5.1 Intake reviews

Investigators should pass any post review correspondence from the complainant to the reviewer who made the decision; they should not deal with this themselves. Correspondence about remedies should go to the Team Coordinator. Investigators should not get involved in telephone calls or other contact once a review request has been rejected or the case has been reviewed and the decision upheld. If a complainant is persistent the Investigator should tell the manager, who will decide what action to take.

Having issued a review response using the standard text around no future contact, reviewers should carefully consider whether any further response is likely to be helpful, or more likely to continue an unproductive dialogue. In rare circumstances, new information can bring the review decision into question. In this case the reviewer should decide what action needs to be taken, which could include re-opening the case.

If the reviewer decided there is nothing more we can say they should politely, but firmly, close the correspondence down. Standard letter ‘No Further Contact’ can be used and if necessary Factsheet G7 ‘Complainant Behaviour;’ should be sent. Any further correspondence should be checked, but not acknowledged or, unless absolutely necessary, responded to. Reviewers should be familiar with the email blocking policy. If the complainant sends in a service complaint about the review or the ‘No further contact’ decision’ it should not be acknowledged, but an ECHO task set for the Director of Intake and Assessment or Director of Investigation so they can decide whether to respond.

Potential Pre-Action Protocols (PAP) or judicial reviews should be dealt with by the original Investigator in consultation with their manager in accordance with the Legal Manual. This is because the original Investigator is best placed to deal with specific points raised. If the Investigator’s Line Manager is not available the person who did any review can deal with the PAP/Judicial review.

5.2     Assessment reviews

For Assessment, valid reviews are recorded on the Other Contact screen. Reviews of Assessment Team decisions are done by the Assessment Managers (AM). There may be occasions where the AM decides the Director of Intake and Assessment should respond. This may be due to the nature of the complaint or issues with the complainant.

Where a review request is about a decision taken by an AM, the Director of Intake and Assessment will carry out the review.

There is a quarterly rota for which AM reviews which team. 

Where the review request is about a Joint Working Assessment decision, the same review process as for mainstream assessment team decision reviews will be followed. However, these Joint Working Assessment reviews will be allocated using the AO allocation list.

5.3       Investigation reviews

For Investigation valid Reviews are recorded on the PDR Screen in ECHO workflow. Joint working investigation review requests will be dealt with following the same process as for mainstream investigation review requests.

There is a rota for assigning which manager will get the next review which requires completing.

Investigation Team Coordinators will allocate reviews to a manager from the list and may set a task for the reviewing manager to inform them of the review and the date the response is due. Managers are allocated reviews proportionate to their FTE.

Where there has either been delay in the review being identified, the review request is out of time, there is a service complaint or it is a JR/PAP that has not had a review, the Team Coordinator should include a comment about these in the task title. The TC should ensure the task title includes the due date to comply with our service standards, even if this is in the past, or very soon, so the reviewer can decide how best to prioritise and potentially send a KIT to the complainant. They will also change the case owner to the reviewing manager through the case properties screen, however they should leave the team as that of the original investigator.

When managers go on leave, they can make a note on the rota of the dates they will be out of the office. Team Coordinators will not allocate reviews until the manager is within a week of their return to work. It is the manager’s responsibility to record their leave dates on the rota and should only do so when they are within one week of going on leave. Team Coordinators will not allocate reviews to managers who are next on the rota but who will be going on leave within one week.

Team Coordinators should be mindful of the date the response is due and, where possible, seek to avoid allocating reviews with imminent due dates to ensure managers have sufficient time to respond on their return to work. Team Coordinators will not allocate reviews retrospectively when managers return from leave of more than one week to ensure managers do not receive several allocations at once. This means managers returning from leave will have either been allocated a review towards the end of their leave or will be allocated one when they are next on the rota. Team Coordinators will not ‘back-fill’ blocked out entries on the rota.

5.4  Special arrangements

Managers may be excused from being allocated reviews, or reduce the frequency of reviews they take for example, when carrying out project work that has a significant impact upon their availability. In all cases these arrangements need to be agreed by the Director of Investigation or Director of Intake and Assessment as appropriate. The manager will be responsible for ensuring the rota reflects what has been agreed and updating it at the end of the agreed period. The Director will notify the Executive Assistant of any such arrangements.

Managers will not be allocated any reviews during an absence of sickness lasting more than one week. Their Team Coordinator will update the rota when the manager is absent due to sickness and notify the Executive Assistant.

The Executive Assistant will carry out a check every three/six months to ensure managers have received their fair share of reviews and propose action if the distribution is not equitable. This will take account of any special arrangements agreed by the Director of Investigation or Director of Intake and Assessment and any absence from work due to sickness. Proposed action may include allocating additional reviews to managers who have taken proportionately less than their counterparts during that period.