Grantham Meres Leisure Centre

Submitted 12th January 2010 and being treated by the authority as a FoI request

1) I understand that the proposal to register South Kesteven Community Leisure Trust as a company with charitable status was not approved by the Charities Commission. If this is the case, what were the reasons for the Charity Commission not agreeing to registration?

2) Does the Leisure Trust formation as approved by Council 17th April 2008 still exist and is it the council’s intention to pursue a Leisure Trust arrangement under this model in the near future ?

3) If it is no longer the council’s intention to do this, where and when was the decision made not to continue with the formation of the Leisure Trust.

4) Is Cllr Thompson’s statement correct that the costs of pursuing charitable status have been bourne by Leisure Connections? If this is the case, why would the contactor bear the costs of establishing charitable status for the leisure trust that is the commissioning body?

5) Is it the intention of the council to set up a Leisure Trust as an Industrial Provident Society. If so, what is the role of Leisure Connections as contractor in establishing this?

6) What other appointments had been made to the original Leisure Trust board apart from Cllr Thompson?

Submitted on 8th January as part of my response to a complaint response and being dealt with under the FoI Act by the authroity:

The response to my complaints suggests that complaints have risen due to the introduction of free swimming. However, according to the data for 2009 the bulk of complaints relate to maintainence and the swimming pool and it is not clear from this data which complaints relate to the increase in demand brought about the introduction of free swimming for under 16s. Can you clarify, which complaints relate to this in the data?

On a simple performance measure, what is the performance target for the number of complaints that was set as a KPI for Leisure Connections for the period of 2009.?

Which of the service standards has Leisure Connections failed to meet in 2009?

What mechansim exists, to terminate the contract if Leisuer Connections fails to meet the performance standards?

Response recieved 28th Jan 2010

Dear Mr Shorrock

Further to your e-mail of 19th January please find below responses to the questions you have raised as you have stated them in turn:

In your e-mail of 8th Jan you queried the following:

Which of the complaints in 2009 related to the increase in demand brought about by the introduction of free swimming?

It is not possible to identify these complaints specifically as they are not recorded as such. However due to the increase in users to the centres generally there were more complaints relating to cleaning, maintenance and equipment. Whilst not all these complaints, ie, 36, 74 and 45 respectively can be attributed to the implementation of free swimming alone, undoubtedly they contributed to their number.

What is the performance target for the number of complaints that was set as a KPI for Leisure Connections for the period of 2009?

Leisure Connection had agreed to an interim extension of their original contract whilst the Charities Commission were deliberating their Trust application, and had also agreed to operate the contract at markedly reduced rates in accordance with their bid. Even though that contract was not in place, the performance measures were indicatively set around the terms of the new contract pending the contract becoming official, and the KPI related to Customer care is as follows:

· Operation of a customer comments and feedback system

· Operation of a helpdesk at reception desk areas within the entrance to each centre

· Availability of feedback from monitoring visits, liaison groups, customer comments and complaints, reports/surveys and customer care activities

· Customer care training programme as part of staff inductions.

· Appropriate system for dealing with lost property

· Maintenance of records of complaints, comments, forums and surveys

Key performance indicators have now been agreed by both parties based on the outcome based measures included in the tender documents as follows:

Monthly performance standards based upon:

· Cleaning

· Environmental Management

· Customer Care

· Reporting

· Maintenance

· IT Systems

· Catering

Annual performance standards based upon:

· Quest accreditation

· Participation Targets

· Sport England National Benchmarking Service

Availability performance standards based upon:

· Opening hours

· Activity programming

· Health and Safety Management

· Equipment

· Access

· Legislation and Policy

· Environmental requirements

· Security

· Staffing

Which of the service standards has Leisure Connections failed to meet in 2009?

None, albeit that there are some remedial actions required in certain areas to raise standards.

What mechanism exists, to terminate the contract if Leisure Connection fails to meet the performance standards?

A review of the interim management agreement performance will be undertaken after four complete months, ie during February 2010. The contract can be determined by 3 months notice.

In your email of 12th Jan you queried the following:

I understand that the proposal to register South Kesteven Community Leisure Trust as a company with charitable status was not approved by the Charities Commission. If this is the case, what were the reasons for the Charity Commission not agreeing to registration?

The Charities Commission gave no final decision for the registration of the South Kesteven Community Leisure Trust. However the matter was prolonged for over 12 month period and Leisure Connection made the decision to withdraw their application on the basis that they had invested some £400,000 in the application and could see no conclusion forthcoming despite the input from specialist solicitors, advisers etc.

Does the Leisure Trust formation as approved by Council 17th April 2008 still exist and is it the council’s intention to pursue a Leisure Trust arrangement under this model in the near future ?

The council accepted a tender submission on the basis that the operator would provide the services through a Trust model. South Kesteven Community Leisure Trust was deemed to be an ideal local model but now Leisure Connection are now offering an IPS as an option to consider.

If it is no longer the council’s intention to do this, where and when was the decision made not to continue with the formation of the Leisure Trust.

Is Cllr Thompson’s statement correct that the costs of pursuing charitable status have been bourne by Leisure Connections? If this is the case, why would the contactor bear the costs of establishing charitable status for the leisure trust that is the commissioning body?

Full costs of the application for charitable status have been borne by Leisure Connection. The council is investigating the IPS model and have yet to make a decision in respect of an IPS structure.

Is it the intention of the council to set up a Leisure Trust as an Industrial Provident Society. If so, what is the role of Leisure Connections as contractor in establishing this?

The council is currently exploring the potential of setting up a Leisure Trust as an Industrial Provident Society through a nation model currently being operated by Leisure Connection on several sites throughout the country including two other South Lincolnshire districts.

What other appointments had been made to the original Leisure Trust board apart from Cllr Thompson?

Three experienced and independent leisure professionals had been appointed to the Trust Board.

I hope that I have answered your questions satisfactorily. I must reiterate that I am not dealing with your request for information as a complaint and that if you would like to make a complaint please advise me on which basis this is being made. Alternatively you may wish to arrange a meeting to discuss if you wish any further clarification on the issues you have raised.

Regards