Challenge 8.1: How can technology help to quickly identify and prioritise support for people in the most vulnerable situations, starting with those having energy problems?

Key information for applicants

Please note: you must apply for this Challenge via Public Contracts Scotland

Launch date
Monday 31 October 2022

Closing date
Midday, Monday 28 November

Exploration Stage interviews
Monday 12 December 2022

Exploration Stage
9 to 27 January 2023

Accelerator interviews
Tuesday 31 January 2023

Accelerator Stage
27 February to 9 June 2023

Maximum contract value
£650,000

What does this mean?

Q&A session

A live Q&A session was held with the Challenge Sponsor team on on Monday 7th November 2022 at 11:00 am. A recording of the session can be viewed here:

Why does this Challenge need to be solved?

Being without energy doesn’t just mean lacking warmth or power, it leads to other implications for the consumer’s health and well-being, which impacts on wider public services. This presents a complex case load for our service to deal with. We need a tool developed that allows us to quickly and reliably detect those consumers who have the most pressing needs. A successful product will help identify the consumer most at risk of harm, allowing targeted support to help those in need and the caseworkers who support them 

The Extra Help Unit (EHU) was created in 2008 to help people resolve difficulties with their energy supplier and is a statutory service required by the Consumer, Estate Agents and Redress Act 2007 (CEAR). Our team of dedicated caseworkers has been managed by Citizens Advice Scotland since 2014. Demand for EHU services has increased year on year since its establishment in 2008. In 21/22, the Unit received over 15,000 complaints and 2000 enquiries. We have also moved from a traditional office way of working to a remote/hybrid environment post pandemic. For more information about the EHU, please visit https://www.cas.org.uk/about-us/consumer-advice/extra-help-unit.

A significant safeguarding concern with remote/hybrid working is that due to high volume service delivery, consumers’ and employees’ needs don’t always get the attention they need at the right time.  Flexible work is not just about working preferences, it is about recognising that people don’t have comparable circumstances. We need to enable staff to work differently in recognition of this change while maintaining a safe and resilient working environment.

As well as assisting vulnerable individuals and micro-businesses with energy issues, we also work hard to improve standards within the energy industry. The EHU is a referral only, second tier service, so it's our referral partners that identify and determine who is vulnerable and what cases are sent to the Unit. Citizens Advice Consumer Service (CACS) is the main referral partner for consumers based in England and Wales, and Advice Direct Scotland being the key partner for Scotland.  Other referral partners also include Ofgem and Ombudsman Services: Energy (OS:E). 

The CEAR act states that ‘A consumer shall be regarded as vulnerable where it is not reasonable to expect that person to be able to pursue their own complaint because of: the personal circumstances of that particular consumer; or the urgency / criticality of the situation and the inability of the consumer to be able to handle the issue within the timeframe in which he/she needs to act; or the complexity of the problem for that particular consumer or any combination of such factors.’

With such a broad definition of vulnerability, the EHU has a real and ongoing prioritisation challenge for service delivery.

Many of our processes rely on the human effort to determine vulnerability. This includes our referral partners correctly identifying and labelling cases with high vulnerability, and our caseworkers prioritising and managing their caseloads in line with who needs urgent help. This creates several safeguarding challenges. For example, we can be mid-call transferred Priority cases where a consumer is on the verge of disconnection, so the EHU can act immediately to provide support. The referral partner and the EHU caseworker are both responsible for identifying the risk of disconnection and responding appropriately. Similarly, during any telephone conversations or written communications, we rely on caseworkers identifying safeguarding concerns. This includes a wide range of situations, such as suicidal thoughts, someone in mental health crisis who needs support, or children and families at risk of harm due to their electric being switched off.

When consumers email us while a case is being investigated the email may not be picked up for several days, and any concerning detail i.e., feeling suicidal could potentially be missed, or responded to slower than we would like.  Additionally, our referral partners send us cases via a portal. We rely on them to mark any cases with safeguarding as ‘urgent’. If they have failed to categorise these cases correctly, there is a chance the EHU will not review these cases in the required timescale. It would be beneficial to build on the safety net we have in place around processes to make it watertight.  The combination of human identification and technological solution would ensure that our service has a strong and robust safeguarding process, protecting consumers and protecting the well-being and integrity of staff delivering the service.  

As an employer, the mental health and wellbeing of our colleagues and partners is as important. We safeguard our employees as well as our consumers. In terms of mental health of staff, when they have high caseloads, they cannot scrutinise every email or note that is updated on a case instantly. This can cause stress in itself, not knowing what's in the contents and whether there is something there that is urgent.  If they do happen to read an email that mentions suicide for example, and they read this two  weeks after the consumer has sent it, this immediately creates worry for the staff member that something has happened to the consumer and that they failed to act in an appropriate timescale - even when they have met the expected timescales for caseload management. This area of work is more challenging in the remote working environment, as staff cannot be observed when they are having a difficult call, meaning a Team Manager cannot overhear and intervene/offer support. The current systems rely on the caseworker flagging the safeguarding concern. We want to use technology to rebalance that responsibility on caseworkers to improve outcomes for our consumers but also enable us to support staff better and protect their well-being.

Demand for EHU services continues to be at an all-time high and it remains a very challenging environment. Staff have to cope with a high volume of cases coupled with the upsetting nature of calls, which are often linked to financial hardship, physical and mental vulnerabilities. The response to this challenge should radically change this safeguarding context.

 In a high priority case, what is unsaid or said in a specific way can be easily missed. We are a high-volume service, it’s easy for fatigue or burn out to occur, and for information to be mis-interpreted or overlooked.

Some of our data is highly unstructured given the vulnerabilities of consumers, for example, long emails with often high levels of irrelevant information.  This creates a situation where key markers/flags can be missed in a syntax manner, causing harm for consumers but also colleagues who understandably missed these key pointers to prevent and intervene early.

How will we know the Challenge has been solved?

We would see an increased number of safeguarding concerns being flagged across the unit, assuring us that we are not missing any concerns due to human error. This would include concerns raised through any form of communication, including telephone, email and information from our referral partners. We would have a greater understanding of the impact on current staff and be able to target support quickly for those team members who are handling a higher proportion of difficult cases.  We would see a decrease in the number of referrals needed to social services and emergency services, as we will be able to give support to consumers at the point they most need it.  

Employee well-being reported in our CAS organisation wide “Pulse” survey will have improved for the EHU, and staff will feel confident that they will not face unexpected safeguarding concerns.

The upset caused to consumers and colleagues in working in such a high volume and challenging work context should reduce, with less impact on physical and mental health of colleagues and consumers.

Consumer and employees feel emotionally and psychologically prepared for post-pandemic style of service delivery.

We would have more conversations and learnings between ourselves and referral partners, to enable informed decisions about the range of pathways for addressing risk and/or support needs, rather than simply defaulting to raising a safeguarding concern or missing situations involving risk that require a response of some kind early in the process.

The solution delivered will have better protected a colleague and/or citizen’s health, wellbeing and human rights; enabling them to live free from harm. This is an integral part of providing a high-quality service in the EHU but may well be beneficial for many other statutory and non-statutory services. 

Ultimately - like enforced remote working during the pandemic - hybrid working and safeguarding is going to be an ongoing research and development project. However, we would want a solution where flexibility, consultation and agile sprint process development can be progressed by technology recognising individual needs, rather than blanket policies.

Reduction in the number of “missed/delayed” reporting of safeguarding, broadly identified as where there is reasonable cause to suspect that a consumer who has more immediate care and support needs than the rest of the consumer workload has been mis-prioritised.

Employees feel as supported in a remote/hybrid working environment as per Pandemic in office working practices to identify potential harm, know what action to take and are clear about how, when and who to report to.

Who are the end users of the solution likely to be?

People or consumers of energy supplier services but also wider statutory and non-statutory services, including our own wider volunteer-led Bureaux network across Scotland across a range of advice, support and care sectors.

The resulting technology solution would be for use across all organisations. The aim is to support frontline practice in all organisations by providing a consistent framework for decision-making. This would involve using technology to enable a wide variety of organisations to have a common and consistent understanding of the circumstances that should lead to raising or prioritising a safeguarding concern, from implied information or correlation of a number of non-expressed harm factors or statements.  

In a service specific context:

• EHU caseworkers including those working from home or hybrid working from our office and their home, in addition to their managers and wider organisation colleagues.

• EHU performance leads that manage relationships with energy providers

• EHU quality assurance and administrative staff, including executive management for performance, compliance and reporting purposes.

Has the Challenge Sponsor attempted to solve this problem before?

No.

Are there any interdependencies or blockers?

We use MS Dynamics 365 database and need to consider this, including future developments of this system that will connect with energy suppliers’ systems which are not yet know. We would want a system that can integrate around any written or spoken word forms of data for example, live calls and call recording. It is important to note our case recording system (D365), our live calls (Avaya) and our call recording system (XIMA Chronicall) are all independent. A perfect solution would interact with these different systems pulling the information into one place.

Is this part of an existing service?

No, however any solution will have to be integrated with data and functionality we use in MS Dynamics 365.

Any technologies or features the Challenge Sponsor wishes to explore or avoid?

We are willing to explore the potential of MS Dynamics 365 database including future developments of this system to complement a solution to this challenge as well as additional potential standalone solutions. For instance, for text or voice based analysis of speech/wider context of words in terms of Natural Language Processing. We also wish to consider other technologies that are able to work with large volumes of biometric/textual data.

What is the commercial opportunity beyond a CivTech contract?

Safeguarding is of interest to many public, private and voluntary sector services. Organisations that support or manage services with vulnerable people will be particularly interested in this challenge and therefore solutions to this challenge.

For example, the recent Scottish Government consultation on safeguarding for Social Security Scotland where its key objective was to safeguard and protect individuals who interact with Social Security Scotland where it becomes apparent they may be at risk of harm https://www.gov.scot/publications/safeguarding-data-sharing-consultation/

However, there might also be other services serving for example care support needs through the need national care service or local adult care/young people/children support service requirements which could be helped by the solution developed.

Across all employers, there is a clear legal responsibility to assess and reduce any risks of work-related stress from home working. The Health and Safety at Work Act 1974 requires measures to be taken to reduce the risk from any form of working, including providing support from managers/supervisors, facilitating regular contact with colleagues, monitoring workloads and having good communication mechanisms in place for home/hybrid workers. We believe the technology solution delivered by this challenge could have a significant impact on delivering this wider societal impact for all those in work and enable better service delivery to consumers.

The greater freedom of hybrid working can mean greater time to focus on health and wellbeing for employees and encourage healthier behaviours (physically and mentally) Indeed a number of employees report improved mental health as a key benefit of hybrid working. However, hybrid work can carry its own risks to employee health and wellbeing and on-board impact on service users. Working remotely means that managers are not as easily able to pick up on the warning signs of colleagues who may be working on a case where there are safeguarding concerns. This carries a risk of ‘misses’ in terms of preventative or early intervention actions for the consumers and the caseworker.

Who are the stakeholders?

• EHU caseworker teams and managers – to be confirmed

• CAS IT staff

• CAS Operational Support staff

Who’s in the Challenge Sponsor team and what additional resources can we provide?

• Access to EHU colleagues: frontline service staff and their managers in office and with agreement in their home office settings

• We would be providing pre-existing Extra Help Unit user satisfaction research

• Safeguarding logs

• Example case studies

• Support from our contracted-out Data Protection (DPO) service with Thorntons solicitors

What is the policy background to the Challenge?

Safeguarding basically means ensuring that there are measures in place to make sure that beneficiaries and others who come into contact with your organisation are protected from harm.

Safeguarding is everyone’s responsibility, and for both governing/leadership bodies and frontline staff it means going over and above your minimum legal responsibilities and making sure the culture within your organisation is to respect and protect the people there.

The Extra Help Unit (EHU) carries out statutory obligations to assist vulnerable individuals and micro-businesses with energy issues; as well as improve standards by working with the energy industry.

The statutory obligations of the EHU include raising and managing complaints with energy suppliers on behalf of people who may be considered vulnerable or at risk of disconnection. We can also help vulnerable people to reduce bills and correct bills that have been issued by energy suppliers. As well as working with suppliers on individual complaints, we work with the regulator and ombudsman service to improve standards across the energy industry.

Staffed by case workers, the service works to improve standards across the energy sector of the United Kingdom and is a free service to consumers. 

Suppliers provide referrals to case workers at the EHU. Caseworkers are trained and able to make decisions that help prioritise the response to vulnerable consumers. This process requires the skills and experience of EHU case workers. EHU staff also include performance leads, administrative staff and a Quality Assurance Officer, to monitor the performance of energy suppliers and quality assure EHU operations and performance.

In a Scottish Government policy context, prevention and early intervention have been hallmarks of the Government's approach to improving the lives of Scottish citizens. Prevention and Early intervention has relevance across a wide range of social policies, and is a natural focus for the delivery and safeguarding of any service and its users. Indeed, a third key objective of reform proposed by the Christie Commission report to the Scottish Government in 2011 was that society should ensure that public service delivery organisations should prioritise prevention, reduce inequalities and promote equality. In the intervening decade since the Christie report, the identified growing demand for public services in Scotland has not diminished, indeed it’s increased in volume and diversified in terms of context. Ten years back Christie concluded that in part, at least, this demand can be said to stem from a focus on reactive spending as opposed to preventative spending, which seeks to prevent problems before they occur or intervene early before they worsen even during an “in-service” delivery context. The costs to Scotland and its public services of negative outcomes, not addressing 'failure demand' as early as possible that results from focussing on consequences rather than causes, and approaches which alienate or disempower service users and providers, has a high cost for society and high costs for public services. This will be increasingly difficult to sustain into the future and they concluded that the subsequent consequences of late intervention will have high human costs which in this context can be significant physical and mental harm to consumers but also those frontline staff delivering the service and witnessing the negative outcomes.

In a service specific context the EHU has recently achieved the British Standard verification certificate BS 18477 Inclusive Service Provision for identifying and responding to consumer vulnerability. BS 18477: the standard that helps vulnerable consumers. If consumers ability to manage their finances and make sound consumer choices is impaired, it’s easy to enter a downward spiral into debt, distress and difficulty. Consumer vulnerability can happen to anyone, and it requires sensitive handling. BS 18477, Inclusive service provision helps organisations reach out to vulnerable customers.

Consumer vulnerability is hard to define. There are some obvious categories of consumer who are more likely to be vulnerable, such as elderly people, those with learning difficulties and people with physical disabilities. However, any one of us could become vulnerable due to a change in personal circumstances. Losing a job, bereavement, developing a medical condition, dealing with addiction or struggling with literacy and numeracy; there are many reasons why someone might become temporarily or permanently susceptible to financial problems, or less able to make informed decisions or place our physical and mental health at greater risk of harm.  

People in a vulnerable position often find it hard to admit their difficulties and ask for help. As a result, bills go unpaid or the consumer might try to ration use of essentials to reduce costs. They might take out a loan to help, which can cause debt to build up and reduce their credit rating. Consumers need protection when their vulnerability leads to detriment, which will be different for every person. For example, one person’s experience of mental health problems might have no impact on their ability to manage financially, whereas another person might struggle. Equally, an organisation’s processes can result in detriment that could have been avoided.

The standard provides a framework to help organisations and their employees understand the underlying factors involved in consumer vulnerability, and work to develop processes to help with the problem. The standard covers topic such as the identification of customer vulnerability, inclusive design of products and services and data collection, protection and sharing. 

As vulnerability is a sensitive issue, organisations should focus their efforts on staff training to raise awareness and improve responsiveness to customer need. For example, consumers generally do not volunteer information about problems such as marital breakdown or mental health conditions. Customer service providers need to be equipped with skills to build relationships with customers and have conversations about the customer’s needs and circumstances and for this implied context this is where we believe a CivTech challenge could add real value.

The benefits for organisations; firstly, staff morale and skill levels improve when they are equipped to help people. Employees should be authorised to exercise discretion in managing vulnerable customers, which can be rewarding and interesting. The standard also helps organisations to avoid negative publicity as a result of getting customer service wrong. While this level of service is seldom deliberate, having processes in place to ensure all customers are treated fairly will help to prevent this damaging publicity. Instead, organisations nurture consumer relationships who value the relationship and this help deliver positive outcomes.