Agenda item

This report provides an update on the performance of the Blue Badge service following its previous report to Overview & Scrutiny Board on 12 May 2025.

The Portfolio Holder for Customer Communication and Culture presented a report, a copy of which had been circulated to each Member and a copy of which appears as Appendix 'A' to these minutes in the Minute Book. The report provided an update on the performance of the Blue Badge service following its previous report to Overview & Scrutiny Board on 12 May 2025. The Portfolio Holder informed the Board that the scrutiny request arose from information which was shared with all Councillors in recent delays in the Blue Badge service which in September saw 600 people waiting over 12 weeks for their application to be processed, although 2000 were processed within 12 weeks. It was noted that this had improved by the point of the meeting but new applications were still taking approximately 13 weeks. The Board had received regular updates on the Blue Badge Service, and it was noted that at the time of the last report to the Board the Service had improved significantly. A number of points were discussed by the Board including:

·      Identified processing issues - The process was described as outdated and inefficient, involving multiple systems and some manual handling of documents. Supporting documents needed to be moved individually from an email inbox and linked with the correct application which was time consuming. 65% of applications arrive without the correct evidence, causing delays.

·      Immediate Actions taken - Staff from other areas had been temporarily redeployed to reduce the backlog and weekly performance monitoring was introduced. A “not for reassessment” flag has been introduced for applicants with permanent conditions, which would reduce repeated checks but this would take time as renewals and new applications came in  - 127 cases had been flagged to date.

·      Longer Term Actions - A  redesign of the process was underway, moving applications from the government portal to the Council’s CRM system. This will allow better guidance for applicants such as a checklist for documents, automated checks, and dashboards for monitoring.

·      Staffing: The processing team was small and shortages were highlighted as a major issue. Officers explained that budget pressures prevent hiring more staff and therefore efficiency improvements were the immediate focus. Councillors asked about peaks and troughs in demand and whether cross-training staff could help resilience.

·      Supporting Evidence requests - Questions were raised about why consultant evidence was sometimes required for renewals; officers clarified that requirements vary by case and guidance would be improved.

·      Refusals – Members asked about the intensive process and the actual number of applications which were refused. It was noted that 1 percent of applications had been refused in the past week (Please note that this figure was given incorrectly as an annual amount. The annual amount of rate of refusals was actually 13-14 percent).

RESOVLED: The Board agreed to review progress in 12 months to assess the impact of the new system and whether further resource is needed. The Portfolio Holder confirmed that he was working with the LGA regarding the difference in the chare and processing cost and hoped to be able to report back progress on this in the near future.