| Main recommendation |
Subsidiary recommendation | Response
| Action |
| 1. | Actively manage the intake of cases through improved marketing, and introduce an up-front filter to avoid taking on inappropriate or ineligible cases (para 6.3)
| CCRC should improve "marketing" by providing clear information to potential applicants.
CCRC should also consider reducing pro-active "recruitment" of applicants eg through roadshows.
CCRC should introduce more rigorous filtering of cases before accepting them: no stateable grounds; no appeals; trivial cases.
Investigation should be limited to points raised by the applicant, other material points uncovered as part of that investigation, and highly relevant additional issues only.
| This point will be given consideration.
This point will be given consideration.
This is of strategic importance to the Commission and will be debated fully.
These issues are fundamental and will be examined as part of the project.
| Communications Working Group has produced a report which has been presented to the Project Board. They will be taking these issues forward in due course.
A more sophisticated filtering system piloted and following Commission agreement, the pilot adopted as policy from September 2006. The Commission has decided not to alter its policy of treating virtually all eligible cases equally on their merits.
Case reviews will be planned and relevant issues for investigation will be identified and agreed with the Group Leader, Assigned Commissioner and/or Case Planning Committee as appropriate according to the relevant caseworking pathway. Pathways implemented October 2006.
|
| 2. | Develop a revised case segmentation with three streams driven by case complexity and work content, and define casework pathways for each stream and for distinct case types (para 6.4)
| | Agreed | Implemented October 2006. Cases now follow designated pathways for their category (A, B or C).
|
| 3. | Define individual portfolio for each CRM, with flexibility to adjust them to match CRM capacity to the needs of the three segments, and allocate cases based on experience and need with clear accountability for a case from start to finish (para 6.6)
| | Agreed | The Portfolios work stream has reported to the Project Board. Portfolios will be adjusted as necessary as part of regular reviews by Group Leaders in discussion with case review managers.
|
| 4. | Introduce a rhythm of organisation-wide and individual performance management with clear targets (para 6.8)
| | Agreed | KPIs workstream is underway and is developing and revising KPIs. Planning and development of a performance appraisal system is underway. For implementation April 2007.
|
| 5. | Introduce a new layer of management with Group Leaders reporting to the Director of Casework, each with responsibility for a group of CRMs and for overseeing the progression of their cases (para 6.9)
| | Agreed | Group Leaders were appointed March 2006. CRMs and administrators were organised into groups and co-located May 2006.
|
| 6. | Increase CRM resource by streaming non-casework functions ( para 6.13)
| Chairman: Could the Chairman's role be reduced to part-time?
Commissioners: Could the number of Commissioners be reduced?
SMT Structure: Does the caseworking process warrant two supporting directorates?
Support functions: Could the support functions be further streamlined?
| Chairman agreed to reduce hours.
Savings expected in Commissioner numbers.
Commission an independent review if, on further examination, considered necessary.
Benchmarking indicates support staff levels broadly comparable to other Home Office NDPBs.
| Ongoing.
Three new Commissioners have been appointed to replace those leaveing at the end of the year. From January 2007, the number of Commissioners will be eleven, the statutory minimum.
In light of Accounting Officer review, appropriate to maintain the two supporting directorates of HR & Administration and Finance & IT.
The need for support posts will be reviewed as they become vacant.
|
| 7. | Clarify governance, responsibilities and accountabilities (para 6.14)
| New Casework policy committee.
COG to have advisory and decision making function only, chaired by DoC.
Clarify roles within casework.
| Not considered necessary; policy matters will continue to be presented to Commission meetings.
Agreed.
Agreed.
| None.
Implemented December 2005.
Ongoing. Phase 1: implementation of the new group leader structure—March-September 2006. Phase 2: review of casework roles—October-April 2007.
|
| 8 | Improve service to the applicant (para 6.16)
| Open communication with applicants; communicate likely timescales for completion; speak to or meet all applicants.
| This point will be given consideration. |
For new A, B and C cases following their designated pathway, consideration to be given to interviewing the applicant. As new processes bed in and timescales for completion of cases can be more reliably forecast, publishing likely timescales will be considered.
|
| 9 | Encourage and support personal development (para 6.17)
| Skills/matrix knowledge management. | Agreed.
| Knowledge management/skills matrix workstream. Work is underway in developing a matrix of the appropriate skills for an effective case reviewer. This will inform future personal development initiatives. The work stream is also developing proposals for enhancing knowledge management to support casework.
|
| 10 | Reaffirm values and translate them into actionable "rules of the road" (para 6.18)
| | Agreed. | Casework processes Project. To be kept under review pending implementation of other changes.
|
| 11 | Develop internal leadership and communication (para 6.19)
| DoC and perhaps other management to review cases regularly in CRM role.
| Agreed. | Implemented for all SMT from
January 06.
|
| | |
| |
