Agenda and minutes

It was resolved that all items should be webcast.

Apologies were received from Councillor English.

There were no Substitute Members.

There were no Visiting Members.

There were no disclosures.

It was agreed that all items be taken in public as proposed.

It was resolved that the minutes of the meeting held on 10 January 2011 be agreed as a correct record of the meeting and duly signed.

Interviews with:

·  Ellie Kershaw, Policy and Performance Manager; and

·  Catherine Negus, Policy and Research Assistant

Catherine Negus, Policy and Research Assistant introduced the Quarter 3 Complaints Monitoring report.  She informed the Committee that in Quarter3, October to December 2011 there had been 102 complaints and 86% of those complaints had been resolved within the agreed timescale. This was down on the previous period.

Housing had the highest number of out of time complaints because of long term sick leave.  They were now receiving assistance from Executive Support. Ten stage two complaints had been received, 90% of these had been resolved within the agreed timescale which showed an improvement on the previous quarter. 28 responses had been received to the Complaints Questionnaire, 29% of those contacted were satisfied or very satisfied with the way their complaint had been dealt with.

An issue highlighted to Members was that staff were not always recording the equalities aspect of complaints. Members were informed that the Core Brief (a document that was circulated to all staff at Team Meetings to inform them of important information) would highlight the need for staff to be aware of this when handling complaints. Miss Negus also explained that in some cases only details of the original complaint or our response to it were being logged, the requirement for both would also be highlighted in the Core Brief and reported to CLT (Corporate Leadership Team). The Officer highlighted that within the last quarter two complainants had been registered as vexatious.

The Committee questioned the progress of the new correspondence and complaints system.  They were informed that a consultant had come into to look at work carried out by the IT department and some progress had been made.  However, a share point system which matched the desired specifications was now available from an external provider.  The Council would be able to purchase this and adapt it to Maidstone Borough Council’s exact requirements at approximately the same cost as developing a new system. Members voiced their concerns at this as previous updates given in Quarter 1 and 2 had been on the implementation of a new system. They suggested to Officers that the Council’s approach to the development of the correspondence system should have been in line with the principles of Prince II project management as widely advocated by the Council and the progress reported to a project board.

Ellie Kershaw, Policy and Performance Manager, explained that there were a number of Officers now trained in Prince II but training had taken place after this project had begun.  As a result it was included in the day to day workload of IT who had had staffing problems.

The Officer explained that the system currently being used was corrupt, meaning that notifications were not being sent when complaints were running out of time and Executive Support were having to remind managers. Members felt that this should not be an excuse for poor performance. They felt that complaints should be monitored by the responsible Manager.  The Manager should also be responsible for analysing complaints and identifying trends and these  ...  view the full minutes text for item 104.

Interviews with:

·  Ellie Kershaw, Policy and Performance Manager; and

·  Catherine Negus, Policy and Research Assistant

Catherine Negus, Policy and Research Assistant introduced the Equalities Objectives report to the Committee. She explained that the Council’s duty under the new act was to set one or more equalities objectives.  Members were informed that the Council would be setting three objectives which as felt to be proportionate to the size of the authority.  They were required to be specific, measurable and achievable. 

The authority had to consider the data available to them on the ‘protected characteristics’ which were:

• Disability;
• Gender reassignment;
• Pregnancy;
• Race;
• Religion;
• Sex and Sexual orientation;
• Age; and
• Marriage.

Miss Negus explained that the data that had been available mainly related to age, gender, ethnicity and disabilities. As more data became available more objectives could be set, the Council would not have to wait a further four years to do this. One of the key recommendations of the report was that when the Council ran surveys more of the characteristics would be included in the questions.  There was also an intention to talk to stakeholders and improve data collection methods.

Members were concerned that there would be pressure on residents to reveal private information such and religion and sexual orientation.  Ellie Kershaw, Policy and Performance Manager, assured Members that  all equalities questions were optional.

The Committee were told that the three objectives to be set were:

• Improve the number of visitors to the museum aged 55+ by 5% over the next year. This target would then be expected to recur but this should be assessed after the first year.

The Committee were informed that this would fit into the Council’s priority of making Maidstone a decent place.  The museum was underused by the borough’s elderly residents and work would involve a cafe and events for older people.

• Increase the proportion of men registering for the Healthy Weight from 24% to 28% over the next year. Subject to review, targets would then be set for each of the next three years leading to a probable target of 40% by the end of the fourth year.

It was highlighted that this was dependent on the programme being granted PCT funding to continue. This target would fit with the Council’s priority outcome of ensuring that ‘residents are not disadvantaged because of where they live or who they are, vulnerable people are assisted and the level of deprivation is reduced’. Members were informed that it was mainly women who were referred to the programme despite research showing that there were a higher proportion of overweight men in the borough than women. This target could also help to address the issue that men in deprived wards had a life expectancy of up to 5 years less than in other wards.

• Increase the proportion of people aged 18-24 who feel that the Council keeps people ‘well informed’ or ‘fairly well informed’ about services and benefits to 58% over four years.

Members were told that this objective was based on the results of the recent Resident’s Satisfaction Survey and the earlier Place Survey  ...  view the full minutes text for item 105.

Interview with Roger Adley, Head of Communications.

Roger Adley, Head of Communalisations, introduced the Residents Satisfaction Survey which he explained was an independent postal survey conducted by Lake Market Research from November 2011 to January 2012.  Members were informed that this was within the same timescale as the previous ‘Place Survey’ conducted in 2008. The questions were not like for like but there was a continuation of a number of questions that could be tracked.

It was explained that survey asked a number of questions about the Council’s Priorities.  He noted that there was a strong correlation between value for money and customer satisfaction.  Areas where customer satisfaction was high included communications and a rise in satisfaction was noted with doorstop recycling, local decision making and treating people fairly. Areas where there was a slight fall in satisfaction were with refuse and street collection and different backgrounds getting on well together.

Members were informed that residents had been asked to vote on a list of actions to help deliver the Council’s priorities. These included encouraging new business, attracting investment, keeping the elderly and disabled in their own homes for longer, affordable housing, energy efficiency and improving consultation with residents .

The Officer explained that the results of the survey had been analysed on a ward by ward basis so that areas where there were differences in satisfaction levels could be addressed.

Members were pleased to see that satisfaction with the Council was high but there was some disappointment that the ward results did not always echo the same levels of satisfaction and the successes that as ward Members, they were aware of. The Committee questioned what targeted work was going to be done with wards to address the areas highlighted and how the information that underpinned the results would be used. The Officer explained that this would be addressed by each manager in their service planning. He told Members that the results had been very pleasing and the insight into the improvements that needed to be made would be something that Cabinet would be keen to take forward.

Ellie Kershaw, Policy and Performance Manager, informed Members that although exact benchmarking could not be done with the results, she had been in touch with other authorities and those carrying out surveys would share their results to enable some comparison to be made.

The Committee considered the question relating to the satisfaction of the Leisure Centre. It was felt that comparisons between the use of the Leisure Centre and other facilities such as the YMCA and private gyms would be useful in future surveys.  Members felt that this was especially important in aiding the fitness of Maidstone residents

A member questioned the way in which the results of Question 3 ‘Percentage of people agreeing that they can influence decisions affecting their local area’ would be addressed as it was noted the satisfaction level was low. Mr Adley informed Members that the Democratic Services Manager was already looking at this issue.  The use of Social Networking sites for agendas, decisions  ...  view the full minutes text for item 106.

The Committee considered its Future Work Programme and the Forward Plan of Key Decisions.  It was felt that the Asset Management Plan was an important document to be considered.  Members took into consideration their remaining meetings and decided that this document should be circulated to them by email. 

Members considered the Leader and Cabinet Member updates scheduled for the April meeting. It was decided that the written updates given at the beginning of the Municipal Year should be revisited by the Committee to determine if there were any areas where an update was required.

It was recommended that:

a)  The draft Council as a Business Review report is circulated to all Members of the committee for their input and amendments in preparation for the final meeting;

b)  The Asset Management Plan 2012-15, as detailed on the forward Plan of Key Decisions, is circulated to the Committee electronically for the its information and individual representations if necessary; and

c)  The Leader and Cabinet Member updates from the start of the Municipal Year are circulated electronically for Members to decide if a final update is necessary.

6.31 p.m. to 8.10 p.m.