LGOAT

London

1.2 Screening

1.3 Investigating

1.4 Determining investigated cases (maladministration, injustice, remedy)

York

1.2 Screening

1.3 Investigating

1.4 Determining investigated cases (maladministration, injustice, remedy)

Coventry

1.2 Screening

1.3 Investigating

1.4 Determining investigated cases (maladministration, injustice, remedy)

Corporate Services

1.5 Business Planning

1.6 Risk Management

Corporate Services

2.1 Finance

2.2 Property

2.3 Staffing

2.4 Information

Corporate Services

3.2 Giving advice on good administrative practice

AO - Assistant Ombudsman

Ch - Chairman

CSM - Customer Services Manager

CSS - Customer Services Supervisor

DCE - Deputy Chief Executive

DO - Deputy Ombudsman

DO(C) - Deputy Ombudsman (Coventry)

FC - Financial Controller

FM - Facilities Manager

HoC - Head of Communications

HoFE - Head of Finance & Estates

HoHR - Head of Human Resources

HoIT - Head of Information Technology

Inv - Investigator

ITT(C) - Information Technology Technician

(Coventry)

LGOAT - LGO Advice Team

MT - Management Team

O - Ombudsman

PA - Personal Assistant

PFM - Principal Facilities Manager

Prog Board - LGOAT Programme Board

SA -Systems Administrator

SI - Senior Investigator

SS - Support staff

STL - Support Team Leader

YMT - York Management Team

Risk category

Severity (to the organisation)

Frequency

Likelihood

F - Financial

1. Impact/effect is insignificant.

A - Annual

1. Does not occur/occurs rarely

I - Information

2. Medium impact/small effect (can be cumulative)

D - Daily

2. Occurs sometimes

J - Injury

3. Major impact/jeopardises operations

M - Monthly

3. Occurs frequently

R - Reputation

Q - Quarterly

S - Service Disruption

U - Under-achievement/ineffectiveness

L i k e l i h o o d

3 (Likely)

M

H

H

2 (Unlikely)

L

M

H

1 (Highly Unlikely)

L

L

M

1 (Minor)

2 (Medium)

3 (Major)

Severity

Business Risk

Risk Category

Consequence

Severity

Strategic risk

Control Arrangement

Monitoring

Likelihood of Incident

Response to Incident

Residual Risk

Acceptable?

Responsibility

Frequency

July 08

Sept 08

Previous

Current

1.1 LGO Advice Team

Premises

1.1.1 Impairment of premises due to external factors

S

Delay or interruption of service

2.1 2.2 2.4

Monitoring other occupants and sub-tenants. Monitor behaviour.

DO (C)

D

Enforce contractual or tenant's obligations

1.1.2 Absence of a business continuity plan

S

Risk to the integrity of the service and loss of service to customer.

All

The preparation and agreement of a separate plan for the AA unit in place prior to operations commencement.

DO (C)

CSM

Y

Approve draft and undertake test by autumn 2008.

Staffing

1.1.3 Excess demand for the service (insufficient staff)

F/R

Advice team swamped and Commission not able to deliver to the public on the expectations of new service.

All

Monitor the flow of calls and have in place back-up arrangement that will provide support from core service into advice team on temporary basis.

Prog. Board

D

Examine experience of other new centres and learning points of fluctuating demand.

Redeployment of resources. Increase staff complement.

1.1.4 Failure to retain staff (whatever reason)

F/R

The consequence is inability to provide advertised service. Potential overload for remaining staff. Potential disruption between AA and core.

All

Actively monitor performance, attitudes and commitment. Engender strong team spirit and bonding. Invest in individuals and gain loyalty.

DO (C)

M

Examine recruitment processes and their effectiveness. Gain feedback on exit interviews.

1.1.5 Failure in staff competence

F/R

Poor service to customers. Loss of confidence in AA service. Insufficient return on investment.

All

Rigorous training, induction and appraisal throughout the process. Extend mentoring role. Consider supplementary training.

DO (C)

M

Assess cause of weaknesses:

(a) candidate

(b) training methodology

(c) excessive expectation

Service Provision

1.1.6 Failure to develop and adapt service following implementation.

F/U

Service fails to deliver improvement affecting service reputation and a fall in confidence.

2.1 2.2 2.4

Post implementation review and tracking improvements using sampling and management review High level of governance.

DO (C)

Q/A

Identification of a problem and early resolution. Analysis of PI's and drawing conclusions.

1.1.7 Loss of Commission staff support for the initiative.

R

Loss of goodwill and adverse impact on front and back ends of operation.

2.1 2.2 2.4

Maintain regular updates. Tackle areas of concern at outset.

Ensure embedded buy-in across Commission staff. Concerted effort to engage and encourage staff commitment.

Prog. Board

W

Obtain urgent feedback on reason for any loss and address areas of concern.

1.1.8 Poor linkage between front and rear operations.

S

Inefficient service delivery.

Loss of case identity.

Confusion for service users.

2.1 2.2 2.4

Weekly up date meetings. Staff feedback.

LGOAT

M

Devote additional resources to ensure joined-up working is established.

Finance

1.1.9 Failure to provide sufficient resources-internal allocation.

F/S

Undermines service provision

2.1 2.2 2.4

Develop detailed costed budgets for various outcomes

CSM

M

Release underspend from 2007/08.

IT

1.1.10 Failure in IT support

I/R/S

Undermines system

2.1 2.2 2.4

Contractor supports the post implementation period with Commission staff.

HoIT

D

If contractor lost an alternative supplier will need to be found. Loss of Commission staff impacts on day to day operations would be more difficult to fill.

1.1.11 Failure of COIN system

I/R/S

Unable to process calls to LGOAT electronically. Revert to manual recording of data.

2.1

2.2

2.4

Mirror server (LGO8) in London can take over until fault rectified. Standard daily backup arrangements.

HoIT

SAs

Contin-uous

Run with COIN until a substitute can be found from a different supplier (6 - 12 months).

1.1.12 Failure of HiPath Call Centre system

I/R/S

No automatic call distribution to LGOAT. Revert to manual pickup of calls.

2.1

2.2

2.4

Support agreement with Mts. Calls answered with emergency message.

HoIT

ITT(C)

Contin-uous

Rely on Mts to repair or replace HiPath Call Centre.

1.1.13 Failure of Coventry telephone switch

I/R/S

No calls reach LGOAT.

2.1

2.2

2.4

Support agreement with Mts. Calls answered with emergency message.

HoIT

ITT(C)

Contin-uous

Rely on Mts to repair or replace switch.

1.1.14 Failure of inter-office network (WAN)

I/R/S

Unable to process calls to LGOAT electronically. Revert to manual recording of data.

2.1

2.2

2.4

Support agreement with Mts.

HoIT

Contin-uous

Report faults to Mts/Global Crossing.

1.1.15 Continual errors on COIN system

I/R/S

Interruptions to users. Loss of confidence in system. Failure to meet system expectations.

2.1

2.2

2.4

Work with CAS to overcome errors.

HoIT

D

Work with CAS to resolve. TR to meet with directors if situation getting out of hand.

Commentary

1.1.2: Coventry Operational Business Continuity Plan has been mocked up for LGOAT plan but as yet information has not been populated and the plan is still work in progress.

Previous risk 1.1.3 deleted and subsequent risks renumbered.

Business Risk

Risk Category

Consequence

Severity

Strategic risk

Control Arrangement

Monitoring

Likelihood of Incident

Response to Incident

Residual Risk

Acceptable?

Responsibility

Frequency

Aug 08

Previous

Current

1.2 Screening

1.2.1 Failure to identify a valid complaint

R/U

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

1.1

Complaint about failure.

CSM/CSS

-

Make up complaint.

1.2.2 Correspondence wrongly identified as a complaint to LGO

R/U

Time wasted for complainant and us on processing

1.1

Initial scrutiny

Early personal contact with the complainant (M).

Casework review.

Monthly supervision.

CSM/CSS

-

-

-

-

Pass to correct authority/de-register

1.2.3 Delay by staff in screening

R/U

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

Complainant's opportunity to seek alternative remedy is prejudiced.

1.1

Monitoring of performance data.

Casework review.

Complaint about failure.

CSM/CSS

?

-

-

Action with individual caseworker/PA.

May need to reassign work.

Apology/compensation if severe

1.2.4 Failure to identify as an urgent complaint

R/U

Complainant's injustice exacerbated/remedy compromised

1.1

Initial scrutiny

Complaint about failure

CSM/CSS

-

-

Prioritise action

1.2. 5 Incorrect decision - complaint screened out

R/U

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

Complainant's opportunity to seek alternative remedy is prejudiced.

1.1

5% monitoring.

2 cases/month/investigator monitoring.

Complaint about failure.

CSM/CSS

M

M

-

Review jurisdictional guidance.

Action with individual caseworker.

1.2.6 Incorrect decision - complaint screened in

R/U

Time wasted investigating complaint (LGO, council, complainant).

Complainant's opportunity to seek alternative remedy is prejudiced

1.1

Casework review.

Monthly supervision.

CSM/CSS

-

M

As above.

Business Risk

Risk Category

Consequence

Severity

Strategic risk

Control Arrangement

Monitoring

Likelihood of Incident

Response to Incident

Residual Risk

Acceptable?

Responsibility

Frequency

Aug 08

Previous

Current

1.3 Investigating

1.3.1 Misunderstanding of complaint

R/U

Time wasted investigating (us, council, complainant)

1.1

Early personal contact with the complainant (M).

Complaint about failure.

Casework review.

Monthly supervision

CSM/CSS

-

-

-

M

Amend records

Renew actions

-

1.3.2 Complainant's expectations poorly managed

R

Complainant's expectations falsely raised Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

Complainant aggrieved.

Complainant notifies press/MP.

Disincentive to new complaints.

1.1

Explanatory publicity

Indicating response times in acknowledgement letters

Early personal contact with the complainant (M).

Agreeing statement of complaint and confirming actions in writing

28 day KITs (M)

Send provisional views (M)

Complaint about failure

CSM/CSS

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Clarify/improve publicity.

Training.

Action with individual caseworker.

Creation of A&A from 1 April 2008.

-

1.3.7 Poor quality communications (letter, phone, etc)

R/U

Time wasting.

Could result in wrong decision.

Complainant/council loses confidence.

1.1

5% monitoring.

2 cases/month/investigator monitoring.

Complaints about failure.

CSM/CSS

M

M

-

Action with individual caseworker.

Training.

-

1.3.8 Misconduct by investigator concerning customers

R

Customer aggrieved

(council/complainant).

1.1

Complaints about failure

Observation by colleagues.

CSM/CSS

-

-

As above.

-

Commentary

The risk numbering is consistent across the offices but not all risks occur in all offices.

Business Risk

Risk Category

Consequence

Severity

Strategic risk

Control Arrangement

Monitoring

Likelihood of Incident

Response to Incident

Residual Risk

Acceptable?

Responsibility

Frequency

Mar 08

Aug 08

Previous

Current

1.2 Screening

1.2.1 Failure to identify a valid complaint

R/U

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

1.1

Complaint about failure

AO

-

Make up complaint

1.2. 5 Incorrect decision - complaint screened out

R/U

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

Complainant's opportunity to seek alternative remedy is prejudiced.

1.1

5% monitoring.

2 cases/month/investigator monitoring.

Complaint about failure

O

AO

AO

M

M

-

Review jurisdictional guidance.

Action with individual caseworker.

1.2.6 Incorrect decision - complaint screened in

R/U

Time wasted investigating complaint (LGO, council, complainant).

Complainant's opportunity to seek alternative remedy is prejudiced

1.1

Casework review.

Monthly supervision

INV

AO

-

M

As above.

Commentary

The risk numbering is consistent across the offices but not all risks occur in all offices.

Business Risk

Risk Category

Consequence

Severity

Strategic risk

Control Arrangement

Monitoring

Likelihood of Incident

Response to Incident

Residual Risk

Acceptable?

Responsibility

Frequency

Apr 08

Aug 08

Previous

Current

1.3 Investigating

1.3.1 Misunderstanding of complaint

R/U

Time wasted investigating (us, council, complainant)

1.1

Early personal contact with the complainant (M).

Complaint about failure.

Casework review.

Monthly supervision

INV

AO

INV

AO

-

-

-

M

Amend records

Renew actions

1.3.2 Complainant's expectations poorly managed

R

Complainant's expectations falsely raised Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

Complainant aggrieved.

Complainant notifies press/MP.

Disincentive to new complaints.

1.1

Explanatory publicity

Indicating response times in acknowledgement letters

Early personal contact with the complainant (M).

Agreeing statement of complaint and confirming actions in writing

28 day KITs (M)

Send provisional views (M)

Complaint about failure

HoC

MT

INV

INV

INV

INV

AO/

DO

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Clarify/improve publicity

Training

Action with individual caseworker

1.3.3 Delayed or poor response from complainant

U

Council uncertainty prolonged.

Time wasted chasing.

1.1

Bring forward system.

Casework management

Monthly supervision

INV

INV

AO

D

-

M

Review timescales.

Exercise discretion to terminate.

1.3.4 Delayed or poor response from council

R/U

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

Time wasted chasing.

Complainant loses confidence.

1.1

Bring forward system.

Casework management

Monthly supervision

Monitoring data.

INV

INV

AO

O

D

-

M

-

Pursue with council.

Minimise our own delays

Refer to in annual report.

Training/Seminars for link officers.

1.3.5 Delay in allocation

R/U

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

Complainant aggrieved.

Complainant notifies press/MP.

Disincentive to new complaints.

1.1

Monitoring of performance data.

Complaints about failure

AO/

MT

AO

W

M

-

Action depends on overall workload. May stockpile, pass to other team/office, amend acknowledgement letters, warn Advice Line, set up task force, etc

Action with individual AO.

1.3.6 Delay in investigation

R/U

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

Complainant aggrieved.

Complainant notifies press/MP.

Disincentive to new complaints.

1.1

BF system

Casework management

28 day KITs (M)

Monitoring of performance data

Monthly supervision

Complaints about failure

INV

INV

INV

AO

MT

AO

AO

D

-

M

-

Q

M

-

Action depends on workload. May coach, pass to other team/office,

Action with individual investigator

1.3.7 Poor quality communications (letter, phone, etc)

R/U

Time wasting.

Could result in wrong decision.

Complainant/council loses confidence.

1.1

5% monitoring.

2 cases/month/investigator monitoring.

Complaints about failure.

O

AO

AO

M

M

-

Action with individual caseworker.

Training.

1.3.8 Misconduct by investigator concerning customers

R

Customer aggrieved

(council/complainant).

1.1

Complaints about failure

Observation by colleagues.

AO

-

-

-

As above.

1.3.9 Too much attention to the case/ `over investigating'

R/U

Less time available to progress other cases.

Time of others wasted.

Complainant's expectations falsely raised and any injustice prolonged.

Complainant aggrieved.

Complainant notifies press/MP.

Disincentive to new complaints.

1.1

Casework management

Monthly supervision

5% monitoring.

2 cases/month/investigator monitoring.

Monitoring of performance data

INV

AO

O

AO

MT

-

M

M

M

Q

As above.

1.3.10 Too little attention to the case/ `under investigated' before conclusion reached

R/U

Incorrect decision possible.

Complainant/council dissatisfied with quality.

1.1

Casework management

Monthly supervision

5% monitoring.

2 cases/month/investigator monitoring.

Send provisional views (M)

Monitoring of performance data

Complaints about failure

Ombudsman's seminars

INV

AO

AO

O

AO

INV

MT

AO/

DO

-

M

M

M

M

-

Q

-

Q

Action with individual caseworker.

Training.

Re-launch investigation

Business Risk

Risk Category

Consequence

Severity

Strategic risk

Control Arrangement

Monitoring

Likelihood of Incident

Response to Incident

Residual Risk

Acceptable?

Responsibility

Frequency

Apr 08

Aug 08

Previous

Current

1.4 Determining investigated cases (maladministration, injustice, remedy)

1.4.1 Right decision - complainant dissatisfied

R/U

Complaint to MP, letter to the press.

Comeback lodged.

JR lodged.

1.1 1.2

Consider jurisdiction throughout complaint (M)

Send provisional views (M)

Commission discussion/decisions

Monthly supervision

5% monitoring.

2 cases/month/investigator monitoring.

Complaints about failures

INV

INV

O

AO

O

AO

AO

D

-

-

M

M

M

-

Review and further letter to complainant.

Settle or fight JR.

1.4.2 Right decision - council dissatisfied

R/U

JR lodged.

May notify associations and press.

1.1 1.2

Consider jurisdiction throughout complaint (M)

Inform Council of complaint and outcome (M)

Send provisional views (M)

Commission discussion/decisions

Monthly supervision

5% monitoring.

2 cases/month/investigator monitoring.

Complaints about failures

INV

INV

INV

O

AO

O

AO

AO

-

-

Review and further letter to council.

Settle or fight JR.

1.4.3 Wrong (or inconsistent) decision (complaint not upheld)

R/U

Standing damaged.

Injustice continues/ exacerbated.

Council unfairly cleared (may have consequences for others).

JR.

Complainant notifies press/national bodies/MP.

Bad decision precedent

1.1 1.2

Consider jurisdiction throughout complaint (M)

Send provisional views (M)

Commission discussion/decisions

Monthly supervision

Casework management

5% monitoring.

2 cases/month/investigator monitoring.

Complaints about failures

Limits to delegation

Advice

Ombudsman's seminars

Comtrac (LA info, ad-hoc queries, etc)

INV

INV

O

AO

INV

O

AO

AO/

DO

O

AO/DO

O

O

INV

D

-

-

M

-

M

M

-

-

Q

-

Commission agree a common view.

Pattern of poor decisions may lead to action on procedure or individual staff.

Settle or loose JR - costs.

Re-launch and substitute correct decision (if not functus).

Apology/ Compensation if severe.

Revise/reissue guidance

1.4.4 Wrong (or inconsistent) decision (complaint upheld)

R/U

Standing damaged

Council unfairly penalised.

Inappropriate remedy.

JR.

May notify associations, MPs and press.

Bad decision precedent

1.1 1.2

Consider jurisdiction throughout complaint (M)

Inform Council of complaint and outcome (M)

Send provisional views (M)

Commission discussion/decisions

Monthly supervision

Casework management

5% monitoring.

2 cases/month/investigator monitoring.

Complaints about failures

Limits to delegation

Advice

Ombudsman's seminars

Comtrac (LA info, ad-hoc queries, etc)

INV

INV

INV

O

AO

INV

O

AO

AO

O

AO/DO

O

O

INV

D

-

-

-

M

D

M

M

-

-

-

-

-

As above.

1.4.5 Wrong (or inconsistent) remedy

R/U

Standing damaged

Council wrongly penalised.

Complainant wrongly redressed.

1.1 1.2

Monthly supervision

Commission discussion/decisions

Ombudsman's seminars

5% monitoring.

2 cases/month/investigator monitoring

Comebacks.

Ombudsman's seminars

Comtrac (LA info, ad-hoc queries, etc)

AO

O

O

O

AO

AO

O

INV

M

-

M

Q

M

-

-

-

If not functus, issue new recommendation.

Training

1.4.6 Failing to act appropriately on post decision correspondence

R/U

Comeback not identified/addressed leading to aggrieved complainant and possible bad publicity

Deadlines for FOI/DPA requests missed leading to legal action.

JRs not identified/ addressed

1.1 1.2

Comebacks, FOI/DPA requests and JRs to be brought to AO's attention.

Complaints about failures.

INV/

AO

AO

-

-

Deal with comeback, apologise, compensation in severe cases.

Court action

Business Risk

Risk Category

Consequence

Severity

Strategic risk

Control Arrangement

Monitoring

Likelihood of Incident

Response to Incident

Residual Risk

Acceptable?

Responsibility

Frequency

Mar08

Aug 08

Previous

Current

1.2 Screening

1.2.1 Failure to identify a valid complaint

R/U

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

1.1

Complaint about failure.

AO/SI/

PA

-

Make up complaint

1.2. 5 Incorrect decision - complaint screened out

R/U

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

Complainant's opportunity to seek alternative remedy is prejudiced.

1.1

Targeted monitoring.

1-2 cases/month/ investigator monitoring.

Complaint about failure

O

AO

AO/DO/O

Bi-monthly

M

-

Review jurisdictional guidance.

Action with individual caseworker.

1.2.6 Incorrect decision - complaint screened in

R/U

Time wasted investigating complaint (LGO, council, complainant).

Complainant's opportunity to seek alternative remedy is prejudiced

1.1

Casework review.

Regular supervision.

Targeted monitoring.

1-2 cases/month/ investigator monitoring.

INV

AO

O

AO

-

Varies ⁽¹⁾

Bi-monthly

M

As above.

Commentary

Some commentary redacted

The risk numbering is consistent across the offices but not all risks occur in all offices.

Business Risk

Risk Category

Consequence

Severity

Strategic risk

Control Arrangement

Monitoring

Likelihood of Incident

Response to Incident

Residual Risk

Acceptable?

Responsibility

Frequency

Apr 08

Aug 08

Previous

Current

1.3 Investigating

1.3.1 Misunderstanding of complaint

R/U

Time wasted investigating (us, council, complainant)

1.1

Effective early personal contact with the complainant (M).

Complaint about failure.

Casework review.

Regular supervision

INV

AO/

DO/O

INV

AO

-

-

-

Varies⁽¹⁾

Amend records

Renew actions

1.3.2 Complainant's expectations poorly managed

R

Complainant's expectations falsely raised.

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

Complainant aggrieved.

Complainant notifies press/MP.

Disincentive to new complaints.

1.1

Explanatory publicity.

Indicating response times in acknowledgement letters

Effective early personal contact with the complainant (M).

Agreeing statement of complaint and confirming actions in writing

28 day KITs (M)

Send provisional views (M)

Complaint about failure

HoC

MT/PA

INV

INV

INV

INV

AO/

DO/O

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Clarify/improve publicity

Training

Action with individual caseworker

1.3.3 Delayed or poor response from complainant

U

Council uncertainty prolonged.

Time wasted chasing.

1.1

Bring forward system.

Casework management.

Regular supervision

INV

INV

AO

D

-

Varies⁽¹⁾

Review timescales.

Exercise discretion to terminate.

1.3.4 Delayed or poor response from council

R/U

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

Time wasted chasing.

Complainant loses confidence.

1.1

Bring forward system.

Casework management

Regular supervision.

Monitoring data.

INV

INV

AO

O/AO

D

-

Varies⁽¹⁾

-

Pursue with council.

Minimise our own delays

Refer to in Annual Letter.

Training/Seminars for link officers.

1.3.5 Delay in allocation

R/U

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

Complainant aggrieved.

Complainant notifies press/MP.

Disincentive to new complaints.

1.1

Monitoring of performance data.

Complaints about failure.

Allocations meeting.

AO/

YMT

AO/ DO/O

AOs/DO

W

M

-

W

Action depends on overall workload. May stockpile, pass to other team/office, amend acknowledgement letters, warn LGOAT, set up task force, etc

Action with AOs/DO working together.

1.3.6 Delay in investigation

R/U

Complainant's injustice prolonged/exacerbated.

Complainant aggrieved.

Complainant notifies press/MP.

Disincentive to new complaints.

1.1

BF system.

Casework management.

28 day KITs (M).

Monitoring of performance data.

Regular supervision.

Complaints about failure.

INV

INV

INV

AO/

YMT

AO

AO/ DO/O

D

-

M

-

Q

Varies⁽¹⁾

Action depends on workload. May coach, pass to other team/office,

Action with individual investigator

1.3.7 Poor quality communications (letter, phone, etc)

R/U

Time wasting.

Could result in wrong decision.

Complainant/council loses confidence.

1.1

Targeted monitoring.

1-2 cases/month/ investigator monitoring.

Complaints about failure.

York Communications Group.

O

AO

AO/ DO/O

INV/ SS/DO

Bi-monthly

M

-

Action with individual caseworker.

Training.

1.3.8 Misconduct by investigator concerning customers

R

Customer aggrieved

(council/complainant).

1.1

Complaints about failure.

Observation by colleagues.

AO/ DO/O

ALL

-

-

As above.