Mobile Electronic Financial Assessments within Social Services Partnership, People, Principles, Pitf

1
Mobile Electronic Financial Assessmentswithin
Social ServicesPartnership, People, Principles,
Pitfalls, Performance, Perfection (almost) and a
Parrot

• Sheila DonHead of Departmental Management
  ServicesCumbria County Council5 and 6 April,
  Local e-gov EXPO 2006

2
Workshop Overview

• A little bit of history
• How the partnership worked together
• Which staff were involved and why
• What principles did we work to?
• Risks and pitfalls
• Performance issues Instilling metrics to
  measure the impact of mobile technology
• How did we know we had reached perfection?
• The Parrot
• Any questions

3
Mobile Electronic Financial Assessments a bit
of history

• Joint project for Cumbria Council Council with
  the London Boroughs of Lambeth, Enfield and
  Sutton. Always part of the Cumbria Grand Plan
• To produce an integrated financial assessment
  system- Residential care (CRAG) charges-
  Non-residential care (Fairer Charging) charges
• New way of working which results in a single
  process from financial assessment to invoice
  procedures in majority of cases
• Faster process for financial assessment
  officers- Massive reduction in office based
  administration- More time helping service users.

4
What key achievements did we want?

• Automatic form updating and dynamic error logging
  via web service
• Data fully encrypted when mobile, unencrypted
  network store
• Connections to multiple Social Services client
  record systems
• Multiple year / rates assessment facility
• Provision for Assessment Letters to be outputted
  in up to 10 languages
• Biometric signature sign-on
• Key performance measure reporting
• Full training materials for trainers and users

5
Process overview
6
Process overview
7
Process overview
8
Which staff were involved and why?

• Financial Assessment Team Leaders- Full member
  of the overall Project Board- Awareness of staff
  attitudes and fears.
• Financial Assessment Officers- Key to system
  development- One from each authority was full
  member of project user group- Supported to work
  with software developer- Demonstrated that
  better systems do not equate to job threats-
  Performance information used to improve service-
  System complimentary to FAOs not a replacement

9
Which staff were involved and why?

• Financial Assessment Officers- Choice of Tablet
  and printer and bag- Development of performance
  reporting- Training on-site prior to visits-
  Manual assessments shadowed by mobile assessment
  in the office- Accompanied visit option- Tablet
  replaces workstation computer- Software allows
  off-line working for e-mail, word, excel etc

10
The principles we worked to

• Each authority wanted the system to replicate its
  paper system
• Time to be spent ensuring software supplier
  understood charging principles
• Commitment to Board meetings
• Senior management support
• Jointly agreed timings and dates for development
  and implementation
• Project managed with a full risk log

11
The principles we worked to

• Monthly Project Board usually in London
• Software supplier fully engaged
• Absolute honesty about problems
• Sharing practice issues
• Sharing policies and procedures
• Training package to be developed
• Driven by staff not management or consultants
  process optimised for them, by them

12
The Pitfalls Hindsight comes too late

• We wouldnt have started from here
• Big learning curve for software supplier
• Printer problems
• Integration issues
• Cumbrian Floods
• Discretions and differences bigger than expected
• Staffing issues

13
The Pitfalls a few more to think about

• Change in working practices- User as change
  agent- Job descriptions- Risk assessment carry
  bags, equipment selection- Policies regarding
  home working etc
• Service user data protection- Data Protection
  Act- Encryption and Security

• System maintenance and development- External
  regulatory changes- Internal development of new
  working practices
• Internal IT Systems and Support- Networking-
  Desktop Support- Data Integration

14
Performance and how to measure it

• Instilling metrics to measure the impact of
  mobile technology e.g. Standard reports
• Enfield
• Reduced assessment process from 15 to 5 days
• Cumbria
• Reduced transport costs
• 75 of assessments completed on first visit
• Sutton
• Significant quality improvement
• Phone calls querying assessments dropped from
  c80 of cases to c1

15
Performance and how to measure it

• All four authorities
• Assessments now delivered more rapidly - Partly
  early notification and prioritisation
• Payments collection enhanced- Service user
  acceptance of charge during visit- Faster
  turnaround avoids large retrospective bills
• User friendliness
• Regular feedback from Project Team meetings
• Staff feedback
• User feedback

16
Its nearly perfect, but theres plenty more to do

• Links to Department of Work and Pensions
• Additional reporting developments
• Additional integration
• Performance measurement not fully developed in
  Cumbria
• Home working issues
• Bench marking
• Cumbria Review of Charging

17
Its nearly perfect and Parrot proof

• System is robust
• No printer problems
• No Tablet problems
• No service user issues over 65s like new
  technology
• And its Parrot -proof

18
Any questions

• Tell me what Ive missed

19
Contact details

• Sheila Don
• Head of Departmental Management Services
• Cumbria County Council
• Tel [phone] extn. 7133
• E-mail sheila.don_at_cumbriacc.gov.uk