Mr. Ned Costello:

I thank the Chairman.

There is a balance, as we would understand it, that the organisation is trying to seek between a needs-based approach and the fact that it has a limited fund and is trying to get to as many survivors as possible who may have a need. This matter is addressed in the most recent annual report produced by the organisation. There is a specific focus on trying to get to survivors who have not benefited from the fund so far. Many of the organisation's outreach efforts are being directed in that regard. Before the cessation date, it picked up a number of survivors that it had not reached.

I shall talk about some aspects of people who are waiting a long time. That issue is somewhat contextualised by the fact that it is not a one-shot application process. A number of clients of Caranua have made a number of applications and, therefore, may still have applications in process. That situation is reflected in the statistics. The latest statistics to the end of October show that Caranua had received 6,526 applications and of those 5,936 were deemed to be eligible but Caranua also has 2,365 open applications. There is still quite a volume of applications that are open. That does not mean that a client has not already received a payment from Caranua because he or she could have a second, third or fourth application submitted. There are quite a number of applications that still require to be worked through. That situation raises the question of why would money be held back, which the Chairman asked. It is because Caranua needs to ensure that it has adequate funds to cater for the applications that it has on hand. It is also why Caranua instituted a closing date for applications because it did not want to take applications and run up a bill that it would not be able to discharge subsequently.

Some questions were raised about the making of applications in terms of literacy issues and so on. That is why Caranua operates with application adviser support. That means that when a person makes an application he or she is assigned an adviser. It is not simply a paper-based process and there is a person to assist them.

Again, without exceeding the role of the Department and commenting in detail about the operations of Caranua, the operations of Caranua are funded by the fund. There is always a balance to be struck between the amount one spends on operations and the amount one spends on payments to individuals.

That is a balance that the organisation and its board have to strike.

In terms of the general area of applications and the process, some questions were raised about the preferred supplier issue, quotations, etc. On the preferred supplier piece, Caranua did pilot two projects in 2014-2015 with the Clúid Housing Association and then with the Sustainable Energy Authority of Ireland, SEAI. The projects were piloted based on feedback given by survivors on the difficulties in sourcing appropriate suppliers to provide quotes. However, the organisation found that fewer than 100 survivors participated in both of the schemes. The schemes were an attempt to assist but there was not a great uptake and, therefore, they have not been pursued.

As regards applying quotes, survivors are asked to provide quotes as follows: Where the cost of the work is less than €1,000 only one quote is asked for; where the cost of the work is between €1,000 and €5,000 then two quotes are required; and above that three quotes are required. A proportionate balance has been struck between the cost of the works and the quotations being sought. I commented on this matter in my opening statement.

The issues of regulatory impropriety and so on have been raised in terms of Caranua. The organisation has to have regard for that. It is understood that this is a vulnerable population of people and a balance must be struck. Clearly, if there is an entirely laissez-faireapproach to that type of issue then it raises the question of that process not being respected, which creates other issues.

On the question of customer satisfaction, a number of specific issues have been raised about specific applications. We cannot comment on them as Caranua is a statutorily independent body. Inevitably, as a result we would not have the information.

In terms of respect for the independence of the body, it would be inappropriate for us to query specific applications. However, Members of the Oireachtas can contact Caranua and there is a dedicated Oireachtas email address. I know that the body will be very happy to pursue any specific instances that Deputies wish to raise with it and to take those up.

We are aware of the survey that was mentioned. It was a survey of a relatively small number of applicants out of the 6,500. Caranua's statistics are somewhat more broadly based but are not comprehensive. There is a question of customer satisfaction surveying. Again, there is a question of balancing how much one spends on such work. A survey costs money versus providing the supports for survivors.

My colleague, Ms Hynes, will comment on the questions on appeals.