APPENDIX 1
Memorandum submitted by the Northern Ireland
Office and the Compensation Agency
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 The Compensation Agency, which operates
from a single site, Royston House in Belfast City Centre, was
established as an executive agency within the Northern Ireland
Office (the Department) on 1 April 1992. Its functions were previously
carried out by the Department's Criminal Compensation Division.
The Agency carries out the Secretary of State's functions covering
the provision of compensation under criminal injuries, criminal
damage and Terrorism Act 2000 legislation. In doing so, it supports
the delivery of Objective V of the Northern Ireland Office's Public
Service Agreement:
"To lessen the impact of crime by working
in partnership with other criminal justice agencies to maintain
and develop policies aimed at preventing or reducing the threat
of crime, the fear of crime and the incidence of crime and to
provide support for the victims of crime."
1.2 The Agency operates under the terms
of a Framework Document, which deals with the responsibilities
of and the relationship between the Agency, Parliament, Ministers
and the Department; financial and personnel arrangements; and
planning, monitoring and accounting arrangements.
RESPONSIBILITY FOR
THE ORGANISATION
1.3 The Agency's Chief Executive, Anne McCleary
heads the 140 staff members and is directly accountable to the
appropriate Northern Ireland Office Minister (currently Mr John
Spellar) on behalf of the Secretary of State. She is responsible
for the effective day to day operation of the Agency and for managing
its financial and manpower resources. The Chief Executive is also
the Agency's Accounting Officer. The Agency's formal point of
contact with the Department is Criminal Justice Services Division,
which provides support to Stephen Leach, the Director of Criminal
Justice in his role as the Agency's "Fraser Figure".
The Division is also responsible for taking forward matters pertaining
to compensation policy.
OVERVIEW OF
THE COMPENSATION
SCHEMES
1.4 The Agency is responsible for the administration
of four statutory compensation schemes on behalf of the Secretary
of State.
— The 1988 Order Criminal Injuries
Compensation Scheme.
— The Criminal Injuries Compensation
Scheme 2002—The Tariff Scheme.
— The Criminal Damage Compensation
Scheme.
— The Terrorism Act 2000 Compensation
Scheme.
An overview of each of the Schemes, together
with a note about how the Agency's decision in individual cases
may be reviewed or appealed, is attached at Annex A. Copies of
the Information Guides on each of the Schemes are attached at
Annex B.
1.5 In the course of processing applications
under the four schemes, the Agency may be provided with reports
from the Police Service for Northern Ireland, the Army, Medical
Personnel, Accountants, Loss Assessors and Loss Adjusters.
2. AIM, KEY
OBJECTIVES AND
KEY PERFORMANCE
INDICATORS
2.1 Following the 2002 Quinquennial Review
the Agency's Aim and Objectives were revised and they are set
below together with the Key Performance Indicators used to assess
the degree to which the Agency meets these imperatives.
Aim |
Objectives | Key Performance Indicators
|
To support the victims of crime and people who have suffered loss from action taken under the Terrorism Act 2000, by ensuring that they are appropriately compensated in accordance with the relevant statutory schemes.
| Provide a responsive and effective service to all applicants in which claims are dealt with speedily, consistently and in accordance with the relevant legislation.
To deliver the compensation schemes efficiently and cost effectively while seeking continuous improvements to the standards of service within the limits of the resources available.
| — Time taken to notify applicant of a decision/decide claim.
— Compliance with legislation.
— Number of justified complaints/compliments received.
— Applicant satisfaction levels (including responses from legal representatives for non-Tariff claims).
— Average unit cost of deciding a claim.
— Time taken to notify applicant of a decision/decide claim.
— Time taken to notify applicant of a decision/decide claim.
— Achievement of recognised management awards.
|
| |
|
2.2 For the above key performance indicators the Minister
annually sets performance targets for the Agency. The targets
for 2003-04 are shown at Annex C. Each year the Agency sets subsidiary
targets which contribute to the achievement of the ministerial
targets and facilitate the cascading down of the higher level
performance targets into the annual forward job plans and personal
development plans of all Agency staff.
3. SERVICE DELIVERY
3.1 The Agency strives continually to improve the quality
of service it provides. The nature of the service means that the
main links are with individual applicants, their solicitors and
loss assessors. The Agency commissions biennial surveys of a randomly
selected sample of some 3000 recent applicants and of the 300
solicitors who are most frequently in contact with it. The results
of these surveys are used to gauge the extent to which the level
of satisfaction with the Agency's service has improved over the
preceding two years.
Table 1 shows the trend in overall satisfaction rates from
1993 through to the last competed survey in 2001.
The surveys carried out in 1993, 1995, 1997 and 1999 indicated
increased overall satisfaction rates, respectively, of 51%, 67%,
70% and 71%. The satisfaction level of 65%, seen in the 2001 survey,
indicated a levelling off of the overall satisfaction rate, a
matter that would be difficult to address without significant
new initiatives. As well as assessing the overall level of user
satisfaction, the surveys have been used to get a broader picture
of the levels of satisfaction attaching to the different aspects
of the service provided. The Agency has responded to specific
areas of concern by:
— Maintaining sustained downward pressure on processing
times;
— Appointing a Customer Information Officer; and
— Sending out compensation scheme information leaflets
to each applicant at the commencement of the claim.
The next survey will take place at the end of 2003.
Performance Achievements 1990-2000 to 2002-03
3.2 A summary of key performance targets, outturns and
achievements since 1999-2000 to 2002-03 is attached at Annex D.
4. FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
4.1 The budgetary flexibilities and financial delegation
accorded to the Agency are detailed in the Framework Document.
The Agency's expenditure is divided for budgetary purposes into
the following:
— Demand-led payments (compensation payments and
applicants' costs);
— Running costs (for example, salaries and current
expenses);
— Other programme costs (Agency's fees, costs and
expenses);
— Interdepartmental charges; and
4.2 Details of actual expenditure in 2002-03 and planned
expenditure for 2003-04 are given at Annex E. These figures are
expressed in resource terms in keeping with the move to a full
resource accounting and budgeting regime. Annex F gives details
of amounts of compensation payments on a cash basis from 1968-69
to 2002-03.
5. BEST BUSINESS
PRACTICES
The Agency considers that to best meet the needs of applicants
and its staff it needs to ensure that it keeps up to date with
best business practices. The following measures help to indicate
how the Agency pursues this goal:
— The achievement and retention of Investors in
People accreditation.
— The award and re-award of the Chartermark.
— The use being made of the EFQM Business Excellence
Model
— The deployment of a Major Incident Team in the
immediate aftermath of major bombing incidents to provide immediate
guidance on compensation and advice on immediate repairs.
— The biennial Applicants' Opinion Surveys
— The robust mechanisms put in place by the Chief
Executive to ensure that complaints are dealt with speedily.
— The Agency's commitment to team-working and having
properly trained staff.
— The strong customer focus engendered throughout
the Agency.
6. COMPENSATION AGENCY
STAFF
6.1 The Agency's staff are one of its key strengths and
must be supported and developed through good personnel management
and training. With the object of sustaining a flexible, skilled
and motivated workforce capable of meeting targets, in the most
cost effective manner, the Agency has successfully pursued the
national standard set by Investors in People and has achieved
accreditation under the scheme in 1997, 2000 and most recently
in 2003. The IiP framework has ensured that the training and development
of all staff is focused on the goals and targets of the Agency.
It also requires that everyone is clear about the tasks that have
to be carried out by individuals, teams and branches to achieve
the performance targets.
6.2 The Agency aims to provide a professional and objective
service under the law to all applicants who have suffered from
violent crime in Northern Ireland. Staff are committed to processing
claims to the highest standards of integrity, impartiality and
fairness. They also recognise the trauma and difficulties suffered
by victims and treat every case sensitively and confidentially
on its individual merits. This focus on "Users" needs
has enabled the Agency to retain its accreditation under the Chartermark
Award Scheme since 1995.
Internal Communications
6.3 Good communication processes are firmly embedded
within the culture of the Agency. These include monthly team meetings
which provide an effective platform for two-way discussion about
ways by which procedures might be improved. These meetings are
supported with memos, updates and quarterly reviews presented
by the Chief Executive to each section.
Staff Complement
6.4 The current staffing level of the Agency is 140 of
whom the majority are administrative grade Civil Servants who
perform clerical and casework duties. The Agency's ten in-house
lawyers and one accountant are employed in the more complex cases.
Extensive use is also made of firms of loss adjusters who contract
to do work for the Agency on a fee basis.The introduction, in
May 2002, of the Northern Ireland Criminal Injuries Compensation
Scheme meant that the Agency now operates four main compensation
schemes as opposed to the three schemes of previous years. This
resulted in a short term increase in staff numbers which is now
reducing as the claims under the previous legislation runs down.
7. SUPPORTING THE
VICTIMS OF
VIOLENT CRIME
Criminal Injuries Compensation—General
7.1 Any person who is the victim of a violent crime is,
in law, entitled to seek compensation directly from the offender
personally; indeed, it is the offender, and only the offender,
who is legally liable to compensate the victim. Many offenders
are not arrested and convicted, and most of those who are convicted
are not in a position to pay compensation to their victims. As
a result, few victims receive compensation from offenders. It
is for this reason that the State comes to the aid of the victim
through the statutory criminal injuries compensation schemes.
Compensation has been payable by the State to victims of terrorism
and other crimes of violence in Northern Ireland for many decades
but only if a number of conditions are satisfied. When paid, compensation
may include amounts for pain and suffering, loss of amenity and
financial loss.
7.1.1 Criminal Injuries (Compensation) (Northern Ireland)
Order 1988
Most of the claims currently in hand (approximately 15,000;
of which 4000 are under appeal) are those brought under the 1988
legislation. This legislation came into operation in July 1988
and covered incidents occurring up to May 2002 when the new Tariff
scheme was introduced.
Around 12,000 claims per annum were received under the 1988
Scheme with some 11,000 claims cleared each year. Under the scheme
approximately 60% of applicants obtained compensation with 40%
of cases refused because the applicants did not satisfy the eligibility
criteria of the scheme. The average award is £7,000 but this
average can be skewed by the payment of very substantial awards
to a small number of applicants. For example, compensation amounting
to £1m was paid to a very severely injured applicant in 2000.
The assessment of injuries is on the same basis as the assessment
of injuries in civil litigation cases. Medico/legal reports are
obtained on the applicant's behalf by his/her legal representatives
and forwarded to the Agency.
7.1.2 The Criminal Injuries Compensation (Northern Ireland)
Order 2002—The Tariff Scheme
During 2002-03, the Agency embarked upon a major programme
of change, both to its organisational structure and to the way
it conducts its core business of processing claims for compensation.
The catalyst for this change was the introduction, on 1 May 2002,
of the Northern Ireland Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme
2002. From that date, the Compensation Agency assumed responsibility
for the administration of the new scheme. This revised scheme
was introduced following a review of compensation arrangements
in Northern Ireland by Sir Kenneth Bloomfield (as recommended
by Sir Kenneth in his earlier report on the victims of the Troubles
"We Will Remember Them", 1998.) The 2002 Scheme differs
from earlier criminal injury compensation schemes in that it establishes
set compensation award levels for various injury types. For this
reason the scheme is generally known as a "Tariff" scheme.
By publishing the award value for a particular injury, it is intended
to make the likely award of compensation more transparent to the
victims of violent crime.
The procedures used by the Agency to process claims for compensation
under the Tariff scheme rely more heavily on IT than those used
to process claims under previous compensation schemes. All claim-related
documentation is captured electronically and the claim processing
software issues standard correspondence and controls workflow
throughout the system. As these revised working practices become
fully embedded, the victims of violent crime will benefit through
quicker decisions on their possible entitlement to compensation.
Prior to the new scheme coming into force on 1 May 2002,
the Criminal Injuries Tariff Scheme Implementation Project (CITSIP)
team was established by the Department to work in conjunction
with Agency staff in order to develop and install the new systems
(and associated works) that were needed to enable the Agency to
administer the scheme. Since 1 May 2002, the Agency has invested
considerable time and effort to ensuring that the IT solution
proposed by the CITSIP team successfully evolved from its original
specification to more fully meet the expectations of its end-users,
that is, the Agency staff who use it to process claims for compensation.
Most of the Tariff IT systems have now been put on a firm
footing but, as would be expected in a system costing approximately
£1m, there continues to be some further technical development
work to be done. A further difficulty with the implementation
of the Tariff scheme has been a problem relating to obtaining
medical reports (see paragraph 10.4.1). These medical report difficulties
have been partially resolved. Once the remaining difficulties
with medical reports have been overcome, and the new working practices
become fully embedded, the Agency expects that the victims of
violent crime in Tariff cases will benefit from decisions in their
claims being made much quicker than under the previous scheme.
8. SUSTAINING THE
CONFIDENCE OF
THE COMMUNITY
The Criminal Damage (Compensation) (Northern Ireland) Order
1977
8.1 Statutory provisions for the payment of compensation
from public funds to victims of criminal damage to property have
existed in Northern Ireland for many decades.
The current legislation, "the 1977 Order", came
into operation in April 1978. (There is no equivalent statutory
scheme operating in the rest of the United Kingdom.) In Northern
Ireland compensation is payable for loss arising from any one
of the following categories of criminal damage to property:
(a)
Damage to any property unlawfully, maliciously or wantonly caused
by three or more persons unlawfully, riotously or tumultuously
assembled together.
(b)
Damage to any property unlawfully, maliciously or wantonly caused
as a result of an act committed maliciously by a person acting
on behalf of or in connection with an unlawful association.
(c)
Unlawful removal in the course of the riot of any property from
a building unlawfully, maliciously or wantonly damaged (to a value
exceeding £200) by three or more persons who are tumultuously
and riotously assembled.
8.2 The primary object of the Scheme is to maintain the
social, commercial and industrial activity of Northern Ireland.
This was particularly the case when, in April 1978, the insurance
industry announced all insurance policies relating to property
(other than private dwellings) in Northern Ireland would be subject
to a new "overriding exclusion". In broad terms, such
policies no longer covered loss or damage caused by or happening
through or in consequence of civil commotion or unlawful association.
8.3 Over the period of the "Troubles" the amount
of public money spent under the criminal damage scheme has been
considerable. Approximately £1 billion has been spent since
1968-69 with the highest annual spend of £75 million seen
in 1992-93. An indication of the cost of various major incidents
is attached at Annex G.
8.4 From 1999-2000, claims under the criminal damage
legislation appear to have stabilised and have reached something
of a "steady-state". A major factor in this phenomenon
has been the very welcome absence of large-scale, town centre
bombing atrocities since the tragic events in Omagh in 1988. This
has also had an impact on the profile of criminal damage claims
with comparatively more claims now arising from incidents where
personal property (including motor vehicles) is damaged. That
is not to say that the business community is no longer adversely
affected by the consequences of criminal damage but, thankfully,
the impact of terrorism-related incidents has abated. It is to
be hoped that this will continue.
9. PROVIDING COMPENSATION
TO THOSE
WHO SUFFER
LOSS FROM
ACTION TAKEN
UNDER THE
TERRORISM ACT
2000
Context
9.1 Compensation provisions have been re-enacted in successive
Northern Ireland (Emergency Provisions) Acts and most recently
in the Terrorism Act 2000 which came into force on 19 February
2001. Despite the greatly reduced operational deployment of the
Army in Northern Ireland, the incidence of claims made under the
scheme did not show a corresponding reduction; indeed an upward
trend was seen.
* The outbreak of Foot and Mouth Disease in 2001-02 led to a delay
in the processing of claims made during that year, and the creation
of a backlog which was cleared during 2002-03. Nevertheless, the
general trend is a steep increase, until April 2003.
Purpose of the Scheme
9.2 The Scheme provides compensation to those whose property
has been damaged as a result of military patrolling: typically,
the damage consists of strained fencing, and/or loss of silage
as well as requisitions. While claims for damage to fencing generally
occur in localities which are also affected by claims for damage/loss
occasioned by helicopter activity, it should be noted that "helicopter"
claims are the responsibility of the Ministry of Defence. Claims
under the Terrorism Act 2000 are founded on the fact that damage
has been caused by proper military patrolling (ie no negligence
is alleged). A requirement of the Terrorism Act 2000 was that
claims should be submitted within 28 days of the damage (to enable
better checks to be made on the incidence of military patrolling).
In practice, claims were made every 28 days, contributing to a
sharp increase in the number of new claims.
Fraud Countermeasures
9.3 The Agency had concerns about the veracity of a number
of Terrorism Act claims. The detail of these concerns was communicated
to the then RUC which commenced a fraud investigation. That investigation
continues, and indeed a further case has been referred to the
PSNI. The Agency is unable to comment further on that investigation
lest the investigation be prejudiced.
Concern about the pattern of claiming and the potential for
fraud led to a review of the Agency's procedures for handling
claims made under the Terrorism Act. The new Chief Executive led
a team which took the views of Agency staff, military personnel,
loss adjusters (who were employed by the Agency in relation to
these claims) and colleagues in the MoD's Area Claims Office.
As a result, a strategy was drawn up which was directed at making
the claims procedure more robust. The strategy involved the introduction
of a new, more detailed, claim form; more focussed reports and
inspection by the Agency's loss adjusters and closer liaison with
the Army.
New Procedures
9.4 By mid-November 2002, improved liaison with the Army
made it possible to challenge allegations that "damage"
was due to military activity. A significant number of claims were
turned down and, while a few claimants challenged those decisions,
the vast majority of denials were not challenged.
The new claims form was introduced in May 2003, following
the publication of notices in local press, and a mail-shot to
anyone who had made a claim in the previous year. Significant
changes included the requirement for the provision of specific
dates upon which the damage had been caused and more robust proof
of title. Simultaneously, the loss adjusters instructed by the
Agency followed new procedures in the content of their inspections:
photographs are now required to be taken of each area of damage
and farm maps, with the damaged areas marked on them, must be
produced at the inspection. These changes were deemed necessary
to make the procedure more robust but were also considered proportionate.
It was appreciated that many claimants would not have title deeds
readily accessible so it was made clear that if the applicant
provided the Folio number of the land in question, the Agency
would obtain a copy of the Land Certificate.
The statistics for claims received since the new procedures
were introduced show a marked reduction in claims.
10. CHALLENGES FACING
THE AGENCY
Scar Viewing
10.1 The Agency currently awaits the publication of Professor
Greer's Review of the Practice of Scar Viewing. The issue arose
when two female applicants who had been injured in the explosion
in Omagh in 1998 voiced their concerns about the practice of lawyers
viewing injuries as part of the settlement process. As a result
of these concerns, the Agency immediately adopted a new practice
of only viewing injuries (commonly scars) when the injury was
visible without the removal of clothing, and only when the victim
provided a written consent.
The legal profession has argued against the new practice,
insisting that injuries need to be seen to be fully assessed.
The Agency is content that, at all times, its lawyers viewed
injuries with sympathy, treating the matter with discretion, and
in accordance with the highest professional standards.
Staffing Issues
10.2 The fact that the 1988 Scheme (the "old Scheme")
is coming to an end has inevitable consequences for the Agency
and its staff. The Agency is endeavouring to keep an adequate
number of staff working with the old Scheme cases to ensure that
these claims are resolved as quickly as possible. However, the
speed with which the Agency can process these claims is influenced
by the speed with which the applicant's legal representative provides
the necessary supporting documentation in respect of the claim
(typically medical and financial reports). This is particularly
the case with claims which are under appeal.
At the same time the Agency is managing the gradual increase
in claims received under the new Tariff Scheme. It is thought
likely that some redeployment may be necessary and that any surplus
staff will be transferred to other parts of the NIO or the Northern
Ireland Civil Service.
Tariff
Medical Reports
10.3 When the Implementation Project Team carried out
the preparatory work to create the procedures for Tariff, it was
not envisaged that there would be a problem with obtaining medical
reports from Accident and Emergency Departments. However, when
the Agency reached the stage of requesting medical reports/statements
from those Departments, it became apparent that each hospital
Trust treated the request differently, both in the range of charges
and in the procedures used to respond to the request. Thus charges
varied between Trusts and there was a lack of a common methodology
for requesting and obtaining reports from Trusts. With the potential
involvement of all Trusts in Northern Ireland, this has escalated
into a major problem. Currently the Agency is in discussion with
colleagues in the health service in order to resolve the problem
but it has already contributed to an on-going delay in the decision-making
process.
Child sexual abuse cases
10.4 The Tariff legislation specifically addressed this
type of claim by allowing anyone who had been the victim of sexual
abuse in their childhood to make a claim, according to the statutory
provisions which prevailed at the time of the incident. In advance
of this change to the legislation, the Agency kept a record of
any claims which were being turned down, but would be affected
by the change in legislation, and notified those applicants when
the legislation changed. This meant that claims could be made
by anyone who had been abused in their childhood, regardless of
the time which had since elapsed. However, the legislation did
not remove any other requirements of the earlier legislation.
In practice this means that if the victim claimed to have been
abused before 1988, and lived in the same household as the perpetrator,
they were barred from receiving compensation.The position has
been queried by various commentators, but the Agency has no option
but to turn down these claims. Recently, however, one such case
has resulted in a Judicial Review of the legislation with the
Applicant alleging that it contravenes Human Rights legislation.
The outcome of this Review will inform future policy in this area
for the Department and the Agency.
Review of the Criminal Damage Scheme
10.5 The rationale behind the Scheme has been outlined
at Section 7. However, as the number of claims reduces the possibility
arises of the insurance industry providing cover in place of the
Scheme. This is an issue which is to be addressed as part of a
forthcoming review arising as part of the Agency's Quinquennial
Review. When asked in 2001, the insurance industry expressed some
interest in returning to such business but it was still considered
too uncertain a risk.
Fortunately there have been no major incidents (such as bomb
explosions) since then and the general atmosphere may be a little
more certain. However, at least one major bomb has been intercepted
and made safe by the PSNI in the last six months so the possibility
of further incidents cannot be ruled out. In addition, the interest
of the insurance industry is likely to have been diluted by the
events of September 11, especially since the industry has strengthened
its terrorist exclusion clauses in the wake of this atrocity.
The review, however, will consider all these factors, and
feed into the subsequent discussions about the Agency's future.
Terrorism Act 2000
Continued Vigilance
11.1 While early returns show that the number of claims
has dramatically reduced following the introduction of the new
procedures in May 2003, it is too early to predict the future
level of claims with any degree of confidence. It is crucial that
the situation is monitored over the next 12 months to ensure that
the claims are handled fairly, consistently and robustly. To assist
in this approach, a Barrister has been identified who will handle
any claims which reach court: this will facilitate consistency
and develop expertise. As with the Criminal Damage Scheme, the
Terrorism Act Scheme will be addressed as part of a forthcoming
review in accordance with the requirements of the Quinquennial
Review.
12. CONCLUSION
Since its formation at a time of widespread violence and
commercial disruption throughout Northern Ireland, the Agency
has been rightly proud of its strong customer focus. The result
of that strength has been the Agency's success in achieving its
performance targets, set against a background of the "Troubles".
However, as the degree of violence and damage diminishes, the
Agency has entered a "Transition phase" during which
the new Tariff scheme has been introduced and new procedures developed
for handling claims made under the Terrorism Act 2000.
These changes have raised considerable challenges which the
Agency is confident that it will meet with the support of its
staff and colleagues elsewhere in the wider NIO and public sector.
The prospects remain uncertain, but the Agency continues to look
to the future, while continuing to adopt a pro-active, professional
approach to the delivery of a high quality service to its customers.
15 September 2003
Annex A
OVERVIEW OF THE COMPENSATION SCHEMES
The Agency is responsible for the administration of four
statutory compensation schemes on behalf of the Secretary of State.
(a)
The criminal injuries compensation scheme which provided compensation
for pain, suffering, financial loss and loss of amenity by the
victims of violent crime, including terrorist crime, in Northern
Ireland for injuries suffered before 1 May 2002. The governing
legislation was the Criminal Injuries (Compensation) (Northern
Ireland) Order 1988.
(b)
The criminal injuries compensation scheme (Tariff) which provides
compensation for the innocent victims of violent crime, including
terrorist crime for injuries suffered from 1 May 2002. The governing
legislation is the Criminal Injuries Compensation (Northern Ireland)
Order 2002.
(c)
The criminal damage compensation scheme which provides compensation
for malicious damage to property in Northern Ireland caused by
terrorism or unlawful assemblies of three or more people; and
for malicious damage to agricultural property. The governing legislation
is the Criminal Damage (Compensation) (Northern Ireland) Order
1977.
(d)
Compensation to those who suffer loss or damage resulting from
action taken under the Terrorism Act 2000.
Review/Appeals against the Agency's Decisions
In respect of criminal damage claims, Terrorism Act 2000
claims or criminal injury claims submitted under the 1988 Order,
applicants have a statutory right of appeal to the Courts if they
are dissatisfied with decisions reached on their claims.
In respect of criminal injury claims submitted under the
Criminal Injuries Compensation (Northern Ireland) Order 2002,
a decision in a case may be reviewed by the Agency. A decision
taken after review may be appealed to the independent Criminal
Injuries Appeals Panel for Northern Ireland.
Annex C
SUMMARY OF KEY PERFORMANCE TARGETS FOR 2003-04
CLAIMS UNDER
THE CRIMINAL
DAMAGE (COMPENSATION)
(NORTHERN IRELAND)
ORDER 1977
1. Maintain average time taken to reach decisions at
19 weeks for claims received from 1 April 2003;
2. Reduce by 85% the number of claims in hand at 31 March
2003 on which no decision has been reached; and
3.* Process claims under the Criminal Damage and Terrorism
Act schemes at a combined average unit cost of £140.
CLAIMS UNDER
THE TERRORISM
ACT 2000
4. Reach decisions on claims in 53 days for claims received
from 1 April 2003;
5. Reduce by 85% the number of claims in hand at 31 March
2003 on which no decision has been reached; and
3.* Process claims under the Criminal Damage and Terrorism
Act Schemes at the combined average unit cost of £140.
*This Unit Cost target relates to claims under the Criminal Damage
and Terrorism Act schemes. The work involved in processing these
claims is carried out in a single organisational unit within the
Agency so the efficiency of this element of the Agency's operations
is measured by reference to a combined Unit Cost target.
CLAIMS UNDER
CRIMINAL INJURIES
(COMPENSATION) (NORTHERN
IRELAND) ORDER
1988
6. Reduce by 45% the number of claims in hand at 31 March
2003; and
7. Reach a decision on 50% of undecided criminal injuries
claims in hand at 31 March 2003.
Claims under the Criminal Injuries Compensation (Northern
Ireland) Order 2002 (Tariff)
8. To decide 45% of all applications within twelve months
of receiving the application.
9. To reach decisions on applications at an average Unit
Cost of £290.
COMPLIANCE WITH
LEGISLATION/STANDARDS
OF ADJUDICATION—ALL
SCHEMES
10. That the Agency's standards of adjudication are appropriate
which will be confirmed by the Department's Internal Audit Branch
through random sampling of claims.
VALUE FOR
MONEY—ALL
SCHEMES
11. Manage the workload in 2003-04 within a running costs
budget (to cover salaries and administrative expenditure) to financial
limits agreed with the Department (including in-year adjustments.)
Annex D
SUMMARY OF KEY PERFORMANCE TARGETS 1999-2000 to 2002-03
Key Performance Targets
| Targets, Outturns and Achievements |
1999- 2000 | 2000-01
| 2001-02 |
| 2002-03 | |
| | | |
To process Criminal Injury claims at an
average cost of £x |
Target
Outturn |
£299
£298 |
£295
£291 |
£290
£290 |
#
# |
To reach a decision in Criminal Injury
claims in an average time of x weeks |
Target
Outturn |
45
45 |
45
45 |
45
45 |
#
# |
To reduce the number of Criminal Injury
claims in hand at due date by x% |
Target
Outturn |
85%
90% |
85%
85% |
85%
86% |
85%
86% |
To reach a decision in x% of Criminal
Injury claims received after due date |
Target
Outturn |
N/A
N/A |
N/A
N/A |
N/A
N/A |
40%
52% |
To reach a decision in Criminal Damage
claims in an average time of x weeks |
Target
Outturn |
19
18 |
19
19 |
19
18 |
19
18 |
To reduce the number of Criminal Damage
claims in hand at due date by x% |
Target
Outturn |
85%
89% |
85%
88% |
85%
86% |
85%
86% |
To process Criminal Damage and
Terrorism Act 2000 claims at an average cost of
£x |
Target
Outturn |
£150
£146 |
£147
£130 |
£140
£157 |
£140
£104 |
To reach a decision in Terrorism Act 2000
claims in an average time of x days |
Target
Outturn |
40
28 |
35
30 |
35
38 |
35
32 |
To reduce the number of Terrorism Act
2000 claims in hand at due date by x% |
Target
Outturn |
90%
97% |
95%
97% |
95%
97% |
95%
97% |
To ensure that the standards of assessment
are fair, objective and in accordance with the
legislation |
Target
Outturn |
Yes
Achieved |
Yes Achieved |
Yes
Achieved |
Yes Achieved |
To manage the workload within the running
costs budget allocated for salaries and administrative
costs (including in-year adjustments) |
Target
Outturn |
£3,238k
£3,197k |
£3,354k £3,326k | £3,477k £3,412k
| £3,966 £3,913 |
| To achieve an improvement in the level of user satisfaction with services provided by the Agency (as reported biennially through independent survey)
| Outturn | Achieved 71% | N/A
| Not Achieved (65%) | N/A |
# These Targets were discontinued in 2002-03.
| | | |
| |
Annex E
| 2002-03 Outturn £000
| 2003-04 Forecast £000 |
Demand Led Payments |
| |
| Criminal Injuries (1988 Order) | 10,353
| 4,260 |
| Criminal Injuries (2002 Order) | 14,894
| 51,840 |
| Criminal Damage | 8,773 |
3,900 |
| Terrorism Act | 1,686 | 5,402
|
| Demand Led Sub-Total | 35,706
| 65,402 |
| Running Costs | 4,628 | 3,899
|
| Programme Costs | -6,051 |
2,450 |
| Inter Departmental Charges | 3
| 11 |
| Recoveries from Offenders | -561
| -180 |
TOTAL RESOURCES | 33,725
| 71,582 |
CAPITAL | 45 |
22 |
| |
|
Annex F
Year | Criminal Injuries In-Year TotalTotal to Date
| Criminal Damage In-Year TotalTotal To Date
| Both Schemes In-Year TotalTotal to Date
|
1968-69 |
£2,356
| £2,356 | £12,036 |
£12,036 | £14,392 | £14,392
|
| 1969-70 | £131,876 | £134,232
| £1,976,760 | £1,988,796
| £2,108,636 | £2,123,028
|
| 1970-71 | £443,474 | £577,706
| £2,780,604 | £4,769,400
| £3,224,078 | £5,347,106
|
| 1971-72 | £724,470 | £1,302,176
| £3,966,680 | £8,736,080
| £4,691,150 | £10,038,256
|
| 1972-73 | £2,173,524 |
£3,475,700 | £26,592,312
| £35,328,392 | £28,765,836
| £38,804,092 |
| 1973-74 | £3,886,426 |
£7,362,126 | £27,901,114
| £63,229,506 | £31,787,540
| £70,591,632 |
| 1974-75 | £6,022,556 |
£13,384,682 | £40,209,285
| £103,438,791 | £46,231,841
| £116,823,473 |
| 1975-76 | £7,937,751 |
£21,322,433 | £45,844,522
| £149,283,313 | £53,782,273
| £170,605,746 |
| 1976-77 | £6,300,336 |
£27,622,769 | £49,975,314
| £199,258,627 | £56,275,650
| £226,881,396 |
| 1977-78 | £7,491,533 |
£35,114,302 | £37,217,730
| £236,476,357 | £44,709,263
| £271,590,659 |
| 1978-79 | £10,612,634 |
£45,726,936 | £39,098,648
| £275,575,005 | £49,711,282
| £321,301,941 |
| 1979-80 | £8,737,357 |
£54,464,293 | £39,526,039
| £315,101,044 | £48,263,396
| £369,565,337 |
| 1980-81 | £10,009,283 |
£64,473,576 | £44,627,341
| £359,728,385 | £54,636,624
| £424,201,961 |
| 1981-82 | £6,251,314 |
£70,724,890 | £36,523,503
| £396,251,888 | £42,774,817
| £466,976,778 |
| 1982-83 | £7,132,522 |
£77,857,412 | £31,058,498
| £427,310,386 | £38,191,020
| £505,167,798 |
| 1983-84 | £8,377,447 |
£86,234,859 | £19,472,529
| £446,782,915 | £27,849,976
| £533,017,774 |
| 1984-85 | £9,246,219 |
£95,481,078 | £19,871,723
| £466,654,638 | £29,117,942
| £562,135,716 |
| 1985-86 | £13,887,904 |
£109,368,982 | £17,218,357
| £483,872,995 | £31,106,261
| £593,241,977 |
| 1986-87 | £11,466,532 |
£120,835,514 | £15,265,899
| £499,138,894 | £26,732,431
| £619,974,408 |
| 1987-88 | £12,925,016 |
£133,760,530 | £19,004,436
| £518,143,330 | £31,929,452
| £651,903,860 |
| 1988-89 | £14,968,319 |
£148,728,849 | £20,606,265
| £538,749,595 | £35,574,584
| £687,478,444 |
| 1989-90 | £16,449,745 |
£165,178,594 | £22,124,107
| £560,873,702 | £38,573,852
| £726,052,296 |
| 1990-91 | £19,547,358 |
£184,725,952 | £22,711,159
| £583,584,861 | £42,258,517
| £768,310,813 |
| 1991-92 | £25,019,951 |
£209,745,903 | £33,096,467
| £616,681,328 | £58,116,418
| £826,427,231 |
| 1992-93 | £26,569,813 |
£236,315,716 | £75,927,801
| £692,609,129 | £102,497,614
| £928,924,845 |
| 1993-94 | £29,601,804 |
£265,917,520 | £67,870,586
| £760,479,715 | £97,472,390
| £1,026,397,235 |
| 1994-95 | £34,634,993 |
£300,552,513 | £53,811,825
| £814,291,540 | £88,446,818
| £1,114,844,053 |
| 1995-96 | £36,345,097 |
£336,897,610 | £32,102,156
| £846,393,696 | £68,447,253
| £1,183,291,306 |
| 1996-97 | £35,116,634 |
£372,014,244 | £23,329,783
| £869,723,479 | £58,446,417
| £1,241,737,723 |
| 1997-98 | £40,660,108 |
£412,674,352 | £25,417,865
| £895,141,344 | £66,077,973
| £1,307,815,696 |
| 1998-99 | £46,240,512 |
£458,914,864 | £32,384,750
| £927,526,094 | £78,625,262
| £1,386,440,958 |
| 1999-2000 | £49,775,565 |
£508,690,429 | £29,435,764
| £956,961,858 | £79,211,329
| £1,465,652,287 |
| 2000-01 | £47,013,823 |
£555,704,252 | £14,645,572
| £971,607,430 | £61,659,395
| £1,527,311,682 |
| 2001-02 | £50,469,842 |
£606,174,094 | £11,427,217
| £983,034,647 | £61,897,059
| £1,589,208,741 |
| 2002-03 | £52,188,863 |
£658,362,957 | £7,337,666
| £990,372,313 | £59,526,529
| £1,648,735,270 |
| |
| | | |
|
Annex G
|
