Data on the Register of Importance - A Day at theDA World

Transcription

1 1. Maintain the Quality of the Register 1.1 Admissions The graph below illustrates that during 213, there were 154 new admissions to the Register compared with 1,481 in 212. This is an increase of 23 new admissions. 25 Admissions Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Of the 154 new admissions in 213, 974 applications were made through the UK routes to registration. The remaining 53 applications were made through EU routes. In comparison, there were 152 UK route applications and 429 EU route applications in UK & EU Admissions Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 211 UK 212 UK 213 UK 211 EU 212 EU 213 EU The graph above shows the new admissions annual workload spread and trends for the last three years. The admissions are split into UK applications and EU applications.

2 1.2 Breakdown of Applications Entered onto the Register The graph below illustrates the routes used to enter the Register during 213, with the 212 and 211 figures alongside Routes to Enter the Register The Register At the end of December 213, there were 34,266 architects on the Register, compared with 34,74 at the end of 212. This shows an increase of 192 architects during 213. The Register continues to grow on a yearly basis. [Please note that due to the timing of the fee collection, resignations and removals from the Register are occurring daily. This may impact on the overall year-end figures.] The graph below illustrates the growth of the Register over the last decade. 35 Numbers on the Register

3 1.4 Gender Breakdown Of the 34,266 on the Register at the end of December 213 (34,74 on the Register as at 31 December 212), the gender breakdown at the end of 213 was 22.1% female and 77.9% male. (21.4% female and 78.6% male in 212). The number of female architects continues to grow slowly through new admissions to the Register. Gender Breakdown of Register at the end of 213 Gender Breakdown New Admissions 213 Female 22% Male 78% Female 38% Male 62% 1.5 Admissions Performance Indicators UK Applications 213 saw the average time taken to process a UK application, increase from 8.8 days in 212 to 11.9 days in 213. However 96.4 % of UK applications were processed within the target. A decrease in the overall target of 1.6 % since 212, when the total processed within 3 days was 98%. In June 213 we started to trial new KPI s, with the KPI for UK applications being lowered from 3 working days to 15. Since June 213, 91.6% of UK applications have been processed within 15 days. The Board is asked to note that there may be times during the year when these revised targets are difficult to achieve, due to the pressure of the annual retention fee collection, and the sheer volume of reinstatement applications.

4 UK Applications Processed (Target 3 Days) Total applications processed Applications processed within 3 days Applications processed over 3 days Please note that the above graph excludes applications processed for first time registration applicants, whose Part 3 was awarded over two years ago. During 213, 38 applications out of 964 exceeded the 3 day target, compared with 21 applications out of 1,4 in 212 and 5 applications out of 837 in 211 European Applications During 213, we processed 492 EU applications through the automatic EU route to registration, compared with 394 in 212 and 364 in 211. An increase of 98 EU applications. EU applications frequently involve a significant amount of external interaction with other competent authorities, sometimes resulting in long delays while we seek information either from our counterparts in other member states or from applicants themselves. Please note these figures exclude the less used routes within the EU framework, as illustrated at % of applications were processed within the 3 day target. There was also an increase in the overall number of applications processed through all available EU routes, from 429 in 212 and to 492 in 213 (13% increase in total applications received). During 213,we processed 431 out of 492 applications (88%) under the automatic recognition route within 3 days. As a comparison with 212, 319 out of 394 (81%) and improvement of 7% applications received under the same route were processed within 3 days. We continue to make improvements in this area, helped by the online registration systems and back office enhancements. From June 213 we started to trial new KPI s for EU applications, we reduced the working days to process from 3 working days to 15. From June to December, 47% of EU applications were processed within 15 days.

5 Belgium Bulgaria Switzerland Czech Republic Denmark Germany Estonia Ireland Greece Spain France Italy Cyprus Latvia Lithuiana Luxemborg Hungary Malta Netherlands Austria Poland Portugal Romania Slovenia Slovakia Finalnd Sweden Croatia Section B Automatic Recognition EU Applications Processed (Target 3 Days) Total applications processed Applications processed within 3 days Applications processed over 3 days Breakdown of EU Applications by Country In July 213 the Board requested, that an annual breakdown of EU applications by country be provided. The graph below illustrates the number of applications from each country during EU Applications by Country

6 1.6 Rejoining the Register There were 131 reinstatements and readmissions to the Register in 213 (including 61 competency standards applications). This compares with 633 reinstatements and readmissions to the Register in 212 (including 5 competency standards applications). The increase in the number of reinstatements to the Register reflects the higher number removed for non-payment of the 213 fee. The performance target for processing reinstatements and readmissions (re-joining within 2 years) is 14 working days. Of the 97 applications processed, 88% of applications met the performance target, with an average processing time of 6.1 days. In 212 of the 583 applications processed, 95% (554) of applications met the performance target, with an average processing time of 5.2 days. The increase in days to process reflects the increase in the number of applications to re-join, creating an increased workload. In June 213, we started to trial new KPI of 5 working days. Since June 213, 33.1% of reinstatement and readmission applications were processed within the 5 day target. We will be monitoring our performance against these targets during Prescribed Examinations We conducted 83 examinations in 213, compared with 135 in 212 and 126 in 211. The overall pass rate for 213 was 55 %, down from 59% in examinations were undertaken at Part 1, and 33 at Part 2. There was 1 appeal which was referred to the Chair of Prescription Committee in line with the requirements of the procedure. The Chair referred the matter to the appeals panel and the panel upheld the appeal Prescribed Examinations

7 1.8 Online Registration Statistics The Board s online application system went live in April 212, this system provides an online portal for all types of registration applications. The graph below illustrates the percentage of applications received online for each type of entry to the Register. The 212 figures are only from April 212 1% 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% % Online Registration Statistics 98% 96% 86% 85% 78% 76% 78% 75% UK Applications EU Applications Reinstatements Readmissions The introduction of the online systems has enabled the streamlining of the application process internally, with further efficiencies planned for Maintaining the Standards of Conduct and Practice of Architects 2.1 Complaints and Performance Indicators 139 formal complaints were considered by the ARB in 213, comparable to the 14 received in Formal complaints received It took an average of 12.5 weeks for the office to either refer a case to the Investigations Panel or to close the case in the office. The target is 16 weeks from the date the complaint is received,

8 which was met in 61% of cases in 213. This area of work is vulnerable to third-party delays as there is no stop the clock provision applied to this figure and so must be absorbed in the statistics. There were a number of cases that were deliberately held in office prior to referral during the changeover of the Investigations Committee to the Investigations Panel; which will have resulted in a short delay. Work continues to secure and maintain staff resources in this area. 2.2 Investigations Panel (IP) Decisions and Performance Indicators IP Decisions In 213, the Investigations Panel (IP) issued 6 decisions, 25% less than the 8 issued in 212. The number of decisions in 212 was significantly more as a number of Investigations Committee cases required completion before the new Panel started in 213. IP Decision Outcomes 37% Refer to PCC 21% No Further Action 42% Advice The IP took an average of 11.6 weeks to reach a decision in 213, compared with 14 weeks in % of decisions were reached within the 12 week target; a significant improvement from 41% in 212. There were no judicial reviews of the Investigations Panel s decisions and nine applications for a Third Party Review (further information can be found at Section 4 of this report).

9 2.3 Inquirers Although no Inquirers were appointed by the Investigations Panel during 213, one Inquirer gave evidence at a PCC hearing, while another was appointed by the Board s solicitor to give expert advice in respect of an upcoming PCC hearing in Overview of Professional Conduct Committee (PCC) decisions for the year and performance indicators In 213 the PCC held 27 hearings, a 17% increase on the number of cases heard in PCC Hearings Of the 27 individual cases heard by the PCC in 213, 24 architects were found guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or serious professional incompetence. Three architects were found not guilty. PCC Outcomes Not Guilty 11% Suspension 11% Erasure 11% No Order 4% Penalty Order 26% Reprimand 37%

10 The Board s solicitor has 12 weeks in which to prepare a report to the PCC. The average number of weeks taken to prepare a report in 213 was 13, the same as 212; 46% of cases met the 12 week target, compared with 67% in 212. This figure in part is explained by a misunderstanding as to the correct date of submission with new panel solicitors and is an area in which improvement will be made in 214. PCC - Total number of sitting days The increase in complexity of the cases is reflected in the total number of hearing days in 213, increasing by 62% from 29 in 212 to 47. In 213, the average cost of a Professional Conduct Committee hearing (which includes the preparation of the legal case and advocacy, costs of venue hire, and PCC member and witness/expert attendance) was approximately 2,; this is compared to 14,5 in 212 which again reflects longer, more complex cases. The cost per day at PCC has remained constant. The Board s legal services have been renegotiated under new contracts in 213, and the cost efficiencies are expected to come into effect in 214. A more detailed report on the work of the Professional Conduct Committee will be presented by its Chair, Alexandra Marks, at the May 214 Board meeting. 3. Assisting the Public to make Informed Choices 3.1 Regulation of title and performance indicators There were 381 investigations into misuse of the title architect during 213, an increase of nearly 5% from 212. This area of work has increased in excess of 1% in recent years, with misuse of title cases particularly prevalent on the internet.

11 Investigations into misuse of the title 'architect' The target for either referring a case to the Board s Solicitor or to closing it is 16 weeks. 92% of cases met this target in 213. Complaints about use of the title architect continue to be resolved promptly as respondents usually cooperate soon after they receive correspondence from ARB. There were six prosecutions completed in 213, including ARB s first successful title prosecution in Scotland. All defendants were successfully convicted of breaching Section 2 Architects Act The average amount of fine imposed by the courts was 785, together with average costs awarded to ARB of 2,84. It should be noted that the level of penalty is imposed by the courts, and is determined by the magistrates after considering the nature of the offence and any guilty plea and/or mitigation. Fines cannot exceed level 4 ( 2,5 per individual charge) on the standard scale. 4 Third Party Review Third Party Review considers certain Board/ Committee/ Panel procedures that are not covered by recourse to the courts. Third Party Review does not revist the original decision, but looks at whether the process was properly and correctly followed. A single Reviewer conducted the reviews during 213 after the second reviewer resigned at the end of 212. ARB is currently recruiting for a second Reviewer to assist not only with the workload, but in the event of one Reviewer is away or there is a conflict of interest. A total of nine applications for Third Party Review were received in 213, of which one was rejected by the Registrar on the basis that the applicant simply disagreed with the Investigation Panel s decision, but failed to identify areas where the Board s procedures were faulty. A second application was made by the same applicant but rejected on the grounds it was received out of time. This compares with the total of 6 applications received in 212 (of which 5 were accepted). The Annual Report of the Independent Third Party Reviewer is attached at Agenda Item 14 and provides further detailed information.

12 5 Corporate & Finance 5.1 Shows and Exhibitions Attended ARB exhibited at two shows in 213: Homebuilding and Renovating and Grand Designs, both at the NEC in Birmingham. During both events ARB received a large number of wide ranging visitors to its stand: members of the public; architects, architectural students and school pupils interested in architecture. There were a record number of visitors to Grand Designs Live in 213 and as a result this show will run an additional day in 214. At both shows staff presented information about the work of the Board and the value of the Register. Visitors were invited to complete a short interactive survey which also allowed for some valuable discussion with consumers and architects. Feedback from consumers was very positive and here are some of the comments received: Although didn't check my architect was registered, knowing what I now know I would in future. Thanks for making me aware Oops I feel rather naive!! Yours is probably the most important stand we'll visit all day so thank you!! 75% of the consumers who completed the survey said that they had appointed or would be appointing someone to assist them with their project. 85% of these consumers said they had checked or would check to see if their adviser was a registered architect and all said it was important that their adviser was covered by a code of conduct, appropriately insured and well qualified. Most of the architects that stopped by the stand said it was great that ARB had a presence at these shows. Furthermore, the architects who were surveyed were not aware that they could use the ARB logo to promote their status, but all said that they would consider using it in future. Staff will attend the Homebuilding and Renovating and Grand Designs Live shows again in 214 and will continue to engage with consumers and architects and seek their feedback. 5.2 Website 1. The ARB website is the organisations main resource for disseminating information to a variety of stakeholders. In February 213 the new website was launched. The diagram below illustrates traffic to the site during 212 and has substantially outperformed 212.

13 Traffic Comparison Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec In 213 traffic to the site outperformed 212 consistently on a month by month basis. This is due in large part to the relaunch of the website, but also the introduction of regular social media activity. Over the course of 213 the site received 227,84 unique visits, an increase of 111% on 212 (17,822 unique visits). The month that saw the highest traffic was October which attracted 24,352 unique visits to the site. The increased visits can be attributed to the retention fee collection process and the additional awareness campaign around it. The average time spent on the site in 213 was 2 minutes and 45 seconds. This is a 5 second increase on 212 (2 minutes and 4 seconds). Traffic has improved significantly in 213, and in 214 we will be looking to grow this further by ensuring that all social media interactions, link people back to the ARB website, further establishing it as the main point of information. Top 2 Pages in 213 The table below lists the Top 2 most visited pages on the site: URL Visits 1. Homepage 158, Information for 24,679 architects 3. I want to register 22, Registration 18, Page doesn t exist 17, Information for 15,82 members of the public 7. Information for 15,536 prescription of qualifications 8. Non-recognised UK and 1,948 overseas qualifications 9. Schools and institutions 1,571

14 of architecture architecture 1. Contact us 1, Concerns about an 1,319 architect 12. Information for 1,132 students 13. Information for 8,981 architects 14. About us 8, EU qualifications 6,413 registration 16. Overseas qualifications 5, Architects code 5, Code of Conduct , Information for 4,436 members of the public 2. How to register 4,428 The most visited page on the site is the Homepage which is to be expected with any site. Referrals in 213 The information below illustrates where the top 2 referrals traffic to the website came from: Page Visits 1. Google.com 133, Direct 54, Bing 6, Architecture.com 4, Architects-Register.org.uk 3, Yahoo 1, ARB.org.uk 1,34 8. ed.ac.uk Facebook.com Ask AVG Telegraph.co.uk LocalArchitectsDirect.co.uk Sheffield.ac.uk Admin.cam.ac.uk MarbleArch.co.uk Retentionfee.arb.co.uk ARB.org.uk.n2testing.co.uk Google.co.uk Money.co.uk 277 The biggest source of referrals for the website is Google.com which accounted for 59% of visits to the site during 213. In second place was people going directly to the ARB.org.uk URL (24% of visits) followed by Bing.com and RIBA s website. Social Media During 213 we started to actively participate in Social Media. The level of engagement was low initially, however numbers towards the end of the year started to pick up.

15 From August a social media strategy was put in place and referrals steadily increased, with a peak of 39 social referrals in November. Social referrals Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec In 214 we aim to further increase the amount of social referrals to the website. Using the social media channels as a customer service and communication channel will help to direct people to the information they need and reduce the amount of calls that come in that could be dealt with online In addition to the ARB main website the Search the Register facility is hosted on its own domain name. Traffic Comparison As with the main ARB site, the Register has outperformed 212 throughout the year with only one month being on par with the same month in 212: Not all of the traffic data is available for 212, so we are not able to provide a full year-on-year comparison. The graph below illustrates the traffic comparison from April to December for both years. 213 saw a 19% increase in visits, with a total of 161,66 unique visitors (136,29 in 212) and a total of 219,294 unique visits over the entire of 213. The average time spent on the site in 213 was 3 minutes and 4 seconds which is a 1 second decrease from 212 (3 minutes and 41 seconds). Further work is planned for 214, to raise awareness of the Register. We will also be communicating with those on the Register to highlight the value of the site, and individual architects ability to promote their registered status.

16 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Referrals in 213 The top referrals in 213 to the site were: Page Visits 1. Google 15, ARB.org.uk 72,71 3. Direct 25,94 4. Bing 4, Yahoo 2, Brent.gov.uk Google.co.uk AVG AOL Ask Search.BT.com CrowdFlower.com Facebook.com Conduit Uk.wow.com Search.mywebsearch.com Facebook mobile Which.co.uk Wikipedia 1 2. Babylon 96 The majority of traffic to the Register comes via Google which is responsible for 48% of the year s traffic. ARB s main site referred 33% of the year s traffic, whilst 11% of traffic came to the site directly, which demonstrates a growing awareness to the site, as a stand-alone facility. During 213 we have been using social media to highlight the Search the Register facility. The graph below demonstrates that traffic to the site is growing using these channels.

17 Social Referrals Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 5.3 Working time lost through sickness absence during 213. Average number of days lost through sickness absence per employee: (Source: CIPD Absence Management: Annual Survey Report 213) Manufacturing and production 6. Private sector 7.2 Public sector 8.7 Not for profit 8.1 All organisations 7.6 ARB Including long term sickness 14.2 Short term sickness only 3.3 The figure for ARB excluding long term sickness is lower than the national average across all sectors. From 5313 working days in 213 (based on 21 employees), ARB lost 298 through sickness absence (5.6%). 228 days were lost to long term absence (4.3%) and 7 days were lost to short term absence (1.3%). Recruitment, retention and turnover Median labour turnover rates by industry sector (Source: CIPD Resource and talent planning 213) All Leavers Manufacturing and production 8.% Private sector 16.3% Public sector 9.4% Not for profit 15.2% All organisations 11.9% ARB 14.2%

18 New joiners Hetta McCabe - Professional Standards Administrator (Temporary Contract) Alice Hutcheson - Professional Standards Officer Rapinda Rodrigues - Professional Standards Officer Leavers Michaela Hunt - Receptionist/Registration Administrator Hetta McCabe - Professional Standards Administrator (Temporary Contract) Ed Crowe - Qualifications Executive Prescription / Professional Standards Officer Vicky Kelly - Team Secretary Average number of staff during the year Telephone Calls In 213, we received 15,292 calls, compared with 18,48 calls received in 212. We are constantly encouraging people wishing to use our services to use the online resources provided on our website, and the reduction in calls illustrates ongoing success in this area. Since we initiated our online self-service processes in 21, and enhanced our web presence and tools, such as Search the Register and online chat, the number of incoming calls has reduced by 61% Telephone Calls Received

19 Total Calls Received per Year Total Received Percentage reduction 21 5, 1, 15, 2, 25, 3, 5.5 Freedom of Information/DP Requests The above chart shows the number of requests that we received under the Freedom of Information Act (FOI) and Data Protection Act (DPA). In 213, we received 57 requests, compared with 31 requests in 212 and 18 requests in 211. We are legally required to respond to all FOI requests within 2 working days (or 4 working days in relation to subject access requests under DPA). In 213, 177 hours and 45 minutes were spent dealing with information requests, compared with 19 hours and 45 minutes in 212, and 25 hours and 1 minutes in 211, and 77 Hours and 3 minutes in 21. Despite efforts to publish more information via our website the increase in time spent on such requests is an increasing burden on resources. The majority of the information requests during 213 related to Professional Standards matters, including a small number of individuals raising multiple requests. The Information Commissioner s Office (ICB) made a decision in one case where a requester had made a complaint about the way in which ARB had dealt with their request. The ICO found that ARB had dealt with the matter appropriately. During 213, we spent 6,663.6 on legal advice in relation to Freedom of Information requests.

20 2 Freedom of Information Requests - time spent considering 177 hrs 45 mins hrs 3 mins 19 hrs 45 mins 5 25 hrs 1 mins ARCUK Occupational Pension Scheme ARB inherited an old Occupational Pension scheme from ARCUK. This scheme is no longer active and there is virtually no involvement by ARB on a day to day basis. Legal & General are the providers and administrators of the scheme with ARB as the corporate trustee. Total of the fund as at 1 June 213 was 72,946 Active members Deferred 14 Pensioners 2 As this was a defined contribution scheme there is no present or future liability to ARB apart from minor administration costs. Consideration has been given to winding up the scheme, but we have been advised that as there are certain guarantees attached, in terms of pension escalation; this would not be a viable option.