Agenda item

To consider an annual report in respect of performance by the Council’s Bereavement Services provider and a five-year plan of maintenance.

Consideration was given to an annual report in respect of Bereavement Services. This report was presented by the Cabinet Member for Customer Services and Finance and by the Head of Legal Services. Also presenting were the Business Leader and Operational Director who were in attendance as representatives of the contractor, Dignity Funerals, Ltd. The Cabinet Member noted recent penalties to the contractor associated with breaches of the contract. Some areas of performance had been higher than the target. Religious awareness training had also been delivered, and faith leaders had been enlisted as active participants in discussions of service provision going forward.

The Operational Director acknowledged that Dignity had not fully delivered on the contract. A substantial investment programme which had invested well over a million pounds was described. The activities had included works such as road surfacing to improve safety and accessibility of cemetery sites. It was felt that these efforts had changed the quality of service delivery vastly. These changes should have been done many years ago to improve facilities and access to sites at Maltby, Greasbrough Lane, and East Herringthorpe. The Operational Director acknowledged years of quality not being up to standard and noted the need for more burial space. This was being addressed through the planning process. The Business Leader who runs the day-to-day operations noted several areas of service improvements, throughout the crematoriums. The Service provider had given consideration to re-evaluating prices for burial fees. Late burial times had been delivered, working alongside Glendale to ensure religious requirements for a late burial throughout the week can be achieved up to 6.30pm with no additional costs. Improvements had also been made to lighting and tarmac paths to allow burials to take place safely during the winter months.

The Service provider had also undertaken consultation with the community and with “Friends of” groups on the running of service functions. Comments were welcomed, and feedback was thoughtfully and seriously considered. The Service provider had undertaken events with the community, recognising multiple faiths in the community as well. A natural burial ground at Rawmarsh had also been established. The Business Leader welcomed a further opportunity to speak in depth about this work on another occasion. A section in Greasbrough Lane was being replanted with birch trees, Glendale was preparing a new burial ground area for planting with meadow plants. Graves were planned which would be dug by hand, and red robin shrubs were being planted. The addition of a Friends Group Room at East Herringthorpe had also been established for use by all cemetery site users. Electricity was being connected to the room, after which an appointment could be booked to have the room available for general activities. A performance management framework was in place with Glendale, involving cemetery supervisor walks to inspect and create a report that is monitored with Glendale in regular meetings using a performance framework to improve performance. Tarmac paths had been installed towards the end of Maltby Cemetery, with further work being finished at East Herringthorpe. Additional taps and rubbish bins had been provided within the cemeteries, as the Service provider were continuing to improve.

In discussion, the Chair noted the production of the five-year plan, which had been requested as part of the September 2021 scrutiny discussion of the previous year’s report. The progress on green burials was also noted and the investments that had been made by the provider in improving service delivery.

Clarification was requested regarding the timescale of delivery of the Muslim burial development. The response from the Service Provider noted that the contactors were on the site now. The Provider had hoped the works would be done before getting into any adverse winter weather conditions. There had been equipment stolen from the site, and contractors doing the works were the same as those working at the Maltby site.

Clarification was also requested regarding refunds of certain burial fees. With regards to the weekend burial fee, the response from Service Providers noted that several people had been refunded. Information currently on the Council website directed people who had been charged the fee to contact Dignity. The Service Providers had been working with members of the public to relay relevant information to the community.

Members noted the five-year plan was positive, but it had been observed that the plans were not very reader friendly to cemetery site visitors. It was noted that without a cemetery map, it can be hard to understand the content of the five-year plan. A publicly displayed plan and map was proposed along with a follow-up seminar for all members of all wards to facilitate a more detailed discussion.

Members requested assurances that the Service Providers were responding to reports of anti-social behaviour, vandalism, and thefts from graves. It had been noted that the five-year plan included assessment of feasibility of CCTV installation by December 2023. The response from Service providers noted that three sites experienced vandalism and theft especially during the winter season. The Service had been discussing the provision of extra security with the relevant security officers. One of the quotes received had proposed the installation of a big pole in the middle of the cemetery for the purpose of providing electricity for the CCTV. This was felt to be unsightly, but temporary measures had been explored in order to ensure security was provided at the site.

Members requested more information around the reasons for the historic underinvestment. The response from the Operational Director noted that there had not been enough commitment to the contract previously. Although it was difficult to comment on history of operations before the current directors were in leadership. It was noted that the directors were all different now.

Members requested assurances regarding drainage surveys which were projected to take two years to complete. The response from the Operational Director noted that after clearing the drains, some of which were over a century old, the issue had not resolved, which suggested that some of the drains have collapsed. Work to address this was on the five-year plan and progress would be monitored.

Members requested clarification of the agreed method and standards which were referenced in the performance rating of red, amber and green, with four performance measures in red. The response from the Operational Director noted that these measures reflected the desired level of maintenance, including how the landscape is maintained, and the desire for performance to improve in these areas. There was still work to do to improve performance in these areas. Dignity’s goal as a national business was supporting people who had lost family and friends to be able to remember them in a way that was positive. 

Members requested clarification around the measures within the five-year plan that seemed basic, such as additional seating benches at six of the eight cemetery sites. The response from the Operational Director noted that whether these were replacement or new benches was not known, but the approach to the five-year plan included as much detail as possible so that the full scope of improvement could be monitored.

Members noted the heart of the issues was equalities and the importance of meeting the needs of a diverse community. It was noted that improvements had resulted from the involvement of community members. Clarification was requested regarding the representation of equalities on the initial equality screening, and the amber rating for equality and diversity as a key performance indicator. The response from the Head of Legal Services noted that the role of the Council was limited to contract management. The operational side was for Dignity to complete. This was one of the contract performance issues that the Council’s Bereavement Services team had raised with Dignity to seek improved performance. Dignity was still working on this area. There were equalities issues and the Council’s Bereavement Services team does raise these with Dignity as part of the performance management framework. For the Service completing the initial equalities screening form, the report was about the performance of Dignity. Dignity had commissioned their own report as to the offer and the Council had commissioned an independent report to ensure that in the performance of the contract, equalities objectives are being met. It was noted that the contract with Dignity was one of the Council’s 350 contracts for services to be provided which the Council has outsourced. The Council expects providers to then meet equalities requirements as they have conduct of the operational day to day matters.

Members expressed interest in further information regarding consultation with neighbourhood residents who live near the sites where there are late burials around any impact to the wider community. The response from the Service providers noted that Dignity respect staff and expect them to be treated with respect. Dignity worked with the community and residents as well.

The Chair noted that many sites do not receive the benefit of support from Dignity; therefore, the Friends groups played an important role in fundraising and in funding applications for additional work. It was felt that this engagement work was key.

Resolved:-

1.    That the report be noted.

2.    That the feedback from Members be noted.

3.    That an all-member session be convened to facilitate a further dialogue around improvements to Service delivery in the five-year plan.

4.    That Bereavement Services and Dignity work together to better demonstrate how equalities duties are adhered to in contract management and operational delivery.