Agenda item

This report and accompanying Appendix brings to the attention of the Committee the response activity undertaken by the Council during the response phase of the COVID-19 pandemic as well as some of the lessons and learning as a consequence.

Carolyn Downs, Chief Executive, and Daryl Jooste, Civil Contingencies Manager, presented a report on the activity undertaken by the Council during the response phase of the COVID19 pandemic as well as some of the lessons learned as a consequence. The Committee was then invited to raise questions on the report, which focused on a number of key areas as highlighted below:

·       In response to a question from the Committee, it was noted that the Council was in a strong position to respond should an emergency incident take place at the same time as a second wave of COVID19 cases. During the crisis the Council had maintained critical services and, for emergency planning, this had been its ability to respond to an emergency (which had been maintained without disruption).

·       It was noted that during the crisis, the Council had been encouraged by central government to do whatever was needed in terms of support for its residents. While it had been given a considerable amount of money from central government, it was likely that there would still be a gap in funding at the end of the crisis. As such, if there was to be a second wave of COVID19 cases, the Council would need to consider the financial implications of its response more carefully.

·       Councils across London were considering charging care homes for personal protective equipment (PPE) supplies in the event of a second wave of COVID19 cases. It was noted that had the Council relied on PPE from the London Resilience Forum it would not have been able to protect care homes as effectively as it did. However, the Council would need to consider the financial implications of supplying PPE cost-free to care homes. This was under discussion at central government level as well as sub-regional level and the Council’s current inclination was to continue to provide PPE cost-free, excluding private care homes.

·       It was noted that the Council had worked well with its sub-regional local government partners during the crisis. For example, the success of its procurement partnerships was highlighted by North West London’s provision of PPE to the whole of London over the past two months. The Council had also worked well with its health partners, particularly around social care. A monthly meeting had been set up between health and local government leaders and there was a possibility that a similar arrangement could continue post-crisis. The Council had also worked well with a range of other partners, including the police and community and voluntary organisations, and it hoped that these close relationships would continue to be developed post-crisis.

·       The Council had worked hard to support its workforce during the crisis. Its IT infrastructure had coped with the additional pressure and employees had been able to work at home during the crisis with little effect on operations. It was noted that the Council could have been more accommodating in responding to staff requests for additional equipment to work at home at the beginning of the crisis, although this was now being provided. Mental health considerations were a high priority, and the Council had facilitated staff webinars and surveys to gauge how employees were responding to working from home and how they feel they can be supported to do so.

·       In response to a question from the Committee, it was noted that the Council was looking at ways it would analyse the data received about its residents from central government and support those identified as in need. For example, the Poverty Commission report was to be published in the coming weeks and the Council felt confident it could provide meaningful support to its residents in response to its findings.

·       The Committee suggested that the lessons the Council had learned from its response to the crisis could be shared with partner organisations in order to develop unified approaches to particular issues.

·       The Council had undertaken a resident survey to gauge how residents found its response to the crisis and the support offered. The volume of responses had been high and its finding would be shared in due course.

·       It was noted that the Council had largely reverted services back to pre-crisis levels. Should there be a second wave of COVID19 cases, it would know what to expect and should be able to get back to this level of service quicker than the first time. The Council appreciated that engagement with members had been affected and their importance to the decision-making process. Having said this, it was keen to build on some of the strengths of the streamlined decision-making process used during the crisis, and would potentially look to engage with members about how it could take this forward.

·       In response to a question from the Committee it was noted that the financial situation of the Council should be clearer by September, at which point members would be informed. The resilience of the organisation was another important consideration for the Corporate Management Team, as many officers had been working particularly hard during the crisis.

·       It was noted that while the data received from central government regarding disparities between those affected by COVID19 across the borough, the Council was working with its health partners to understand why this had been the case. It recognised that it needed to reach out to black and minority ethnic (BAME) residents in particular, especially in regard to testing.

The Committee then expressed its thanks to all the officers involved in supporting residents throughout the pandemic.

Resolved

To note the contents of the Lessons Learned from the COVID-19 Response report.