Agenda item

Purpose of the item: The report provides a detailed summary of complaint activity in Adult Social Care for the period April – September 2020.

Witnesses:

Sinead Mooney, Cabinet Member for Adults and Health

Kathryn Pyper, Senior Programme Manager (Adult Social Care)

Liz Uliasz, Deputy Director of Adult Social Care

Key points raised during the discussion:

1.    The Deputy Director of Adult Social Care (ASC) introduced the report and stated that the ASC service welcomed all feedback, whether that was complaints or compliments. It took complaints seriously and aimed to resolve them in a timely way.

2.    The Senior Programme Manager presented slides and detailed that there was a statutory timescale of three working days to acknowledge complaints, and a statutory obligation to respond to them in a timescale that was reasonable and less than six months. Surrey County Council’s ASC service had adopted its own timescale of 20 working days for responding to complaints. Sometimes it was necessary to extend this, but the Council always kept the complainant updated. If dissatisfied, complainants had the right to go to the ombudsman.

3.    Showing a slide detailing the number of complaints received in the period from April to September 2020, the Senior Programme Manager explained that while the 22 complaints received in learning disabilities and autism (LD&A) was larger than the number of complaints received in other areas, it was proportional to the caseload the LD&A service accounted for. The Deputy Director added that LD&A was a county-wide service, while others were largely area based. She also explained that timelag was the reason why there were seven complaints received for the Guildford area, but ten complaints responded to.

4.    The Senior Programme Manager continued to state that as part of the new complaints management system, quarterly meetings were held with the commissioning and quality assurance teams, and a summary of complaints for each area and learning was provided to members of the leadership team each month. Key learning areas for April to September 2020 were better communication, timely assessments and reviews, effective record keeping and improving the quality of the service and staff practice. Furthermore, the complaints teams were supported and trained across ASC. Finally, a leaflet called Listening to Your Views had recently been updated.

5.    A Member requested more detail on complaints resolved outside the complaints process, as mentioned in the report. The Senior Programme Manager said that this meant where a complaint was raised in the first place, but the ASC service had spoken to the resident, resolved the issue and found a solution the resident was happy with, without going through a full complaints procedure. Nonetheless, this sort of process was still recorded.

6.    A Member enquired how the service was explaining complaint pathways to residents, apart from the Listening to Your Views leaflet. The Deputy Director replied that there was information on the Council’s website and that, if a resident was unhappy with the care received, ASC staff would advise them of their right to make a complaint.

7.    A Member noted that needs assessments were the reason behind a large proportion of complaints. Why were people dissatisfied with this? The Deputy Director replied that these complaints were generally about the outcome of the assessment, rather than the nature of the assessment. If the complaint was about the nature of the assessment, the service would take learning from that complaint, but if it was about the outcome, the service would take this up with the specific practitioner involved in the case.

8.    The Chair of the Independent Mental Health Network (IMHN) raised a number of comments and concerns:

a.    It would be useful to see data from the last 12 months, not just the last six months, to give a longer-term view.

b.    The Listening to Your Views leaflet should be available more widely at community hubs and third sector partners.

c.    Some residents were still afraid to complain for fear that their funding would be reduced.

d.    Some residents felt they were not being listened to, particularly residents with disabilities.

In response the Deputy Director remarked that she too had encountered residents who were reluctant to complain. If any resident had had their package reduced as a result of a complaint, the ASC service would like to hear about this, perhaps through Healthwatch Surrey, as this is not good practice and should not be happening. With regards to feeling listened to, this was part of the strengths-based approach and motivational interviewing technique, which ASC staff had been trained on. Videos about this new training would be brought to the Select Committee at its January 2021 meeting. The Senior Programme Manager added that data over the last 12 months was available and this could be provided in future to the Select Committee. Regarding the leaflet, it would be made available as a core leaflet in care homes and community hubs.

9.    The Co-Chair of the Surrey Coalition of Disabled People commented that the report was mostly quantitative and suggested including examples of specific complaints.

10.  Referring to the 18% of complaints still pending, as mentioned in the report, a Member requested more information on what types of cases these were and the reasons for the delay. The Senior Programme Manager said that this would not necessarily entail a delay; rather, it might be a case for which there was not yet an outcome and the investigation extended beyond the end of the reporting period, but more information on these cases could be provided.

11.  A Member asked whether responses to complainants included details of what the Council had done or would do as an outcome of the complaint. The Deputy Director informed the Select Committee that, as picked up in the training for staff, it was expected that learning should be included in all responses to complaints.

12.  A Member enquired whether spot checks were undertaken by team leaders to check whether staff were following guidance and the service was improving. The Deputy Director replied that this was picked up in supervision and one-to-one meetings with managers. However, the Deputy Director would remind team managers to do this nonetheless. The Senior Programme Manager added that a summary was provided to the assistant director for their relevant area every month, so issues identified in this could be followed up.

Actions/further information to be provided:

1.    The Deputy Director of ASC to incorporate videos on new training techniques to the Select Committee at the 19 January 2021 meeting;

2.    The Senior Programme Manager to incorporate data covering a 12-month period into future ASC Complaints reports to the Select Committee;

3.    The Senior Programme Manager to ensure the Listening to Your Views leaflet is made available as a core leaflet in care homes and community hubs;

4.    The Senior Programme Manager to include specific examples of complaints and/or case studies in future ASC Complaints reports;

5.    The Senior Programme Manager to provide Members with more information on complaints that are ‘still pending’ in future reports;

6.    The Deputy Director of ASC to remind team managers to supervise and conduct spot checks with staff in the complaints team.