting functionality using the Lagan system.

· To identify the lessons learnt from complaints, and work with departments on any areas that may have been highlighted as requiring action.

· To benchmark with other authorities on all compliance areas, to enable best practice to be shared and enhance performance monitoring

· To review and enhance the current Publication Scheme, in line with ICO guidance, to enable greater transparency and openness. By routinely publishing information as part of an authority's normal business, thereby making efficiencies in reporting times.

· Review and update DP breach guidance, to outline what to do in case of a suspected or actual breach. To ensure that staff are aware of the guidance and share best practice.

· Review the Hantsnet and Hantsweb pages to enable the public and members of staff to have information on all aspects of compliance easily available in an easy to understand format.

· To review and act on Information Data Sharing between Government departments and partner organisations. This is a complex area, and there is a need to work closely with departments to establish protocols in line with ICO guidelines.

22) Conclusion:

22.1 Good progress has been made in the response times and general performance management in all compliance areas. The report shows that we have responded in a professional and efficient manner. But there is still room to improve the service and to learn from all compliance issues.

22.2 This has been achieved in a climate of heightened awareness by the public regarding all areas of compliance, which has tested the processes and procedures.

22.3 Further work is required to develop a single view of the customer and to set up benchmarking against similar organisations.

Section 100 D - Local Government Act 1972 - background papers

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report, or an important part of it, based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

NB the list excludes published works and documents which disclosure exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act:

None

Appendix one

Local Authority Report - Hampshire County Council for period ending 31/03/08
LGO - complaints received by subject area
	Adult care services	Children and family services	Education	Other	Planning and building control	Public finance	Social services	Transport and highways	Total
2007/08	6	7	14	3	5	0	0	12	47
2006/07	13	`	18	5	2	0	0	12	58
2005/2006	12	5	15	1	0	2	28	12	75
Decisions	Local settlement	No maladministration	Ombudsman discretion	Outside jurisdiction	Premature Complaint	Total
2007/08	5	20	10	7	9	51
2006/07	6	21	10	8	11	56
2005/08	3	15	35	10	8	71
Response times	No. of first enquires	Avg no of days to respond
2007/08	22	32
2006/07	24	33.2
2005/2006	17	48.2

Appendix two

Changes to the LGO procedures

Changes to the LGO procedures have also been brought about by the new Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007. Some of the main provisions of the Act which will impact on us are:

· That if, during the conduct of an investigation into a complaint, an apparent service failure or apparent maladministration comes to the LGOs' attention, they can investigate, even though no-one has complained

· The LGO may now make a finding of `service failure' even if there is no maladministration. This could relate to failure in a service which was the local authority's function to provide and, also, failure to provide such a service

· The LGO's already draw a Council's attention to fault that has been identified during the course of an investigation. The new power enables the Ombudsman, in a report where there is no injustice, to recommend action. This would be to prevent injustice being caused in the future in consequence of similar maladministration.

· Where it is the local authority's function to provide a service, and it does this through a partnership with another body, accountability rests with the local authority. This has long been the LGOs' view, and it is now established in the legislation.

Appendix three

FOI breakdown 2007/08
Department	Edited Disclosure	In Process	Information Fully Disclosed	Information Not held	Refusal Vexatious or Repeated	Refusal/ Beyond £450 limit	Refusal Exemptions Apply	Request Refused	Request With drawn	With drawn	Grand Total
Chief Executive's	5		22	1	1	1	2	2		4	38
Children's Services	5	1	33	3			1	3	17	5	68
Environment	3		57	3			2	3	2		70
Human Resources	3		15								18
IT Services	1		10							1	12
PBRS	7		35			1	8	2	4	3	60
Recreation and Heritage			5	1			1	1			8
Adult Services	1		9			1		3	1		15
Treasurer's	1		19				2	1	1		24
Total	26	1	205	8	1	3	16	15	25	13	313