Agenda item

The Committee were presented with an interim report highlighting significant weaknesses identified by Internal Audit in the Council’s processes for managing and monitoring the carrying out of Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DoLS) assessments. It was noted that the report was presented at this stage in view of the reference to the matter in the Council’s Annual Governance Statement 2016/17, which the Audit Committee was responsible for approving. Members also noted that there were no safeguarding issues found as part of the review; the clients in question were receiving the care that they needed. The review, however, identified that the operational management of the DoLS process was poor and it was supported by systems that were heavily manual and not fit for purpose.

The following headline key issues were identified:-

·         The return of assessments distributed to assessors was not routinely monitored or outstanding assessments actively chased up when overdue;

·         No performance information was available routinely to monitor the service, with significant amounts of manual input required to determine the level of outstanding cases at any one point in time;

·         The inappropriate payment of employees undertaking best interest assessments through the Accounts Payable (creditors) system rather than via payroll;

·         Little or no consideration of the working time directive when allocating best interest assessments to employees to do in their own time on top of their existing day job;

·         In one case particular the allocation of a volume of assessments that was significantly in excess of what could reasonably achieved within the set deadlines;

·         In some cases, payments were made in advance of the work (assessments) being completed, in contravention of the Council’s Financial Procedure Rules, this also leading to overpayments being made for assessments that were never completed;

·         In many other cases payments were made at the point of receiving assessments but before the assessments had been quality checked, i.e. essentially before it was checked that the assessments were satisfactory, because of a significant backlog that existed;

·         There was heavy and inappropriate reliance on spread sheets to record the Teams activity and assessments;

·         Linked to the above point, there was poor data quality, with numerous examples of missing information and erroneous data including missing assessments dates, missing and incorrect information on who the assessment was completed by/allocated to and even in some case client names.

Following the presentation of the report, members were given the opportunity to make comments and ask questions.

In relation to paragraph 2 of the report, Councillor Iris Beech asked what would happen to a person who had a lack of mental capacity and had no immediate family to assist, would the Council endeavour to obtain a person who would have power of attorney. She also commented that in relation to 511 cases where the assessments were obsolete, this be avoided from liaising with electoral services for instance when they are notified of a death, this would ensure that unnecessary work was carried out.

In response, it was reported that DOLS assessments were only undertaken within Residential Care Homes and hospitals so the information required would already be supplied. It was advised an independent advocate could be used to assist the person. In relation to notification of a death, the Council would be advised of these through the manager of the home or the hospital and it was envisaged that when the electronic system was in operation this would alleviate the backlog problems being incurred in respect of these.

Kathryn Smart asked whether there had been any suspicions raised around allegations of fraud with regard to staff payments. It was reported that through investigations, there had been nothing to suggest that any fraudulent activities had taken place. However, members were advised that there had been one individual who had claimed for assessments without carrying them out and this had been dealt with.

Kathryn made comment in relation to the backlog and whether this would leave the authority at risk of challenge. It was reported that although the authority was technically in breach, Doncaster was no different to other local authorities. It was advised that the vast majority of people were quite happy to be where they were but where there was a chance this might not be the case, these were being prioritised for assessment, to minimise any risk. Kathryn asked for Members to be advised whether the Council had a responsibility to notify clients that the assessments needed to be completed and it was agreed to provide the Committee with a response.

Kathryn asked whether there were any internal controls that could be used to alleviate the problems being incurred in a number of areas within Adults Services. It was reported that as we saw with Childrens Services following Damian Allen’s appointment, he had put processes in place to ensure the services improvement and we were starting to see the same improvements in Adults. It was stated that extra budget provision had been put in place and regular monthly meetings were being held to ensure the service was working as it should.

In response to a question regarding the how long a DOLS assessment takes, it was reported that although this would depend of the individual concerned the maximum length of time for an assessment would be 12 months by law. However, majority should be completed within 21 days or shorter and urgent cases within 7 days. It was reported that at the moment very few meet the 21 days.

With regard to the 1637 outstanding assessments, the Chair, Councillor Austen White asked whether any progress was being made into clearing the backlog. A breakdown was presented to Members and it was stated that the numbers were likely to change on a regular basis in line with the validated information. It was noted that with the introduction of care first, numbers were decreasing although there was no definitive number identified until all the data cleansing had been carried out. It was envisaged that a clearer picture would be provided at the next meeting of the Committee. It was also noted that 250 cases had been outsourced to an outside company and were expected to be completed by the end of October 2017. Members were advised that weekly spread sheets were provided by the company on the progress being made.

Councillor David Nevett commented that whilst work had been outsourced there was still a significant amount of backlog. He asked how this was going to be managed. Committee were advised that every Social Worker should be undertaking training to enable them to carry out a Best Interest Assessment (BIA) and whilst some of the work had been outsourced it was envisaged that social workers would be carrying out assessments in for the future. Members were also advised that at one time the authority had around 70 external assessors that could be called upon but a hold had been placed on this resource. It was hoped that once the Care First System was available, external assessors could be brought back in to assist. It was envisaged that it would take 9-12 months to clear the backlog.

In response to a question raised in relation to early payments, it was reported that early payments no longer exist. It was also stated that work was continuing with the team and the transfer of data and the work would take 2-3 months to be completed.

The Chair, Councillor Austen White made reference to the Officer Decision Record (ODR) that had not provided the capability to deliver and asked whether any lessons had been learnt from this. It was stated that there was always an opportunity to learn lessons for future service delivery. In this particular circumstance an increase in the number of cases had been tenfold which was very rare but it was important that the authority looks into why the ODR wasn’t followed through. It was suggested that a further updates be provided within the Audit Committee action log at the next meeting relating to progress in clearing the backlog of assessments, and a fuller update provided in February 2018.

RESOLVED that:-

(1)        the audit review and the actions taken to date to address       the issue by the Adults, Health and Well-being Directorate be noted;

(2)        an update on progress in clearing the backlog be        provided within the Audit Action Log at the next   Committee meeting; and

(3)        a full update be provided in February 2018.