Agenda item

1.  That the Committee considered the update and provided comments on the format of the graphs.

Mrs Burnham stated that there was nothing specific to highlight in this report but  that on page 91 the caseloads under appendix 1 (day to day tasks) for the member case levels were in new graphic form as opposed to just figures. This gives more of an idea of what work has been completed, added and the amount of work coming into the office as well as the historical levels and peaks in case levels.  It also shows the level of activity for the 3 Councils separately.

The trend shows that there has been an increase in the monthly number of tasks.  Some of this relates to the amount of work caused in the creation of new admitted bodies on transfers of staff, for example, when 400 staff was transferring to new admitted bodies (NEWydd and Aura). 

Mrs Burnham also noted that the were in excess of 700 unknown joiners notified due to the iConnect implementation which would lead to more work in the busy interim review period and this would have a knock on effect of other tasks. However, this would be expected to settle down and going onto iConnect is a very positive step going forward for the Fund in terms of data quality and meeting the statutory deadlines.

Mr Hibbert pointed out that on page 91 whether there was a scaling issue that the Fund needs to be looked at as it is a concentrated amount of information. Mrs Burnham confirmed the format of the graph would be reviewed and the underlying statistics are available in tabular format.

Mrs Burnham commented that on appendix 2 from page 94 onwards which showed the performance against KPIs, this was also done in a graphical format for clarity showing the three different areas of legal requirement, internal turnaround times and the overall experience i.e. end to end process.  TPR is interested in the legal requirements but it is important to look at this from different perspectives.  It covers 7 key process areas.

The Chairman asked if Mrs Burnham could explain the new graphs from appendix 2.

Mrs Burnham explained that on page 94 the thick line showed the % number of completed cases (right hand axis) and the bar chart showed the number of cases completed (left hand axis).  It was noted that some of the legal obligations were not being met and it was explained that the various initiatives (iConnect, Data Improvement plan etc.) are part of the plan to assist in meeting the targets but noting that 100% compliance in every area may not be possible as it relies on 3^rd parties supplying the data in a timely way e.g. employers. 

Mr Hibbert commented that for the graphical presentation it was clear to understand the ones where the Fund hadn’t achieved compliance.  However with the ones where the Fund has exceeded the legal requirement it was difficult to see e.g. why the thick line on the graph looks way above the bars on page 97.

This relates to the different axis.  Mrs Burnham said that whilst the lines are above the bars, it shows that in the first month overall 65% was achieved. She added that there will be explanatory notes to explain the graphs to the Committee in the future.

After further discussion the Chairman also asked if there could be explanatory notes for the graphs on this appendix. Mrs Burnham confirmed that she will arrange for this to be done. 

Page 101 highlighted statistics for the Member Self Service usage. On the coloured chart it demonstrates the amount of registered members split for each unitary, which shows 17.03% of potential members but this figure has now increased to 18%. It was emphasised that the amount of registered members is large in comparison as other schemes are around 10%-15%.  It was noted that it is incumbent on all to keep encouraging use of MSS through employers and Fund publications.

On the right hand side of the page it outlined the amount of people that have entered the website, with a total of 10,697 benefit projections having been calculated. The MSS has given people the opportunity to connect to the website and look at their benefits at different dates using different pay. Mrs Burnham also commented that there are 31,275 potential members and only 264 elected to receive paper copies of documents.  This is all very positive in terms of usage.

Cllr Llewelyn Jones mentioned that as a member of the pension fund as a Councillor he had not yet been able to enrol on to the MSS. Mrs Burnham replied by saying that it is a different scheme and that at the moment the benefit projections etc. don’t work for Councillors.  She explained it is unlikely the software would be developed for Councillors as it impacts very few members.

RESOLVED:

1.  That the Committee considered the update and provided comments on the format of the graphs.