APPENDIX 1
SUPPLEMENTARY MEMORANDUM FROM THE CROWN
PROSECUTION SERVICE PAC 97-98/203
NAO Study of the Crown Prosecution Service
Request for Further Information
1. At the hearing on 2 February 1998, the
Committee asked for further information on the following topics:
- information on the timeliness and
quality of police files under the joint performance management
initiative and future targets for improvement;
- progress in introducing case management
plans;
- how the new service standard with
the Bar will improve the rate of returns and the sanctions available;
- the costs of SCOPE and the discussions
with Unisys on the SCOPE contract;
- when the CPS expected to have an integrated
computer system with links to the police and the courts.
Timeliness and quality of police files
2. Since January 1997, Her Majesty's Inspectorate
of Constabulary (HMIC) has been responsible for the collection
of police performance data under the joint performance management
initiative. The Director has written to HMIC to ask them to provide
the Committee with the information which has been requested.
Case management plans
3. At the hearing the Director explained
that expenditure on Counsel fees was demand led and that case
management plans were being introduced to control expenditure
on the larger cases. Case management plans enable the CPS to identify
and agree, in advance, the work required in these cases and to
monitor progress.
4. Case management plans were originally
introduced in 1995. Initially there was reluctance by some practitioners
and CPS prosecutors to accept the use of case management plans
in all substantial cases, particularly where it was not clear
whether the value of the case would exceed the threshold of £5,000.
The CPS is putting pressure on Chambers and its staff to use the
plans. It is encouraging their use with the Bar through Circuit
Leaders and the Bar Council's Legal Aid and Fees Committee and
Chief Crown Prosecutors now report on the use of the plans each
quarter. Recent figures for the second half of 1997 show an encouraging
uptake:
| 1997 | Number of | Case management
| Percentage |
| payments | plan used
| |
| | | |
|
| September | 151 | 108
| 72 |
| December | 192 | 146
| 76 |
Returned briefs
5. In the discussion the Director referred
to the use of penalties and mentioned one example from Manchester.
A set of chambers in Manchester was not briefed by the CPS for
four months in 1995-96 in response to CPS concerns about their
level of returned briefs. The new returned brief monitoring system
measures compliance by the Bar with the agreed service standard
on returned briefs. For the purposes of the Standard, cases are
categorised A, B or C according to weight and complexity. Category
A cases include all ex post facto fee cases, cases in which Leading
Counsel, Grade 4 or Special List (London) Counsel are instructed
and all cases with class 1 and 2 offences, category B includes
other pre-marked cases and standard fee cases with fixed trial
dates and category C includes standard fee cases without fixed
trial dates. Categories A, B and C account for 10, 15 and 75 per
cent respectively of CPS Crown Court cases.
6. Chambers provide monthly reports to CPS
Branches on the number of, and reasons for, returns broken down
into the three case categories. Reports also indicate returns
within the same chambers or to another set. Priority will be given
to reducing returns in category A and B cases where a high level
of returns will have the greatest adverse affect on quality of
case preparation and performance in court.
7. The reports will identify where action
my be required to reduce a high level of returns by chambers and
it should help the CPS to rationalise its distribution of work.
There are many reasons why briefs are returned and the causes
need to be established before action is taken. The action will
vary with the cause. A high number of returns outside chambers
may, for example, indicate a shortage of sufficient suitably experienced
counsel to provide a back-up service if a return is unavoidable.
Returns which fail to meet the timescales in the Standard could
point to poor communication between counsel and the clerk.
8. Regular meetings are an integral part
of the monitoring system. They will encourage dialogue between
chambers and the CPS Branch and should lead to agreed action rather
than imposed solutions. Some chambers will receive work from more
than one Branch, and Branch Crown Prosecutors will be in a position
to raise issues in liaison meetings with chambers about variations
in the levels of service provided by one set of chambers to different
Branches.
9. Sanctions are available when all other
avenues have been explored and there has been no improvement in
the rate of returns. Sanctions are likely to involve a reduction
in the level of work sent to chambers or individuals according
to circumstances. Complete withdrawal of work for a period of
time would be an option.
SCOPE
10. The planned roll out programme of the
SCOPE system was regularly reviewed. Following a fundamental reassessment
in 1995, negotiations began with Unisys on a development programme
to address identified weaknesses. At the same time other options
were explored in the light of developments in the criminal justice
system that offered the opportunity of greater co-operation and
information sharing; and the growing emphasis on the private finance
initiative.
11. In April 1997, the decision was taken
to halt roll-out while these other options were explored. The
conclusion was that SCOPE was not seen as meeting the CPS's future
needs (in particular for links with other agencies), that future
IT provision should be pursued through PFI and that a contract
with a new supplier could be in place during 1999. Against this
timescale, the likely benefits from further roll out and development
of SCOPE could not be justified in view of the costs. The CPS
decided that the contractual commitment with Unisys to roll out
SCOPE should be terminated.
12. Negotiations with Unisys to conclude
the hardware contract to roll out SCOPE were completed in November
1997. The contractual commitment to implement SCOPE nationally
terminates in 1998-99. Branches with SCOPE will continue to need
support and there is a separate contract for the maintenance of
SCOPE, with Unisys, to ensure the system is supported in the period
to March 2000. The total cost of SCOPE, including maintenance,
is estimated to be £18.8 million in cash terms and £20.2
million in 1997-98 prices.
13. At the end of 1996-97, the estimated
capital costs of national implementation would have been £15.9
million. Following the decision to restrict implementation to
53 Branches, the estimated capital cost, is £10.6 million.
The following table shows estimates of the capital and running
costs of SCOPE on this basis.
SCOPE costs
£ million in 1997-98 prices
| | | |
| Capital costs | Running costs
|
| | | |
| National implementation | 15.9
| 12.4 |
| estimate made at the end of 1996-97 |
| |
| | |
| Implementation in 53 Branches | 10.6
| 9.6 |
| estimate made at the end of 1997 |
| |
| | |
Note: the figure of £6 million in the report
is in current, and not 1997-98 prices, and refers to running cost
expenditure up to the end of 1996
Private finance initiative (PFI)
14. During the latter part of 1997 the CPS
undertook a study of the procurement options for obtaining the
next generation of IS services to support its business and the
Director's Strategic Board agreed that a project to procure an
information systems and technology (IS/IT) service under PFI should
be initiated.
15. The new service will focus primarily
on the provision of support to the casework process within the
CPS and integration with other criminal justice agencies. The
CPS system will need to support processes and information flows
which start with the police and travel through all the criminal
justice system agencies including CPS, the courts, solicitors,
Counsel, the Probation and the Prison Service.
16. The intention is that the IS service
will support all current casework processes, including: case registration,
case review, advance disclosure, case management, court preparation,
appeals, pre-committal, committals, and crown court hearings.
Wherever possible, tasks that are paper based will be removed
and processes improved. To support reduction in delays and more
timely decision making, CPS process improvements will need to
be supported, where appropriate, by improved police and courts
processes. The majority of the information used by the CPS is
provided by the police and access to a standard police electronic
case file is a key requirement.
17. Each agency in the criminal justice
system is at a different stage in taking forward its own IS/IT
strategy. The cross departmental review of the criminal justice
system has instigated a review to ensure that these strategies
are coordinated effectively.
18. Each agency will need to complement
the work of other agencies and support the common information
flows in a consistent manner. This requires national standard
systems for each agency. For the CPS, the most important links
are with the police and the courts. The police intend to start
the implementation of their strategic case preparation application
under their National Strategy for Police Information Systems from
March 1999. The question of whether the case progression system
should be mandated for police forces is being considered as part
of the Ministerial review. The Magistrates' Courts plan to place
a contract for their LIBRA service in Summer 1998, with the intention
that implementation will begin in 2000 followed by up to a three
year roll out. The Crown Court hopes to have implemented its CREDO
service by the end of 2001.
19. The CPS is ready to begin the formal
procurement process under the private finance initiative but this
will not be started until the recommendations in the forthcoming
Glidewell report have been considered. They may require significant
changes to the service requirement. Once the decision to start
has been made, the CPS would aim to place a contract within 12
months. The supplier may want at least 12 months to develop the
solution and pilot successfully and roll out will take from 9
to 12 months. National implementation could be completed within
three years from now.
20. The supplier will be expected to take
on a significant amount of risk in the ongoing delivery of the
service for which they will expect appropriate reward if they
are successful. The CPS expects significant savings to be generated
by the new service through the removal of existing tasks and improvement
in processes.
Crown Prosecution Service
27 February 1998
| 
