Inspection Framework

Our values – of independence, credibility, user-focus, respect and partnership – underpin our approach to scrutiny.

Independence – We act independently in all we do, providing impartial and objective scrutiny of the service provided by COPFS.

Credibility – We deliver high quality, evidence-based scrutiny and report publicly on our findings. Our approach is rigorous but fair and proportionate.

User-focus – The views and experiences of those individuals and organisations who are affected by the work of COPFS are central to our scrutiny activity. This includes victims, witnesses and next of kin as well as those who advocate on their behalf. We are also mindful of the experience of accused persons and those who represent them.

Respect – Respect for human rights is at the heart of what we do, and we support equal access to justice. We engage constructively with those we inspect, and we value the contribution they make.

Partnership – We work in partnership with others. We support continuous improvement in COPFS, and we work with our scrutiny partners to support improvement across the criminal justice system.

Our approach is also guided by:

• The five principles for external scrutiny set out by Professor Lorne D Crerar following his review of the regulation, audit, inspection and complaints handling of public services. These five principles are independence, public focus, proportionality, transparency and accountability.[2]
• The four key pillars for the reform of public services in Scotland set out by the Scottish Government in response to the Christie Commission.[3] These four pillars are:
  • Prevention – reducing future demand by preventing problems arising or dealing with them early on
  • Performance – a sharp focus on improving performance through greater transparency, innovation and use of digital technology
  • People – greater investment in people who deliver services through enhanced workforce development and effective leadership
  • Partnership – bringing partners together with communities to deliver shared outcomes.

Additionally, our approach to inspection is guided by 10 principles of inspection based on Cabinet Office guidance:

(1) Purpose of improvement. Inspectors should explicitly aim to contribute to the improvement of the service being inspected. This should guide the focus, method, reporting and follow-up of inspection. In framing recommendations, inspectors should recognise good performance and address any failure appropriately. Inspection should aim to generate data and intelligence that enable services more quickly to calibrate the progress of reform and make appropriate adjustments.

(2) Focus on outcomes. Inspectors should consider service delivery to the end users of the services rather than concentrating on internal management arrangements.

(3) User perspective. Inspectors should focus on the experience of those for whom the service is provided. Inspectors should encourage innovation and diversity and not be solely compliance-based.

(4) Over time, inspectors should modify the extent of future inspection proportionate to risk and according to the quality of performance by the service provider.

(5) Inspectors should encourage rigorous self-assessment by managers. Inspectors should challenge the outcomes of self-assessments, consider them in the inspection process and provide a comparative benchmark.

(6) Inspectors should use impartial evidence. Evidence, whether quantitative or qualitative, should be validated and credible.

(7) Inspectors should be transparent about the criteria they use to form judgements.

(8) Inspectors should be open about their processes, willing to take any complaints seriously, and demonstrate a robust quality assurance process.

(9) Inspectors should have regard to value for money, their own included.

(10) Inspectors should continually learn from experience, in order to become increasingly effective. This can be done by assessing their own impact on the service provider’s ability to improve and by sharing best practice with other inspectors.

Setting our inspection programme

Issues for inspection are selected by HM Chief Inspector of Prosecution in Scotland following consultation with the Law Officers, COPFS and stakeholders. In selecting issues for inspection, the Chief Inspector will take into account:

• whether it is in the public interest to inspect the issue
• whether the issue relates to an area of high risk or concern or strategic importance
• whether we can add value by carrying out an inspection
• whether the issue has been inspected previously
• whether another scrutiny body has reviewed the issue
• whether the issue is within the scope of a previous, current or future public inquiry
• whether there have been any findings from a court, public inquiry or other source regarding COPFS that merit follow up
• whether we have sufficient resources and capacity to carry out the inspection
• whether the issue is linked to COPFS’s strategic priorities, or the priorities set out in the Scottish Government’s Vision for Justice in Scotland.[4]

The Chief Inspector will also consider whether there is scope for an issue to be inspected jointly with another scrutiny body. We actively seek opportunities to carry out our inspection activity in partnership with others. The effective operation of the justice system cannot be achieved by any one agency – it is dependent on a range of organisations working together at a strategic and operational level. When appropriate, a similarly collaborative approach should therefore be taken to independent scrutiny, to ensure that shared outcomes are being achieved. Joint scrutiny is facilitated by some of our key scrutiny partners adopting inspection frameworks which are also based on the EFQM Model.

HM Inspectorate of Prosecution in Scotland may also be directed to inspect a particular issue by the Lord Advocate as, under section 79(2) of the Criminal Proceedings etc. (Reform) (Scotland) Act 2007, the Chief Inspector must submit a report to the Lord Advocate on any particular matter connected with the operation of COPFS which the Lord Advocate refers to the Chief Inspector. Additionally, under section 115 of the Public Services Reform (Scotland) Act 2010, we may be asked by Scottish Ministers to conduct a joint inspection in relation to specified services.

Evidence-gathering

Our goal is to gather sufficient, relevant and reliable evidence from a range of sources to support our inspection findings and recommendations. We use both qualitative and quantitative evidence, and we seek to triangulate and quality assure the evidence we gather. Our key evidence gathering methods include:

• reviewing documentation such as strategies, plans, policies, guidance and procedures
• analysing management information and performance data
• examining cases
• interviewing (or carrying out focus groups with) staff, service users, stakeholders and partner organisations
• carrying out surveys
• observation (of, for example, court proceedings or training).