Dudley Council has reported a mixed set of results for the first quarter of the financial year, with officers confirming six key targets were missed, two exceeded and three within tolerance at a scrutiny committee meeting on 23 September.
FOI compliance and contact-centre performance highlighted
One of the most prominent shortfalls is the council’s handling of Freedom of Information (FOI) requests. Data presented to the Core Business Scrutiny Committee shows only 50.7% of FOI enquiries were answered within the statutory 20-day period during April — well below the council’s internal target of 90%.
- FOI responses on time: 50.7% (target 90%)
- Dudley Council Plus call answer rate: 66% (target 85%)
- Call volume rise: 31% increase year-on-year to 123,741 calls
Councillors voiced frustration at recurring explanations that high demand was to blame. Cllr Quasim Mugal told the committee this was not a one-off: he said it was the third time the issue had been raised during his time on the committee and that repeated assurances about demand were insufficient.
"I wouldn’t mind if this was the first time that this has been raised but it is now the third time time in this committee since I’ve been here and it’s getting worse," Cllr Quasim Mugal said.
Operational pressures cited but councillors demand solutions
Officers explained the spike in phone calls was partly driven by the introduction of new waste collection services coinciding with a traditionally busy period for customer contact. As a result, staff resources were reallocated to handle pressing duties and the Dudley Council Plus Service answered 66% of calls, short of the 85% target.
Cllr Phil Atkins criticised what he described as repetitive explanations about demand and capacity, saying the council ought to be better at forecasting. He drew a parallel with his NHS experience, saying it was possible to predict demand in other public services and implying the council should plan more effectively around known changes such as bin rollouts and seasonal peaks.
Other targets missed and broader implications
Beyond FOI and call handling, the report shows additional missed targets including sickness as a percentage of full-time employee days, subject access request compliance, and the percentage of corporate complaints receiving a full response within the specified timescale. Two performance measures were exceeded and three were within tolerance, but councillors focused on the areas where statutory or widely expected standards were not met.
| Performance area | Result | Target |
|---|---|---|
| Freedom of Information responses on time | 50.7% | 90% |
| Dudley Council Plus calls answered | 66% | 85% |
| Call volume (quarter) | 123,741 (up 31%) | — |
Officers attributed some of the pressures to changing operational priorities and increased demand. However, councillors pressed for concrete steps to improve compliance and customer service rather than repeated assurances about demand. The committee heard calls for targeted resourcing and better forecasting, particularly ahead of planned service changes and predictable seasonal peaks.
What this means for residents
For Dudley residents, the shortfalls could mean longer waits for formal information under the FOI regime, delays in responses to subject access requests, and longer telephone queues when trying to contact council services. Given the council’s own targets are considerably higher, the report raises questions about whether current staffing and processes are sufficient to meet statutory obligations and public expectations.
Councillors are likely to seek further detail on remedial plans at future meetings. For now, the figures presented at scrutiny underscore a council grappling with operational strain while being urged by elected members to move from explanation to measurable improvement.
