Agenda item

Report of the Assistant Chief Executive and Divisional Director of Strategic Commissioning

The Committee received a report of the Divisional Director of Strategic Commissioning which was a follow up to a report considered by Members in November 2012.  The Chair welcomed the Portfolio Holder for Performance, Customer Services and Corporate Services, the Divisional Director of Strategic Commissioning and another officer to the meeting.

The Divisional Director, in introducing the report, stated that overall it could be concluded that Harrow’s data quality standard was relatively sound although there were some inconsistencies.  An officer added that it was also important to recognise that there were was broad work on information management governance going on and that the internal audit department had provided input into the report before Members.

A Member expressed concern at the lack of data in the report and, referring to paragraph 2.14 of the report, questioned how Members could identify a subtle issue or where there was not such a high level of checking.  Members relied on the performance data they received and needed to have confidence in it.  An officer reported that the no further action report in relation to the increase in referrals to social care had been considered by the Corporate Director of Children and Families and that as a result of that issue there was now a different approach.  There was a dedicated team carrying out case file audit that could identify the more subtle data issues and a data quality policy was being developed.  In addition, further training of staff had been carried out and a clear explanation of the requirements in terms of data given.  Members were also informed that computer software would prevent a member of staff accessing the system if they had not completed the online training.

In response to a Member’s comment that reference to data quality requirements should be included in managers’ roles and responsibilities and that failure to comply should result in sanctions, the officer responded that there were many examples where managers took a lot of care.  There would, however, always be exceptions to this.

In terms of Members having to rely on information that the NHS provided, the officer confirmed that there was an expectation that the Council complete their information governance toolkit.  The public health team used NHS data from hospitals and GPs and it was the analysis of that information which was key.   Another Member stated that he was yet to be convinced that public health was providing accurate data.  If residents and users were not recognised the Council would be under funded due to poor data.

A Member questioned whether 100% of the Housing stock survey data was available.  The officer advised that considerable work was going on in the housing area and the data could be provided to the Member.  The Divisional Director added that Housing was one of the Council’s success stories in that improved data had transformed how the service was run.

In terms of changing the culture in relation to data quality and a Member’s comment that, having heard about the improvement in the Housing department, a training programme would be beneficial, the officer commented cultural change was being sought and the Youth Offending Team was a good example of this.

The Chair thanked the Portfolio Holder and officers for their attendance and responses.

RESOLVED:  That

(1)               the report be noted;

(2)               the Committee support the coverage of data quality in the 2013-14 internal audit plan.