Thematic report on complaints handling and feedback

What Does a Good Complaints System Look Like?

12. The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman's (SPSO) guidance on a model complaints handling procedure published in 2011^[3] is the definitive authority for best practice in complaints handling in Scotland. This guidance informed the development of the Scottish Government Model Complaints Handling Procedure (CHP) which advocates a standardised model CHP across government, providing 'quicker, simpler, more streamlined complaints handling with local, early resolution by empowered and well trained staff'.^[4] The goal is an efficient, effective, standardised and fair complaints procedure across the public sector which aims to 'get it right first time'.

13. In summary, a good complaints handling process will:

• be simple and streamlined;
• be accessible and visible to the public;
• deal with complaints as quickly, effectively and as close to the point of service delivery as possible; and
• share the learning from complaints to drive up the standards of service delivery.

COPFS Complaints and Feedback Policy and Process

14. In its Complaints and Feedback Policy^[5] ("the Policy") COPFS states "We welcome feedback, positive or negative from people affected by our work. It can give valuable insight into what the public think about the service we provide. It can also help us to improve our standards of service".

15. It declares a commitment to:

• Giving those affected by its work the opportunity to comment on the service COPFS provides, including policies, systems and procedures;
• Listening and recording feedback;
• Responding to complaints in a timely and helpful manner; and
• Using feedback to inform changes and improvements, as appropriate, so that COPFS delivers a better service.

16. It has laudable aspirations, especially in relation to identifying good practice, recording feedback received and providing regular analysis of feedback to improve the service to customers.

17. Good customer service is grounded in sound organisational values. The COPFS core values - being professional and showing respect - should be at the heart of its complaints and feedback policy. It would be appropriate to re-emphasise those values in the policy.

18. Customers should be aware of the standards of service that they are entitled to expect. COPFS, in partnership with other criminal justice organisations,^[6] recently published new Standards of Service.^[7] The new Standards of Service explain:

• what a victim or witness can expect to happen at each stage of the criminal justice system process;
• the standards of service they can expect;
• who they can contact for help or advice so they can participate effectively in criminal justice proceedings.

19. The Standards of Service contain flowcharts setting out what can be expected from each organisation at each stage of the process. Standards of service and complaints and feedback are inextricably linked, with the standards providing a benchmark for victims and witnesses to assess the quality of service. It would, therefore, make sense to refer to the new Standards of Service in the policy.

Procedure

20. The policy introduces a standardised approach to handling complaints across COPFS, which seeks to comply with the SPSO's guidance on a model complaints handling procedure.

21. The policy defines a complaint as:
"any written or spoken expression of dissatisfaction with the service we provide."

22. It provides a two stage procedure to resolve complaints:

• Stage 1 - Quick Resolution - this aims to resolve expressions of dissatisfaction as soon as possible.
• Stage 2 - Formal Procedure - complaints that require further investigation.

23. It aims to respond within the following timescales:

Acknowledgement

• By telephone - immediate verbal acknowledgement
• By email - immediate automated acknowledgement
• By letter - acknowledgement within 3 working days

Response

• Quick Resolution - as early as possible or, if brief enquiries are necessary, COPFS will aim to respond within five working days;
• Formal procedure - COPFS will aim to respond within 20 working days (excluding weekends and public holidays) or if this is not possible, COPFS will keep you advised of progress.

Content

24. The policy provides guidance on key areas, including details on the type of information that should be included, and is simple and easy to understand. It provides details on how to make a complaint and emphasises COPFS commitment to listening to customers and responding in a timely and helpful manner. We were advised that the policy is currently under review^[8] and that the revised policy will include guidance on the following:

• what a complaint might look like and the type of subjects that may constitute a complaint;
• what is not included in the definition of a complaint, e.g. a first time request for a service; and
• the legal right of victims to seek a review of a decision made not to take action or to discontinue a case after court proceedings have commenced.^[9]

25. Other aids or tools that feature in many complaints policies to assist complainants and provide a more focused complaints system include:

• a diagrammatic representation of the process, e.g. a flowchart;^[10]
• a standard complaint form; and
• a list of potential remedies/outcomes and a request to the complainant to specify which remedy/outcome they seek, e.g. an explanation or corrective action.

Recommendation 1

In its revised complaints and feedback policy, COPFS should also include the following:

• a reference to COPFS core values - being professional and showing respect;
• a reference to COPFS standards of service for victims and witnesses;
• a diagrammatic representation of the complaints and feedback process, e.g. a flowchart;
• a standard complaint form; and
• a list of potential remedies/outcomes and a request to the complainant to specify which remedy/outcome they seek, e.g. an explanation or corrective action.

Accessibility and Visibility

26. The COPFS policy provides a number of options to make a complaint, including by email, in writing, by telephone including text relay^[11] and in person at a local office. From our sample, the most used format for making a complaint was email (44%), followed by letter (33%) and telephone (20%).^[12]

27. 'Your Feedback' posters feature in prominent places in Procurator Fiscal offices.

28. The headline on the poster reads:

• 'We want to hear about your experience of COPFS, was it good… or could we have made it better?'

29. The policy is published on COPFS' website and a hard copy can be made available on request at local offices.

30. We understand that the Scottish Government Justice Disability Project team is working towards a collaborative Easy Read version of the complaints procedures of criminal justice partners, namely COPFS, Police Scotland, Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS), Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB), the Law Society and the Scottish Prison Service (SPS) that will be available on all justice partners public websites.^[13]

COPFS Website

31. The Policy can be accessed via the front page of the COPFS website by clicking on 'Comments and Complaints.' This links to a page detailing information about feedback and complaints which in turn has a direct link to the policy and other publications, including the Complaints and Feedback Policy Annual Report 20142015. There is also a link to the central COPFS contact point for complaints - the Response and Information Unit (RIU) email box - that complainants can use to send complaints or feedback.

32. The font size on the website can be changed and documents can be translated to any language on request or made available in an audio format.

33. We welcome the publication of the COPFS Annual Report on the performance of its Complaints and Feedback policy. The report includes quantitative data on the volume and type of complaints and key performance details such as the time taken to reply, the stage at which complaints were resolved and whether or not they were upheld.

Unacceptable Actions

34. A concern expressed by COPFS staff working on the frontline is how to deal with unreasonable actions or behaviour from members of the public. This has been exacerbated by increased use of social media.^[14] For example, staff at RIU expressed anxiety about being identified on websites and the posting of abusive comments and derogatory remarks on blogs etc.

35. COPFS complaints and feedback policy includes a section on "unacceptable" actions, providing guidance to staff on how to deal with such behaviour, including:

• Aggressive or abusive behaviour;
• Unreasonable demands;
• Unreasonable persistence; and
• Vexatious correspondence.

36. The unacceptable use of social media is, however, not addressed in the policy.

37. To address staff concern, we recommend that COPFS includes guidance in the unacceptable actions section of the policy on this type of social media use. The guidance should emphasise that there is strict monitoring of social media and that COPFS will seek to remove posts containing offensive language or personal comments relating to members of staff, and if the post is deemed to constitute a crime that the person responsible may be reported to the police.

Recommendation 2

COPFS should include guidance on the inappropriate use of social media in the unacceptable actions section of the complaints and feedback policy.

Independent Review and the Role of the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman

38. A good complaints policy will have an element of independent external review.

39. This is provided to COPFS in part by the Scottish Public Services Ombudsman (SPSO), which provides a free, independent and impartial service for dealing with complaints about public services in Scotland, including COPFS. Complainants should exhaust the COPFS complaints handling procedure before being referred to the SPSO.

40. The SPSO has published a leaflet^[15] explaining its role in handling complaints about COPFS. The leaflet provides advice on what the SPSO can and cannot investigate. For example, it clarifies that SPSO cannot take up a complaint about what happened in court or a COPFS' decision to take or not take criminal proceedings.

41. While, the SPSO cannot review operational decisions, it has adjudicated on process or administrative issues flowing from such decisions. This includes delays in replying to correspondence, failure to return productions timeously and failure of COPFS to meet its own standards of service to victims and witnesses.

42. The number of complaints referred to SPSO after the completion of the COPFS internal complaints process is low. The SPSO website summarises thirteen decisions relating to COPFS between February 2012 and June 2015. Of those, eight were partially or fully upheld. The main issues were a lack of communication and delay in dealing with a complaint. The main recommendations were for COPFS to apologise to the complainant, to ensure compliance with its own complaints policy and to ensure that appropriate and accurate information is provided.

43. On occasion, SPSO and COPFS have different interpretations of whether a complaint falls within the remit of SPSO but, similar to the approach in other jurisdictions (discussed below), agreement has been reached through discussion on a case by case basis.

44. The SPSO provides a wealth of information designed to improve complaints handling across the public sector. One aspect emphasised in the guidance is the importance of organisations learning from complaints. All complaints referred to SPSO and the outcome of the SPSO investigations are discussed at a weekly meeting between the Head of COPFS, the Crown Agent, and the Head of RIU to ensure that any systematic deficiencies are addressed.

Independent Assessors in England, Wales and Northern Ireland

45. In other UK jurisdictions, external review of complaints about public prosecution services is provided by externally appointed 'independent assessors'.

46. In England and Wales and Northern Ireland, on completion of the internal complaints process, service complaints about the Prosecution Service can be referred to the Independent Assessor of Complaints (IAC) for review.^[16]

47. In Northern Ireland, the Independent Assessor (IA) will review a complaint where the complainant is not satisfied with the way in which the Public Prosecution Service (PPS) has dealt with the matter. S/he is unable to comment on matters which relate directly to a prosecutorial decision. Agreement on whether a complaint falls within the jurisdiction of the assessor is reached via 'mature discussion' between the IA and PPS senior managers.

48. The present Independent Assessor in Northern Ireland can and does talk directly to complainants to try to understand their grievance. He believes that complainants value his personal interest and that an early apology can set the tone and prevent unnecessary escalation.

49. In addition to reviewing complaints, the Independent Assessor provides guidance on best practice in complaints handling and undertakes an annual audit of PPS complaints. This audit allows him/her to identify emerging patterns and themes and evaluate whether the organisation has learned lessons from complaints. The assessor publishes an annual report that makes recommendations to the Director of Public Prosecution for consideration and action. We heard that the relationship is constructive and the PPS respects the judgement and guidance provided by the Independent Assessor and values the contribution made by his annual audit to organisational learning and development.

50. The IAC^[17] in England and Wales has a similar role and remit. Similarly to the IA in Northern Ireland, the IAC cannot review complaints that are solely about prosecution decisions. In addition to providing an independent tier, the IAC has a role in supporting the Crown Prosecution Service to develop best practice and improved service standards.

51. The role of the IACs in Northern Ireland and England and Wales in reviewing complaints received at any stage to identify trends, promote best practice and evaluate whether lessons have been learnt, provides transparency for members of the public as well as valuable feedback for both organisations.

52. SPSO similarly promotes best practice and learning through publication of reports and newsletters but it can only evaluate complaints that have exhausted the COPFS complaints process and fall within its jurisdiction, which are relatively few.

53. The absence of independent oversight of the effectiveness of COPFS in learning from complaints and identifying trends - such as is provided by the IACs in England, Wales and Northern Ireland - makes it all the more important that COPFS has a robust and transparent self-assessment process to undertake this function.