Harrow see also Harrow Audit  Byron Hall  &  Harrow and Office of Fair Trading

Council to Investigate LC   Hatch End H&S Report   Leisure Minutes    Report Discounts Shocking User & Staff Views

Council One of the Worst in London   by Tristan Kirk   7.2.08   Harrow Times   Reproduced in Full  http://www.harrowtimes.co.uk/search/display.var.2026573.0.council_one_of_the_worst_in_london.php 

Harrow Council is one of the worst in London according to an Audit Commission report published today. The commission's annual Comprehensive Performance Assessment has awarded the council two out of a possible five stars. The report highlights the council's slow rate of service improvement, particularly in adult social care and street cleaning. It also criticises the authority's management of council housing and low public satisfaction with recycling services. However the council is praised for its delivery of housing benefits and improvements to its services for children and young people.

The rating of two stars, is one of the lowest in London and places the council the bottom 25 per cent of authorities the country. While three quarters of councils in England and Wales are improving well or strongly, Harrow has dropped down the scale, from improving well in 2005, to improving adequately in 2007.

Councillor Chris Mote, leader of the council, blamed the low rating on "significant financial challenges", but promised to listen to what people want. He said: "We know that we have a long way to go but there are strong signs of real improvement."

Michael O'Higgins, chairman of the Audit Commission, offered the council advice how it can emulate Hackney Council, which has bounced from one to three stars during the year.  He said: "Where there are challenges, we know the characteristics they need to copy from the highest performers, strong leadership, a skilled management team willing to take tough decisions and an ongoing focus on poorly performing services."

LC Supported Plans to Rebuild Centre Attacked

This year's Audit Commission report is not yet available on the web but it will be interesting to see what it has to say about leisure services. Last year's report (item below)  found much dissatisfaction. Despite struggling to manage the basics Harrow Council floated grandiose plans to rebuild its major leisure centre with a  smaller pool and other loss of facilities. After LC's Chief Executive spoke in favour of the plans they were attacked by the local Sports Council and Sport England, as well as opposition from many residents. Follow links below for local press coverage of LC support and the arguments against. PB 

 http://www.harrowtimes.co.uk/search/display.var.2022888.0.sports_council_criticises_leisure_plans.php    http://www.harrowtimes.co.uk/search/display.var.2022933.0.sport_england_slams_leisure_project.php

 http://www.harrowtimes.co.uk/search/display.var.2011605.0.proud_to_work_with_council.php    http://www.harrowtimes.co.uk/search/display.var.1987463.0.leisure_boss_backs_council_plans.php 

Audit Commission Slams Harrow Council March 2007 http://www.audit-commission.gov.uk/Products/CPA-CORP-ASSESS-REPORT/9E485802-E211-48A0-9080-7E9C19C5A9E3/LBHarrowCorporateAssessment13Mar07REP.pdf 


The Audit Commission Corporate Assessment Report for Harrow gave Council an overall rating of 2 and an even lower score for capacity to improve. 

"Latest national surveys indicate comparatively low satisfaction with the Council’s parks and open spaces as well as most leisure facilities except for libraries. The Council’s own survey this year indicated residents were more positive about access to nature and parks but more critical of sports and leisure facilities."

Council Leader Starts to Investigate LC Contract

While Vale Farm is the nearest pool to my home I also use occasionally Harrow Leisure Centre and have made complaints about it's dire cleaning, copious litter in the pool, and standards of lifeguarding. The Audit Commission in July 2005  identified that there was a problem with Harrow's renewed contract with LC. But over a year after the inspection (March 2005) little has been resolved and the Leader of the Council replied to me on 16 June 2006 saying:

 "I  too, have concerns with Leisure Connection Limited., and have instituted an investigation into what first of all, can be done about getting the complaints dealt with and secondly, what can be done with the contract that we have with that Company.

At the moment, I hope that over the next month or two, the standards will have improved and if they haven't, I will be seriously looking at what i can do to possibly change contracts."

Getting details of LC's performance from Council officers under the Freedom of Information Act has not been straightforward. Rather than talk to me as requested about what records there were, in April 2006 I was asked in writing for £3180 upfront.  After much correspondence, this was reduced to a mere £960!

Among the reasons given for such costs are the problems caused by the Leisure Service being shunted around different council departments over the last few years, so that more than one set of files has to be searched. It seems to me that if a council can't readily access data relating to management of a contract, inherent  problems with that contract are likely to be exacerbated. In any case, no reports relating to the performance of LC have been presented to the Council Cabinet between November 2005 and the end of May 2006. 

As well as the Audit inspection the Council engaged five consultants in 2005 including MB Associates (to report on the condition of Harrow Leisure Centre), ICA Leisure (to review the centre management partnership contract), and Capita Symons (advisor re. transfer of three leisure centres from the Council to LC),  Claydon Associates (design & build), and Bell Associates (architects). A "Cultural Strategy" was drafted in September 2005 but for all the words and meetings cleaning problems have persisted. 

Some documents have been received and what  has been sent adds to my concern about the performance of LC and  the way the council got into bed with this company.  PB

Health & Safety Report on Hatch End Swimming Pool August - December 2005

While some issues are listed below the full report is available on LCW as an 11-page Word document. This is as received apart from replacing names of staff with a single initial and highlighting some of the issues. 

While the report is dated August it  has been used to record progress on issues up until December 2005.  The Council also has not done all it should but here are  some of the items  that appear to be the responsibility of LC. As well as the sheer quantity of safety matters that needed to be brought to the attention of LC  there are worrying delays in tackling some of  them. A further review was due in February but LCW has not had sight of this. 

Rated by the inspection "Critical importance and immediate action is needed to improve the health and safety performance to an acceptable level"

Entrance - Fire action notice not completed. Completed Nov 05

Reception - The small fridge is very dirty and has not been cleaned for some time. Completed December 05

Swimming Pool  - The twin fire door ‘push-bar lock’ is not closing at the bottom.  Still to be done

Swimming Pool - The alarm cable trunking pipe is rusted. Completed Dec 05

The Pool water looked very dirty with dead algae. There has been no pool hoover available on site for over one year.  The manager borrows a pool hoover from Harrow Leisure Centre site and is returned back after two days. Still to be done

Swimming Pool - The water hosepipe was lying on the floor creating a trip hazard  Still to be done

Disabled Changing & Fist Aid Room - The floor lino at the external entrance door has uplifted from the floor creating a trip hazard.  Still to be done

Plant room - The first aid box was on the floor.  Some of the contents in the first aid box were out of date - Still to be completed

Plant Room There is a mains electrical fuse box where the RCD fuse is being secured by red tape.  Still to be completed

The plant room door was not locked during my visit.  Children can injure themselves if they wander around into the plant room. Completed Dec 05

Rated as "Action is needed within an agreed timescale to improve health and safety performance to an acceptable level."

The building in general needs cleaning at high levels. There is no cleaning schedule/programme of deep clean to include scrubbing at regular intervals. Completed Dec 05

All the changing room floors are mopped everyday.  However, they are not deep cleaned or scrubbed at regular intervals.  This has resulted in dark staining / patches appearing in several areas in all changing rooms.  This gives an impression to the customers that the floors are never cleaned. Still to be done

Staff members have not received any health and safety training. Completed Dec 05

Reception - There were no paper towels available to dry hands after washing. Still to be done

Male Changing Room - Some floor tiles have holes in the tiles.  The holes look very dirty and are a hygiene risk. Still to be done

Disabled Changing & First Aid Room - The toilet has not been cleaned for some time. Completed Aug 05

Disabled Changing & First Aid Room - There were no paper towel holder or paper towels. Still to be done

Harrow Leisure Meeting Minutes

LCW has received notes and minutes of 17 meetings between November 04 and April 06. Seven of these were "Contract" meetings between Officers and LC staff but here were also two High Level Meetings". While they cover many matters, only two record to specific customer complaints. One reference is in October 2005, involving "failure of complaints system". The other is in December 2005, concerning "queue jumping". Yet it seems complaints were discussed at Contract meetings but not recorded as the December meeting agreed to change the agenda from "Complaints" to "Comments / Complaints". This and the difficulty accessing documents  leaves me with a strong suspicion that someone is trying to hide something

The brevity of the Contract meeting notes do not support quality working. They do not specify the date of the previous meeting so it is harder to understand to what extent action points were followed up. The notes wouldn't be of much use to a new person having to take over for the council. There are also gaps between meetings (or missing notes). The longest gap is between June and October 2005. 

The minutes of the High Level meeting on 3.5.05 record that "The Council is concerned about how Leisure Connection communicates and consults, particularly with customers on on pricing charges, complaints and general improvements in customer service."

 The Contract Meeting notes for 12.5.05 show that LC's performance reports for March, April and May were still outstanding and this was also an issue noted on 26.1.06. 

The Contract  notes for 6.10.05 list under Maintenance  "Numerous items outstanding" including fire doors, lights, and cubicle locks. Referring to a pool hoover they state, "Following numerous complaints and problems with algae at Hatch End Pool  LC to purchase vac." The notes for the15.12.05 meeting also refer to "Numerous items still outstanding as previously reported." 

A special "Election Meeting" was held on 21/2/03 to prepare leisure centres for the local polls in May. Dynorod were to visit Byron hall 2 to 3 days before to clean all drains and acquisition of hand dryers was to be expedited "as a number of hand dryers" are not working. LC would "provide toilet attendants to check and clean and stock toilets every hour". Ceiling tiles were to be purchased and fitted, repairs made to bollards,  paving an drains. "3 managers will be on site for each hall and a spare floating manager. 4 cleaners to be provided, 2 for each hall." Plus up to 18 security staff and a service for a Stannah chairlift! ! And the notes of the Contract meeting on 2.3.06 add that "lights around the building to be checked, especially the car park, to ensure they are ready for the elections."  

What this says to me is that the resources can be found and even lavished when more than the usual leisure centre users are expected. 

Audit Commission Discounts Views of Users and Staff

The High Level Meeting in May 2005 mentions an email from the Audit Commission Inspectors "...regarding the performance of the Users Focus Group and Leisure Connection Staff Meeting.  The auditors were shocked at the feedback received at the interviews and decided to take a view that this was not a fair and un-biased representation and to disregard all the comments made."  I run focus groups and train people to run them. The groups I have run include ones full of  people hostile to the commissioning organisation but I have never simply dismissed their claims in the way suggested here. I have made an FOI request to the Audit Commission to better understand their decision. [Update]

One of the few references to cleaning in the minutes received  is in the February 2005 meeting , under "CPA Cultural Inspection" (Audit Commission) due 7 to 11 March. "LBH (the Council) to undertake an external deep clean. ... LC to un keep site [litter pick] ".  (sic). 

Additional activities linked to the inspection mentioned in these minutes were:

Shame that it takes an inspection to provoke managers and the council into doing what they clearly recognise is needed.