Agenda item

The Board has previously requested to be kept updated on progress relating to a number of key administration projects and planned improvements which may have an impact on members of the pension fund and the purpose of this report is to provide an update on the current status and progress against any specific target dates.

Witnesses:

Neil Mason, Assistant Director, LGPS Officer

Colette Hollands, Head of Service Delivery

Key points raised during the discussion:

1. The Head of Service Delivery introduced the report explaining that the report covered the last quarter and specifically service performance for the last 6 months. The Head of Service Delivery updated the Board on the audit recommendations, our actual performance, the presentation of the revised performance tables and backlogs.
2. It was explained that the performance tables had been updated as per audit recommendations. An update was given on the audit recommendations. New columns had been added to the table including columns F and G around outstanding cases. Another audit recommendation was around not consistently meeting KPI's in the work areas being reported. Service delivery managers now have the ability to monitor caseloads via the insights software and are using this to consider changes in priorities and resources.
3. The Chairman queried if anything could be learnt from the loss of staff and what the reasons for this was. The Head of Service Delivery explained that the service ran a successful training programme which meant that people left through promotions and natural progression to other roles and other funds.
4. The Chairman of the Pension Fund Committee queried what the consequences of low performance standard for deferred status on the performance report meant. The Head of Service Delivery explained that the numbers went up and down in peaks and troughs and resources had been increased to reduce the backlog. The consequences of low performance on deferred status was that members were not being informed as quickly as the service would like.
5. Officers were asked to provide an update on transfers in and transfers out numbers and explained in most cases the service was waiting on information from third parties. In the past staff had not be trained on this process but this was now being proactively addressed by the service delivery manager. A bulk process to clear cases for deferred benefits was being explored.
6. A Member of the Board suggested that an extra column needed to be added to the performance table so Member’s could measure performance from the last performance report. The Member also asked for an exception paragraph to be added to the report which picks up areas of concern.
7. The Chairman asked if the backlog cases could be separated so those cases which would be ongoing for a longer period of time could be differentiated out in the performance report. The Head of Service Delivery estimated that it would take two years to sort out the backlog.
8. With regards to Annex 3, it was queried if officers were surprised there had been so many login issues. TheHead of Service Delivery stated that this was expected as annual benefit statements would have gone out from June-August and would be published via the MSS portal which would have meant logging in to the portal to access statements. Forgotten logins were understandable for this period.

Actions/ further information to be provided:

1.    That an extra column needed to be added to the performance table so Members could measure performance from the last performance report. Also, an exception paragraph to be added to the report which picks up areas of concern.

2.    That the backlog cases be separated so those cases which would be ongoing for a longer period of time could be differentiated out in the performance report.

Recommendations:

For the report to be noted.