Following the six-month reports from the initial
three posts reviewed by the Best Practice Unit (BPU)—Amsterdam,
Beirut and Damascus—we undertook to assess the impact of
the Unit so far.
(a) passport offices overseas run in accordance
with Passport Guidance;
(b) passports are issued within PSA targets;
and
(c) passports are issued to those with a genuine
claim to British Nationality and with appropriate checks taken
to ensure authentication of identity.
Recommendations made during Best Practice reviews
can largely be split into two areas:
(i) Recommendations which concern working practices
or mandatory checks for which policy has already been laid down
in FCO Guidance on Passports.
These recommendations are considered "non-negotiable".
There may be auditory implications if these recommendations are
not followed and Posts are strongly encouraged to follow them.
The six-month review post-BPU visit looks closely at these areas.
(ii) Recommendations which encourage a change
to processes within the passport section. This in turn may lead
to the more efficient production of a passport, the better designation
of tasks according to grade and job description and the encouragement
to better meet PSA targets.
These recommendations rely on "buy-in"
from the Post, as their focus is on promoting best practice rather
than addressing any failures to comply with standards. However,
if Posts choose not to follow recommendations and subsequently
have difficulty meeting PSA targets or demonstrate continued inefficiency,
the Head of Passport and Documentary Services Group will strongly
encourage the senior management at Post to step in and ensure
that the recommendations are given a fair trial.
In the course of the first three reviews, the BPU
found that there were gaps in some of these areas and have made
recommendations for Posts to tighten procedures. Below is a brief
report of the findings, recommendations and action taken following
the first three Best Practice reviews. These demonstrate that
the BPU has fulfilled its objectives in these cases.
VALUE TO
POSTS
The value of having an independent expert to review
working practices and procedures, to make recommendations for
improvement is obvious. It also helps to build relationships between
London and posts and between groups of posts with similar regional
issues—the Head of BPU helps to establish and encourage
ongoing sharing of best practice between posts.
The feedback from posts reviewed over the past six
months has been overwhelmingly positive.
VALUE TO
CONSULAR DIRECTORATE
The work of the BPU has also given staff in London
a valuable insight into the work being conducted at the overseas
passport issuing posts. From the reviews we are able to see how
things are working on the ground and this in turn is helping to
formulate future passport issuance policy and processes.
The BPU is also of value to Consular Directorate's
Resources Group. Resources Group identifies posts which are not
meeting PSA targets and asks the BPU to conduct reviews to see
how working practices can be improved to bring the post up to
the required standard. Although the full impact will not be known
until statistics are collated in April 2007, we feel confident
that the reviews will have had a positive impact on posts' ability
to meet the PSA targets.
Overall, we feel confident that the BPU has fully
met is objectives during review visits to seven passport issuing
posts over the past eight months and that the BPU is an asset
to the Consular operation. There might even be a case for expanding
its resources over the coming months to enable it to keep up with
demand.
DETAIL OF
FINDINGS FROM
REVIEW OF
FIRST THREE
POSTS
Amsterdam: November 2005
During the course of the BPU visit to Amsterdam the
Head of BPU found no major issues in the "non-negotiable"
areas and those recommendations made involve only minor changes
to procedures. The majority of the recommendations concern processes.
There were, and remain, parts of the process which are being completed
by staff at the incorrect grade. However, the Head of BPU has
pointed out that there is an on-going staffing issue in Amsterdam
which the Consular Review Team are aware of and negotiations towards
its resolution continue. This is putting pressure on the rest
of the team in Amsterdam and the Head of BPU accepts that, until
the staffing issue has been sorted, some of the recommendations
on processes cannot be implemented.
The Head of BPU was pleased to see that the recommendations
made on Passport Application Form (PAF) administration have been
implemented and that information on application forms has been
made clearer. Also, as the Passport section is now open only in
the mornings only one cashier is appointed per day (Amsterdam
used to have two different people taking cash in the mornings
and afternoons which made accounting for errors difficult). Although
the Head of BPU would prefer Amsterdam to nominate one member
of staff as a permanent cashier, she can see that this compromise
will work. Nationality determinations are being made by correctly
graded staff although, through staffing problems the Consul-General
is still validating passports and he is over-graded for this task.
In the "non-negotiable" area, surprise
checks are now being undertaken each month and the security of
bulk and working stock is well managed.
Beirut: November 2005
During the course of the BPU visit to Beirut the
Head of BPU found no major issues and the majority of the "non-negotiable"
recommendations involved some minor changes to procedures. General
working practices in Beirut were sound and Post had spent some
time improving their processes in light of a passport fraud which
was discovered in 2004.
However, in a few areas processes had been unnecessarily
over-graded in an attempt to prevent future fraud. For example,
the Consular Assistant did not make nationality determinations
and this was taken on by the Vice Consul. The Consular Assistant
is the correct grade to make these determinations and has had
the appropriate training. As long as the Vice Consul is performing
the correct checks while validating the passport application and
the mandatory monthly sample check of applications is carried
out by the Consul, the Consular Assistant should be allowed to
take on this aspect of passport work. In addition, supporting
documentation for basic and straightforward passport renewals
was being kept with the passport application. This is generally
unnecessary as a previous nationality determination has been made
and all the relevant supporting documentation was received when
the initial nationality determination was made for the first passport.
The Consular Assistant is making nationality determinations but
the more complex cases are still being dealt with by the Vice
Consul. Moreover Post have decided to continue keeping supporting
documentation for all applications.
Of the "non-negotiable" recommendations,
the majority have been implemented. The customer is now required
to sign for the receipt of their new passport, Lost and Stolen
reports are recorded on "Compass", Passport Destruction
Certificates are filed in logical order with the passport application
forms, and the Custodian of the bulk stock of blank passports
has been given a letter from the Ambassador outlining his/her
duties and responsibilities.
Damascus: November 2005
There were a substantial number of recommendations
made by the BPU in both areas.
Damascus runs a small passport operation and although
the Head of BPU recommended several changes to working practices,
there were no serious problems in this area. The recommendations
for changes to processes included better administration of the
passport application forms (in terms of how data is recorded),
ensuring annual orders of passports and quarterly returns for
Emergency passports are submitted in time and that refusals were
administered in the proper fashion by a correctly graded member
of staff. In the six months since the BPU review, all recommendations
in these areas have been implemented.
However, the "non-negotiable" areas were
of more concern and the Head of BPU made a large number of such
recommendations. Of these, Post have confirmed that they have
implemented the majority including: tightening up on the security,
storage and access to blank working stock passports, entering
lost and stolen passport details on Compass, asking customers
to sign for the receipt of their new passports and the Custodian
of the bulk stock of blank passports has now been issued with
a letter from the Ambassador outlining her responsibilities and
duties. (In addition, the Head of the BPU has added that comment
was made at the time of the BPU visit about effectiveness of the
bulk stock custodian. It was the most organised bulk stock operation
she has seen and credit must be given to the bulk stock custodian
for the way she carries out her duties in this regard.)
The Head of BPU is still concerned that the mandatory
monthly check of issued passport applications may not be being
carried out effectively by the Consul. The current Consul leaves
post in August and BPU have arranged to have a meeting with the
new Consul to highlight these issues and to ensure that mandatory
checks are being undertaken.
Consular Directorate
FCO
