The proposed local government reorganisation across England represents one of the most significant changes to local government structures in a generation. The creation of new unitary authorities will see existing councils merge, boundaries change and services transfer between organisations. For residents, these changes should eventually create simpler local government structures. Behind the scenes, Information Governance teams will face a challenging time. Will they be able to maintain business as usual whilst simultaneously helping to build entirely new authorities? Here’s some of the key challenges to prepare for…
Merging thousands of information requests
Councils could have up to 22 years of FOI, EIR and Subject Access Request (SAR) casework stored within case management systems depending upon their own retention schedules. All will be different. At the time of reorganisation, some will have ongoing investigations by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), internal reviews still in progress, and requests approaching statutory deadlines. The new authorities will inherit all of these responsibilities and records.
Information Governance teams will need to ensure that every live request is identified, transferred correctly and continues to be managed without interruption. Missing even a small number of cases could result in statutory deadlines being missed or complaints to the ICO.
Historic requests also provide valuable precedents. Previous decisions often help officers answer similar requests more consistently in the future. Preserving this knowledge during migration will therefore be essential. It’s also a great opportunity to weed and delete! Don’t transfer anything that you can lawfully delete under your retention and disposal policy; get rid of it!
Combining different case management systems
Few councils use identical software.
One authority may use a bought in case management system and another may still rely largely on Outlook and spreadsheets.
Decisions will need to be made about whether to:
- migrate all historical records into a single system;
- retain legacy systems for reference;
- build entirely new workflows; or
- temporarily operate multiple systems.
Each option presents risks around data quality, accessibility, audit trails and staff training.
Migration projects rarely proceed exactly as planned, meaning IG teams may need to work across several systems for months while maintaining normal service delivery.
Maintaining statutory deadlines
The law does not recognise organisational restructuring as an excuse for delay and FOI & EIR requests will still need to be responded to within the time compliance limits. Similarly, Subject Access Requests generally remain subject to that one-month deadline.
During transition, workloads are likely to increase considerably. Requests may arrive at both old and new authorities, confusion may arise over which organisation holds which information, and responsibilities for ongoing requests may change several times before the new structures become fully operational. Meeting statutory deadlines while systems, teams and reporting lines are changing will require careful planning and managers being on top of it all!
Staffing uncertainty
Perhaps the greatest risk lies not with technology, but with people. Reorganisation inevitably creates uncertainty and everyone is already worried about their job. Experienced Information Governance professionals may choose retirement, promotion elsewhere or redundancy before the new organisations are fully established. Others may spend considerable time supporting wider transformation programmes rather than processing requests.
The loss of experienced staff can have a disproportionate impact. Much of Information Governance depends upon things learnt on the job over years and organisational knowledge that is difficult to document fully. Experienced officers often know:
- where difficult information is held;
- who owns specialist records;
- how historical decisions were reached;
- previous ICO rulings affecting the authority;
- longstanding retention arrangements; and
- relationships with service departments.
Replacing this knowledge takes time.
Aligning different policies and processes
Although information law is consistent nationally, practical procedures often differ considerably. Every council develops its own ways of working. Authorities may have different:
- FOI handling procedures;
- SAR verification requirements;
- exemption application guidance;
- review processes;
- retention schedules;
- breach reporting arrangements;
- records management policies;
- publication schemes; and
- governance structures.
Before the new authority can operate efficiently, these differences must be reconciled. Simply choosing one council’s procedures is rarely a good thing to do. Instead, organisations have an opportunity to review best practice and design stronger, more consistent processes from the outset and build a new system together from the outset with staff buy-in.
Governance during transition
Determining accountability during reorganisation can be really hard! Questions may include:
- Which authority is responsible for responding to requests relating to transferred services?
- Who owns records created before the new authorities start?
- Which Senior Information Risk Owner (SIRO) has responsibility?
- Which Data Protection Officer advises on ongoing matters?
- Who signs off ICO responses?
- How are cross-authority data breaches managed?
Without clear governance arrangements, decisions can easily become delayed while responsibilities are clarified. Early agreement on governance structures will therefore be critical.
Data quality and records management
Successful Information Governance begins with good records. Mergers often expose years of inconsistent record keeping!
Authorities may have:
- duplicated information;
- inconsistent file structures;
- different naming conventions (or in many cases, NO naming conventions!);
- varying metadata standards;
- obsolete records;
- incomplete retention schedules; and
- different approaches to electronic document management.
Poor data quality and weak records management makes responding to FOI and Subject Access Requests significantly more difficult. Reorganisation can offer an ideal opportunity to improve records management rather than simply transferring existing problems into the new council. Start as you mean to go on with everyone doing things in a new improved way.
Increased request volumes
Major organisational change almost always generates additional information requests. Campaign groups, trade unions, councillors and members of the public naturally become interested in decisions affecting local services. Requests may seek information about:
- restructuring costs;
- redundancy payments;
- consultancy expenditure;
- asset transfers;
- staffing structures;
- governance arrangements;
- consultation responses;
- decision-making processes; and
- future service delivery.
Think now about proactive publication and what can be put out there to reduce those types of requests.
At the same time, residents may become confused about which authority now provides particular services, increasing correspondence and requiring additional advice from Information Governance teams. Can you create an online AI-powered form to help them submit requests to the correct place?
Staff training
Even experienced staff will require training. New policies, new software, new reporting lines and new governance arrangements all require explanation. Service departments will also need clear guidance. It will be information overload.
Many delays to FOI and SAR responses occur not within Information Governance teams themselves but because information is not identified or supplied promptly by service areas. Training therefore needs to extend beyond specialist teams and include managers, records owners and frontline staff across the organisation. Investment in training early in the transition is likely to reduce compliance risks later.
An opportunity as well as a challenge
Despite the scale of these challenges, local government reorganisation also presents a rare opportunity. Rather than simply merging existing practices, councils can redesign Information Governance from the ground up and aim for gold-plated!
Hopefully they can introduce modern case management systems, improve records management, simplify policies, strengthen governance, increase automation where appropriate and develop more consistent approaches across larger organisations.
The coming year is likely to be one of the busiest Information Governance professionals have ever experienced. Success will depend upon early planning, strong leadership and close collaboration between councils long before the new authorities formally come into existence.
For Information Governance teams, the challenge is significant—but so too is the opportunity to build modern, resilient governance arrangements that will serve their new authorities for many years to come.
