Ending of Matt Dunkley's position - Nov 2017
Dear Norfolk County Council,
We hope you can help provide information.
Matt Dunkley left your organisation to join Kent County Council SCS in November 2017]
The 'agreement' with Kent County Council , to release him early from his contract is attracting interest.
Please advise the basis upon which NCC agreed to end his contract , and agree to him moving to KCC.
Please advise which organisation and/or individual helped appoint his successor, and was Mr Dunkley in ANY form the recipient of fees, or monies, or 'favours' of ANY kind, in his successors appointment.
Please advise what due diligence Kent County Council underwent to secure his services, and was there any fees, exit fess, or favours made between the parties for his services to begin at KCC in November 2017?
Yours faithfully,
Mr Elliott
Good Afternoon,
Freedom of Information Act 2000 – Information Request ENQ-276685-T9J4V3
Thank you for your request for information under the Freedom of
Information Act 2000 received on 05 September 2018.
Emma Gedge will be dealing with your request.
We have up to 20 days in which to deal with your request. If we require
clarification regarding your request, we will contact you to explain this.
The 20 working day period will then start from the day that we receive
your clarification.
You will also be informed in advance if there is a charge for supplying
copies of the information.
Please also be aware that, if the requested information contains
references to any third parties, we may need to consult these individuals
about the release of their personal data before making a decision whether
or not to release the information to you.
We will also provide an explanation if any information is not released to
you.
Should you have any queries regarding your request, please contact the
team by email [1][email address] or by telephone
01603 222661.
Yours sincerely,
Sarah Cooper, Business Support Assistant
Information Compliance Team
Dept: 01603 222661
Room 043, County Hall, Norwich
[2]Norfolk County Council [3]Twitter[4]Facebook[5]Web
[6]Campaign Logo
Dear Mr Elliott
Freedom of Information Act 2000 –Information Request ENQ-276685-T9J4V3
I refer to your request for information dated 05 September 2018.
You asked: Matt Dunkley left your organisation to join Kent County Council
SCS in November 2017. The 'agreement' with Kent County Council , to
release him early from his contract is attracting interest -
o Please advise the basis upon which NCC agreed to end his contract ,
and agree to him moving to KCC.
Matt Dunkley was engaged through a recruitment agency as an interim
Executive Director of Children’s Services until October 2017 whilst we
were looking to recruit to this role on a permanent basis.
o Please advise which organisation and/or individual helped appoint his
successor, and was Mr Dunkley in ANY form the recipient of fees, or
monies, or 'favours' of ANY kind, in his successors appointment.
A number of executive search agencies were invited to tender for the work
to recruit to the Executive Director of Children’s Services in line with
our procurement rules and Gatenby Sanderson was awarded the contract.
We hold no records of any payments, fees or ‘favours’ of any kind being
made to Matt Dunkley in this process.
o Please advise what due diligence Kent County Council underwent to
secure his services, and was there any fees, exit fess, or favours
made between the parties for his services to begin at KCC in November
2017?
This information is not held by Norfolk County Council, please contact
Kent County Council.
We did not make any fees, exit fees, or favours with Kent County Council.
If you are dissatisfied with our handling of your request you have the
right of appeal through the Council’s internal review procedure by setting
out the grounds of your appeal in writing to:
[1][email address]
or Information Compliance Team
Room B18
County Hall
Martineau Lane
Norwich
NR1 2DH
An appeal should be submitted within 40 working days of the date of this
notice and should be identified as "FOI Appeal".
If you are dissatisfied after pursuing the complaints procedure, you may
apply to the Information Commissioner under Section 50 of the Act for a
decision whether your request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of Part I of the Act. Refer to the ICO
Website at: [2]https://ico.org.uk/concerns/ for advice on how to report a
concern. Or you can write to them at:
First Contact Team
Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane, Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Yours sincerely
Andy Swan
Senior Information Compliance Officer
Information Management Service
Norfolk County Council
County Hall
Martineau Lane
Norwich
NR1 2DH
Dear Swan, Andrew,
FOI APPEAL:
Thank you for your reply which has been noted.
However, the reply we found to be evasive, and failed to answer some of the questions put, in a transparent way.
1.
.....the 'agreement' with Kent County Council , to release him early
Please can NCC explain the reasons why his release from his contract was EARLY.
As you know, Mr Dunkley was appointed February 2017, and you sought, procured and confirmed his successor on 24 July 2017. This matter is in the public interest, and we would hope you will help provide this information. His EARLY release and reasons are important.
Mr Dunkley was specifically appointed (by Gatenby Sanderson) on the basis of taking the council through the OFSTED inspection into 2018.
This was abruptly ended when Mr Dunkley (whom worked for Gatenby Sanderson), found his successor then speedily and the left NCC in October 2017 having only served few months.
2. I asked:
"Please advise which organisation and/or individual helped appoint his
successor, and was Mr Dunkley in ANY form the recipient of fees, or
monies, or 'favours' of ANY kind, in his successors appointment.
You replied:
A number of executive search agencies were invited to tender for the work
to recruit to the Executive Director of Children’s Services in line with
our procurement rules and Gatenby Sanderson was awarded the contract.
"We hold no records of any payments, fees or ‘favours’ of any kind being made to Matt Dunkley in this process".
My appeal:
Mr Dunkley worked for, and you chose him from, the very Agency who appointed his successor at the time of your selection. Please therefore provide the fees paid in total by NCC (if any) to Gatenby Sanderson for the search and find of Mr Dunkley's successor.
Please also confirm , that NO payments were made to Mr Dunkley via Gatenby Sanderson or his successor as a result for this appointment.
3. I asked:
Please advise what due diligence Kent County Council underwent to
secure his services, and was there any fees, exit fess, or favours
made between the parties for his services to begin at KCC in November
2017?
You replied:
We did not make any fees, exit fees, or favours with Kent County Council.
My appeal:
I asked 'between the parties', not to Kent County Council specifically. This would include any agencies or other persons involved in the transaction (to include Mr Dunkley himself). To include but not limited to KCC.
We hope a speedy response is forthcoming given the gravity and urgency of this FOI
Yours sincerely,
Mr Elliott
Good Morning,
Thank you for your email.
I can confirm your Freedom of Information Request, ENQ-276685-T9J4V3, has
been progressed to the Internal Review stage and assigned to an
Information Compliance Manager to complete.
Thank you,
Sarah Cooper, Business Support Assistant
Information Compliance Team
Dept: 01603 222661
Room 043, County Hall, Norwich
[1]Norfolk County Council [2]Twitter[3]Facebook[4]Web
[5]Campaign Logo
Sarah Cooper, Business Support Assistant
Information Compliance Team
Please advise when we should expect a response. It has now been 25 Days.
Yours sincerely,
Mr Elliott
Dear Mr Elliott
I have now completed my review of the Council’s response to your request
of 5 September 2018. I will deal with each of your questions in turn.
1. Your original request was:
Please advise the basis upon which NCC agreed to end his contract , and
agree to him moving to KCC
In your appeal you state:
1......the 'agreement' with Kent County Council , to release him early
Please can NCC explain the reasons why his release from his contract was
EARLY.
As you know, Mr Dunkley was appointed February 2017, and you sought,
procured and confirmed his successor on 24 July 2017. This matter is in
the public interest, and we would hope you will help provide this
information. His EARLY release and reasons are important.
Mr Dunkley was specifically appointed (by Gatenby Sanderson) on the basis
of taking the council through the OFSTED inspection into 2018.
This was abruptly ended when Mr Dunkley (whom worked for Gatenby
Sanderson), found his successor then speedily and the left NCC in October
2017 having only served few months.
In our response we stated that:
Matt Dunkley was engaged through a recruitment agency as an interim
Executive Director of Children’s Services until October 2017 whilst we
were
I consider that the original response answered your question and your
appeal is not upheld. However, in order to assist you I will provide
additional clarification.
The nature of an “interim” appointment is as the word suggests a temporary
arrangement to fill a gap between permanent appointments. As an “interim”
Mr Dunkley’s services were procured on a temporary basis until the role
was recruited to on a permanent basis. There was no specified end date to
his contract and he was therefore not released early as you state in your
appeal.
The Council had no prior knowledge of when the Ofsted inspection would
take place and in fact it took place after the permanent Executive
Director of Childrens Services had been appointed which is why she dealt
with the inspection in Norfolk.
Mr Dunkley’s employment with Kent County Council is a matter between Mr
Dunkley and Kent County Council. Norfolk County Council had nothing to do
with this appointment other than providing a reference in the way it would
for any other interim or employee.
2. Your original request was:
Please advise which organisation and/or individual helped appoint his
successor, and was Mr Dunkley in ANY form the recipient of fees, or
monies, or 'favours' of ANY kind, in his successors appointment.
In your appeal you state:
Mr Dunkley worked for, and you chose him from, the very Agency who
appointed his successor at the time of your selection. Please therefore
provide the fees paid in total by NCC (if any) to Gatenby Sanderson for
the search and find of Mr Dunkley's successor.
Please also confirm , that NO payments were made to Mr Dunkley via Gatenby
Sanderson or his successor as a result for this appointment.
In our response we stated:
A number of executive search agencies were invited to tender for the work
to recruit to the Executive Director of Children’s Services in line with
our procurement rules and Gatenby Sanderson was awarded the contract.
We hold no records of any payments, fees or ‘favours’ of any kind being
made to Matt Dunkley in this process.
Your appeal is not upheld. I consider that the response answers your
questions. However, to assist you I will provide further clarification.
Gatenby Sanderson submitted a tender for the work which required executive
search support also known as “head hunting” for this senior role. This
process was completed in accordance with the Norfolk County Council
procurement rules.
The agency was engaged to attract a pool of suitably qualified and
experienced candidates; they did not make the appointment. The
appointment was made by a panel of County Councillors in accordance with
Norfolk County Council’s Constitution.
Your request for “the fees paid in total by NCC (if any) to Gatenby
Sanderson for the search and find of Mr Dunkley's successor” was not part
of your original request. This will therefore be treated as a new request
and you will receive a response regarding this in due course.
The second part of this question has been clearly answered. The council
is not aware of and holds no records regarding any payments, fees or
‘favours’ of any kind being made to Matt Dunkley in this process.
3. Your original request was:
Please advise what due diligence Kent County Council underwent to secure
his services, and was there any fees, exit fess, or favours made between
the parties for his services to begin at KCC in November 2017?
In our response we stated:
This information is not held by Norfolk County Council, please contact
Kent County Council.
We did not make any fees, exit fees, or favours with Kent County Council.
In your appeal you state:
I asked 'between the parties', not to Kent County Council specifically.
This would include any agencies or other persons involved in the
transaction (to include Mr Dunkley himself). To include but not limited to
KCC.
Your appeal is not upheld. Your request did not specify who “the parties”
were. The council took the view that the parties you were referring to
were Norfolk County Council and Kent County Council and provided an
appropriate response.
However, in order to assist you I will attempt to clarify. As previously
stated, Mr Dunkley’s employment with Kent County Council is a matter
between Mr Dunkley and Kent County Council. Norfolk County Council had
nothing to do with this appointment other than providing a reference in
the way it would for any other interim or employee. Norfolk County
Council holds no information regarding any fees, exit fess, or favours
made between the parties for his services to begin at KCC.
If you are dissatisfied after pursuing the complaints procedure, you may
apply to the Information Commissioner under Section 50 of the Act for a
decision whether your request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of Part I of the Act. Refer to the ICO
Website at: [1]https://ico.org.uk/concerns/ for advice on how to report a
concern. Or you can write to them at:
First Contact Team
Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane, Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Kind regards
Lesley Spicer, Information Compliance Manager
IMT
Tel: 01603 222661
Room 043, County Hall, Martineau Lane, Norwich, NR1 2DH
[2]Norfolk County Council [3]Twitter[4]Facebook[5]Web
[6]Campaign Logo
Dear Spicer, Lesley,
Thank you for your response, however we find it to still to be evasive, and in part disturbingly misleading.
We will raise a separate FOI for the matters you suggest. However on this specific point, it seems NCC are simply unwilling to provide transparency on these matters which remains disappointing
You do not uphold the following aspect on the following grounds.
"The nature of an “interim” appointment is as the word suggests a temporary
arrangement to fill a gap between permanent appointments. As an “interim”
Mr Dunkley’s services were procured on a temporary basis until the role
was recruited to on a permanent basis. There was no specified end date to
his contract and he was therefore not released early as you state in your
appeal. "
"The Council had no prior knowledge of when the Ofsted inspection would
take place and in fact it took place after the permanent Executive
Director of Children's Services had been appointed which is why she dealt
with the inspection in Norfolk.
Here is 1 extract to confirm you are misleading this request, and the public:
Jan 2017 (On appointing Mr Dunkley)
We remain of the view, NCC intentions when appointing Mr Dunkley to his role as Interim, with CLEAR objective. He failed in this objective up to 25th July 2017, where Wendy Thomson CEO stated this would now be 'Sara's job....and we therefore asked 'Why' was his contracted terminated early, which clearly it was from the evidence.
You contracted Mr Dunkley's services to " be in place to see the council through its next full Ofsted inspection of children's services, where it aims to create a clear path towards a solid 'good'
rating'.
JAN 2017
(Fact Quote below)
"Norfolk County Council said Mr Dunkley, ....." would be in place to see the council through its next full Ofsted inspection of children’s services, where it aims to create a clear path towards a solid ‘good’ rating”."
You then agreed to terminate this early, and accept his 'colleague/friend' to replace him, using Mr Dunkleys's 'Gatenby' connections to do so.
It would appear that in fact you did have prior knowledge of when the OFSTED would take place as stated by Wendy Thomson NCC CEO. It is quoted below.
25th July 2017
"Wendy Thomson, said:
'I'm delighted that we have recruited Sara. ......'Our ambition is to move
up in the Ofsted rating from 'inadequate' to 'requires improvement' at the
next inspection, which is expected later this year or early next year.
As NCC know, Mr Dunkley had financial vested interests in GATENBY, and has declared those interests to KCC. Thus it is clear, in his role with GATENBY the chosen supplier to recruit his replacement, he had some role by 'introducing you' to his replacement.
NCC also know his replacement was very well known to Mr Dunkley as they shared Board positions at other Organisations. NCC are aware of this close relationship, and thus of course would know what occurred in terms of 'public interest', 'transactions'.
I would urge transparency when responding.
I appreciate between yourselves and KCC this may be very difficult given the seriousness of these matters. I would urge NCC to do this in the public interest and refrain from what appears to be collusion.
Yours sincerely,
Mr Elliott
Dear Mr Elliot
I refer to the additional request that you made in your request for
internal review of FOI request ENQ-276685-T9J4V3.
You asked for:
the fees paid in total by NCC (if any) to Gatenby Sanderson for the search
and find of Mr Dunkley's successor.
Our response:
The total figure paid was 19,100 plus VAT
I hope you find this information useful.
If you are dissatisfied with our handling of your request you have the
right of appeal through the Council’s internal review procedure by setting
out the grounds of your appeal in writing to:
[1][email address]
or Information Compliance Team
Room 043
County Hall
Martineau Lane
Norwich
NR1 2DH
An appeal should be submitted within 40 working days of the date of this
notice and should be identified as "FOI Appeal".
If you are dissatisfied after pursuing the complaints procedure, you may
apply to the Information Commissioner under Section 50 of the Act for a
decision whether your request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of Part I of the Act. Refer to the ICO
Website at: [2]https://ico.org.uk/concerns/ for advice on how to report a
concern. Or you can write to them at:
First Contact Team
Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane, Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Yours sincerely
Information Compliance Officer
Information Management Service
Norfolk County Council
County Hall
Martineau Lane
Norwich
NR1 2DH
From: Spicer, Lesley
Sent: 30 October 2018 08:55
To: [3][FOI #518106 email]
Subject: FW: Internal review of Freedom of Information request - Ending of
Matt Dunkley's position - Nov 2017
Dear Mr Elliott
I have now completed my review of the Council’s response to your request
of 5 September 2018. I will deal with each of your questions in turn.
1. Your original request was:
Please advise the basis upon which NCC agreed to end his contract , and
agree to him moving to KCC
In your appeal you state:
1......the 'agreement' with Kent County Council , to release him early
Please can NCC explain the reasons why his release from his contract was
EARLY.
As you know, Mr Dunkley was appointed February 2017, and you sought,
procured and confirmed his successor on 24 July 2017. This matter is in
the public interest, and we would hope you will help provide this
information. His EARLY release and reasons are important.
Mr Dunkley was specifically appointed (by Gatenby Sanderson) on the basis
of taking the council through the OFSTED inspection into 2018.
This was abruptly ended when Mr Dunkley (whom worked for Gatenby
Sanderson), found his successor then speedily and the left NCC in October
2017 having only served few months.
In our response we stated that:
Matt Dunkley was engaged through a recruitment agency as an interim
Executive Director of Children’s Services until October 2017 whilst we
were
I consider that the original response answered your question and your
appeal is not upheld. However, in order to assist you I will provide
additional clarification.
The nature of an “interim” appointment is as the word suggests a temporary
arrangement to fill a gap between permanent appointments. As an “interim”
Mr Dunkley’s services were procured on a temporary basis until the role
was recruited to on a permanent basis. There was no specified end date to
his contract and he was therefore not released early as you state in your
appeal.
The Council had no prior knowledge of when the Ofsted inspection would
take place and in fact it took place after the permanent Executive
Director of Childrens Services had been appointed which is why she dealt
with the inspection in Norfolk.
Mr Dunkley’s employment with Kent County Council is a matter between Mr
Dunkley and Kent County Council. Norfolk County Council had nothing to do
with this appointment other than providing a reference in the way it would
for any other interim or employee.
2. Your original request was:
Please advise which organisation and/or individual helped appoint his
successor, and was Mr Dunkley in ANY form the recipient of fees, or
monies, or 'favours' of ANY kind, in his successors appointment.
In your appeal you state:
Mr Dunkley worked for, and you chose him from, the very Agency who
appointed his successor at the time of your selection. Please therefore
provide the fees paid in total by NCC (if any) to Gatenby Sanderson for
the search and find of Mr Dunkley's successor.
Please also confirm , that NO payments were made to Mr Dunkley via Gatenby
Sanderson or his successor as a result for this appointment.
In our response we stated:
A number of executive search agencies were invited to tender for the work
to recruit to the Executive Director of Children’s Services in line with
our procurement rules and Gatenby Sanderson was awarded the contract.
We hold no records of any payments, fees or ‘favours’ of any kind being
made to Matt Dunkley in this process.
Your appeal is not upheld. I consider that the response answers your
questions. However, to assist you I will provide further clarification.
Gatenby Sanderson submitted a tender for the work which required executive
search support also known as “head hunting” for this senior role. This
process was completed in accordance with the Norfolk County Council
procurement rules.
The agency was engaged to attract a pool of suitably qualified and
experienced candidates; they did not make the appointment. The appointment
was made by a panel of County Councillors in accordance with Norfolk
County Council’s Constitution.
Your request for “the fees paid in total by NCC (if any) to Gatenby
Sanderson for the search and find of Mr Dunkley's successor” was not part
of your original request. This will therefore be treated as a new request
and you will receive a response regarding this in due course.
The second part of this question has been clearly answered. The council is
not aware of and holds no records regarding any payments, fees or
‘favours’ of any kind being made to Matt Dunkley in this process.
3. Your original request was:
Please advise what due diligence Kent County Council underwent to secure
his services, and was there any fees, exit fess, or favours made between
the parties for his services to begin at KCC in November 2017?
In our response we stated:
This information is not held by Norfolk County Council, please contact
Kent County Council.
We did not make any fees, exit fees, or favours with Kent County Council.
In your appeal you state:
I asked 'between the parties', not to Kent County Council specifically.
This would include any agencies or other persons involved in the
transaction (to include Mr Dunkley himself). To include but not limited to
KCC.
Your appeal is not upheld. Your request did not specify who “the parties”
were. The council took the view that the parties you were referring to
were Norfolk County Council and Kent County Council and provided an
appropriate response.
However, in order to assist you I will attempt to clarify. As previously
stated, Mr Dunkley’s employment with Kent County Council is a matter
between Mr Dunkley and Kent County Council. Norfolk County Council had
nothing to do with this appointment other than providing a reference in
the way it would for any other interim or employee. Norfolk County Council
holds no information regarding any fees, exit fess, or favours made
between the parties for his services to begin at KCC.
If you are dissatisfied after pursuing the complaints procedure, you may
apply to the Information Commissioner under Section 50 of the Act for a
decision whether your request for information has been dealt with in
accordance with the requirements of Part I of the Act. Refer to the ICO
Website at: [4]https://ico.org.uk/concerns/ for advice on how to report a
concern. Or you can write to them at:
First Contact Team
Information Commissioner's Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane, Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF
Kind regards
Lesley Spicer, Information Compliance Manager
IMT
Tel: 01603 222661
Room 043, County Hall, Martineau Lane, Norwich, NR1 2DH
[5]Norfolk County Council[6]Twitter[7]Facebook[8]Web
[9]Campaign Logo
We work to defend the right to FOI for everyone
Help us protect your right to hold public authorities to account. Donate and support our work.
Donate Now