Issue - meetings

To consider a report which summarises the feedback, both positive and negative, that the council received between April 2023 and March 2024, and which also sets out how the organisation has implemented learning from this feedback.

It was reviewed how feedback had been used to improve processes and policies. However, there was some uncertainty about the specific mechanisms linking feedback to policy changes. One concern was whether there were systematic processes in place across all services to ensure feedback could lead to service improvements.

The response clarified that improvements and changes were often specific to individual complaints, with feedback driving some smaller, local changes or larger adjustments within services. The process of using feedback to drive change was described as more cultural, with an emphasis on listening to complaints and using them to identify improvements. Although there was no formal, unified feedback strategy yet, plans were in place to develop a more systematic approach, including new software to manage casework and capture learning.

Further discussion focused on how individual complaints were handled. For example, a complaint about poor communication with adult social care suppliers highlighted an issue that, while initially affecting one resident, pointed to a broader problem. This led to action being taken to prevent similar complaints in the future. The goal was to address the root cause, not just the individual issue.

The discussion also covered the top reasons for complaints, particularly poor service standards and failure to provide services. It was noted that these issues were particularly prevalent in housing services. Questions were raised about how the council would address these concerns and ensure improvements for residents. It was stated the approach was initially prescriptive, suggesting a rigid response to complaints, requiring triage, assessments, and extensive meetings. However, the aim was to shift the mindset so that complaints were not met with defensiveness but with active listening. In some cases, complaints were from a single resident, while others were issues that had been affecting multiple residents but hadn't been formally reported. When these complaints reached management, it was often unclear whether they were isolated incidents or symptoms of a larger problem.

As the issue was investigated further, it became clear that the problem could be addressed locally, without needing an extensive review process. This approach emphasized the importance of not dismissing complaints or thinking that solving the loudest complaint was sufficient. It was crucial to ensure that similar issues weren't affecting other residents, and proactive measures were put in place to prevent further complaints. Additionally, there was a recognition that if the adult social care team did nothing, more complaints would arise, creating a repetitive cycle. It was essential to continue advocating for residents and not be intimidated by the potential impact of addressing their concerns.

Proactive updates from Directors or Cabinet members were suggested, as communication gaps often left Councillors in the dark about ongoing issues. Councillors had expressed frustration about a lack of response or acknowledgment regarding member inquiries, only to later learn that the problem was due to understaffing or resource limitations. Understanding these situations helped Councillors convey the issues to residents, even if the situation was still frustrating.

Concerns were also raised about analysing trends and whether the Council  ...  view the full minutes text for item 67