Queensland Ombudsman. Complaints Management Project

Queensland Ombudsman Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report December 2005

Queensland Ombudsman Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report December 2005

Queensland Ombudsman, 2005 Apart from any fair dealing for purposes related to the functions of the Ombudsman or the purpose of private study, research, criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright Act, no part of this document may be reproduced by any process without permission. Inquiries should be made to the publishers, the Queensland Ombudsman. ISBN 0-9581039-9-2 Queensland Ombudsman Level 25, 288 Edward Street Brisbane Qld 4000 GPO Box 3314 Brisbane Qld 4001 Tel: (07) 3005 7000 Fax: (07) 3005 7067 Email: ombudsman@ombudsman.qld.gov.au Web: www.ombudsman.qld.gov.au

Foreword Most people know that the Queensland Ombudsman s Office investigates complaints about the actions and decisions of public sector agencies. However, they may not be aware that, with the introduction of the Ombudsman Act 2001, we have an additional role to assist public sector agencies to improve their decision-making practices. One of the ways my Office is carrying out this role is by undertaking a project called the Complaints Management Project (CMP) to assist agencies to develop or improve internal complaints management processes. This is the most significant improvement-focused project we have undertaken. The aims of the project are to improve internal complaints handling procedures, raise standards of administrative decision-making and improve standards of service to the community. Eleven public sector agencies participated in the first phase of the project, during which my officers worked closely with representatives of each of those agencies to develop a complaints management system that suited its own organisational structure and business processes. For this purpose, we developed a number of tools to assist agencies to evaluate their current complaints management practices, identify areas for improvement and guide the development of complaints policy and procedures. I commend the agencies involved in the project for the commitment they demonstrated to accountability, in adopting best practice systems for managing and resolving complaints. Phase 1 has already begun to have a positive impact on the standard of complaints handling in agencies and the outcomes of this phase will provide a platform for launching the next phase of the project. This next phase will focus on encouraging all other public sector agencies and local councils in Queensland to implement best practice complaints management systems. Complaints management is a vital component of every decision-making framework and is especially relevant to agencies that have service-oriented roles in the public sector. There is an increasing expectation for public sector agencies to respond to complaints from members of the community in an effective and timely way. Agencies also need to be aware that a good complaints management system can enable them to identify and address systemic and service related problems. My Office is committed to helping agencies improve the quality of their decisionmaking and service-delivery and will continue to support and encourage agencies to meet best practice standards in complaints handling. David Bevan Queensland Ombudsman

Contents Foreword i Executive summary 1 1. Introduction 5 1.1 Impetus for the project 6 1.2 Project overview 6 1.2.1 Phase 1 6 1.2.2 Phase 2 8 2. Implementing Phase 1 9 2.1 Strategies 9 2.1.1 Selecting participating agencies 9 2.1.2 Agencies participating in Phase 1 9 2.1.3 Developing awareness 10 2.1.4 Reviewing existing complaints management systems in agencies 12 2.1.5 Developing effective complaints management systems 14 2.1.6 Assisting with implementation 15 2.2 Factors affecting the implementation of Phase 1 16 3. Project achievements 17 3.1 Overview of achievements 17 3.2 Agency summary reports 18 3.2.1 Department of Child Safety 18 3.2.2 Department of Corrective Services 21 3.2.3 Department of Education and the Arts 24 3.2.4 Department of Industrial Relations 27 3.2.5 Department of Natural Resources and Mines 30 3.2.6 Queensland Health 35 3.2.7 Queensland Transport 38 3.2.8 WorkCover Queensland 41 3.2.9 Boonah Shire Council 43 3.2.10 Gold Coast City Council 45 3.2.11 Maroochy Shire Council 49 4. Looking forward 53 4.1 Phase 1 53 4.2 Phase 2 53 4.2.1 Encouraging all agencies to implement good complaints systems 54 4.2.2 Addressing the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993 54 4.3 Commissioner s directive 54 5. Supporting projects 56 5.1 Good Decisions Training Program 56 5.2 Website redevelopment 56 6. Conclusion 57

Appendix 1: Project steps 58 Appendix 2: Project milestones 59 Appendix 3: Effective Complaints Management Fact Sheets 60 Appendix 4: Effective Complaints Management Self Audit Checklist (updated) 92 Appendix 5: Developing Effective Complaints Management Policy and Procedures 122 Appendix 6: Western Australian Premier s Circular 139

Executive Summary Executive summary Purpose of project The Complaints Management Project is one of the most significant and resource intensive projects my Office has undertaken. Its purpose is to encourage and assist public sector agencies in Queensland (both State agencies and local councils) to implement complaints systems that meet recognised standards for good complaints management. Why we undertook project We initiated this project for the following reasons: We have a statutory responsibility under the Ombudsman Act 2001 to assist public sector agencies to improve their decision-making and administrative practice. Complaints management is a vital component of every decision-making framework. A good system will identify systemic or recurring problems and allow agencies to improve service delivery. Based on our extensive experience in complaints investigation and the results of a survey conducted in 2002-03, we were aware that a significant number of public agencies did not have complaints systems that complied with recognised standards for complaints handling. We had received numerous requests from agencies to assist them to develop or improve internal complaints management processes. For resource reasons and to encourage agencies to take responsibility for rectifying their own poor decisions, we generally will not commence an investigation unless the person has made a genuine attempt to resolve the complaint with the agency complained about. Therefore, we were keen to ensure that the persons we referred to agencies were dealt with fairly and professionally. Participants The project commenced in March 2003 and this report presents a summary of the first phase. Eleven agencies participated in this phase, namely: eight Queensland Government departments and agencies that deliver key services to the public and generate a substantial number of complaints to our Office; two of the larger local councils; and one small local council. The aim of this phase has been to help each of the participating agencies to develop a complaints management system that suited its own organisational structure and business processes. 1 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

Executive Summary Methodology We knew that no one model would fit all agencies and this did not matter as long as each system met the recognised standards for good complaints management. From the outset, we recognised that developing a suitable system for each agency, which met the needs of both the agency and the public, would require a collaborative effort. Therefore, my officers worked with nominated liaison officers from the agencies to review their existing complaints management systems, evaluating them against best practice. We then made recommendations for improvements to those systems. My officers also provided extensive advice and other assistance to agencies while they were implementing our recommendations. To assist agencies through the process, we developed and published: 14 fact sheets that explain the essential elements of a good complaints handling system; a checklist on complaints handling that agencies could use to evaluate their own complaints systems; and guidelines called Developing Effective Complaints Management Policy and Procedures that agencies could use in developing or enhancing their own complaints policies and procedures. We also conducted forums for agency project officers where speakers outlined complaints handling systems and demonstrated complaints management databases. It should be understood that the focus of our project was on encouraging and assisting agencies to develop best practice policies and procedures for complaints management. We did not conduct operational audits of how agencies currently manage complaints. Findings and recommendations Common findings from our evaluation of agency complaints management systems were that: agency policies or practices were either non-existent or rudimentary in that they failed to address key areas such as timelines; staff were not trained or given clear responsibility for carrying out complaints handling roles; information was not made available to the public on how to go about making a complaint; and systemic problems could not be identified and addressed because the existing systems lacked coordination and reporting capability. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 2

Executive Summary Our most common recommendations were that agencies: develop stand-alone complaints management policies and procedures containing relevant key features including timelines for resolving complaints; clearly delineate staff responsibilities for complaints handling and train staff in those roles; make the policies and procedures available to both agency staff and the public; and ensure complaints data is collected, analysed, and reported and acted on, especially where systemic issues are revealed. Agencies were receptive to the recommendations. At the date of reporting, nearly all agencies had either implemented best practice systems or were well on the way to doing so. Why publish this report? I have decided to furnish this report on the outcomes of the project so far for three main reasons. First, there is significant public interest in public sector agencies responding appropriately to complaints from members of the community. The community has a growing expectation that public sector agencies will act fairly and reasonably in making decisions that may adversely affect any person or group of persons. Where people believe this has not occurred, they expect the agency to have in place a credible and effective process for reviewing its decisions. Second, recent revelations in the public health and immigration sectors have highlighted the importance of an agency having in place a complaints management system that: is responsive to concerns about service delivery raised by the public or by the agency s own officers; and has the capacity to identify complaints trends to enable the agency to implement complaints prevention and business improvement measures. Third, the report constitutes a resource for public sector agencies not involved in the project, which they can use in developing or reviewing their own complaints systems. 3 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

Executive Summary Phase 2 The resources we have developed, and the various complaints models we helped agencies implement during the project so far, provide a platform for launching Phase 2 of the project. This phase focuses on encouraging all other public sector agencies and local councils in Queensland to implement best practice complaints management systems, perhaps by adapting the system developed in Phase 1 that is most relevant to their requirements. Following recent amendments to the Local Government Act 1993, all councils are required to establish a general complaints process by 1 March 2006. However, there is no similar requirement in relation to State agencies. Therefore, I wrote to the Public Service Commissioner in October 2005 asking him to issue a directive under the Public Service Act 1996 requiring each department and public sector unit to develop and implement, by a date he specifies, a complaints management system that complies with the relevant Australian Standard. I am pleased to say that the Commissioner responded positively to my request and has advised that he agrees in-principle to issue the directive after consulting with the heads of the departments and other public sector units. Phase 1 of the project has already benefited the people of Queensland by improving the standard of complaints handling in agencies that deliver important public services. In this way, the project has assisted those agencies to support the Queensland Government s priority of providing a responsive public sector. I am confident that the second phase of the project will achieve similar benefits for the community by encouraging all other public sector agencies in Queensland to see complaints as opportunities to improve service delivery and demonstrate their commitment to accountability. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 4

1. Introduction 1. Introduction The Queensland Ombudsman s Complaints Management Project was developed to encourage and assist Queensland public sector agencies to implement high quality internal complaints management systems. The implementation by an agency of an effective complaints management system improves the agency s capacity and preparedness to deal with complaints about its decisions and actions appropriately, consistently and in a timely manner. Further, by analysing complaints information, agencies can identify and address systemic and service related problems and the causes of recurring complaints. These initiatives will raise standards of decision-making and standards of service to the community. The Complaints Management Project is the most significant project undertaken by our Office to date to address our responsibility under the Ombudsman Act 2001 to improve the quality of decision-making and administrative practice in agencies. Other Ombudsmen interstate and overseas have published guidelines for good internal complaints handling, and that material has been of a high standard. However, public sector agencies in those jurisdictions do not appear to have acted on that material to a significant degree. We therefore decided on a more strategic approach, which was to: avoid the one size fits all approach of publishing generalised guidelines to the world at large in the hope that they would be picked up and implemented by some agencies; select appropriate agencies to participate in the project that is, large complaints generating agencies and one small local council and obtain high level commitment to the project; work closely and directly with those agencies to develop specific complaints handling solutions appropriate to their unique business environment and requirements; and develop and publish a range of complaints handling models that could be adopted or adapted by other agencies not participating in the project. Our research indicates this is the first time in the world an Ombudsman s Office has attempted such a project on this basis. This report reviews the processes, tools and achievements of Phase 1 of the project, details further initiatives that have arisen from Phase 1 and outlines plans for Phase 2. 5 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

1. Introduction 1.1 Impetus for the project The impetus for the project came from a number of sources. First, the Ombudsman Act 2001 places upon the Ombudsman s Office an obligation to assist agencies to improve their administrative processes and practices. Based on extensive experience in complaints investigation, we identified internal complaints handling by agencies as a key area where they could improve their processes and practices. Second, we have received numerous requests from agencies to assist them with developing internal complaints management processes or ensuring their existing processes reflected best practice. This highlighted a need among public sector agencies for comprehensive and expert advice on complaints management. Third, research conducted with Queensland public sector agencies between October 2002 and May 2003 revealed that only 58% of responding agencies had a policy governing complaints handling. Further, only 26% of agencies with a complaints handling policy considered that their policies reflected the essential elements of the Australian Standard for complaints handling (AS 4269-1995 Complaints Handling). The majority of agencies did not know if their policy and/or procedures complied with the Australian Standard. Fourth, for some time our Office has applied a policy of declining to investigate complaints unless the complainant has, wherever practicable, first attempted to resolve their complaints directly with the agencies concerned. We were keen to ensure that the agencies to which complainants were being directed had procedures in place to deal with these complaints fairly and effectively. A recent development that reinforces the timeliness of the project is the passing of amendments to the Local Government Act 1993 in May 2005. These amendments require local governments (councils) to establish a general complaints process by 1 March 2006 that meets certain requirements. In Phase 2 of the Complaints Management Project, we will provide support and guidance to councils in developing policies and procedures that comply with these requirements. 1.2 Project overview 1.2.1 Phase 1 The purpose of Phase 1 of the project was to help each participating agency develop and implement high quality complaints management policies and procedures that meet the needs of the agency. A complaints management system includes policy, procedures, personnel and technology. To be effective the system must provide the guidelines for receiving, recording, processing, responding to and reporting on complaints, as well as using the guidelines to improve services and decision-making. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 6

1. Introduction We conducted a literature review in 2003 to identify, analyse and document information on innovation and best practice in complaints management. The Complaints Management Guidelines for Local Government developed by the Department of Local Government and Planning in 2001 in partnership with us and local government representatives provided a sound foundation from which to launch our more extensive literature review. The literature review appraised Australian and international literature on complaints management and identified examples of best practice within both private and public sector agencies. We sought advice from Ombudsmen s offices in Australia and overseas and identified other leading publications such as: New South Wales Ombudsman s Complaint Handler s Tool Kit; Quebec Ombudsman s A legitimate, credible complaints office Complaints processing in government organisations; and United Kingdom s Cabinet Office s A Guide to the Charter Mark Criteria scheme which introduced customer service standards that promoted customer choice, flexibility and innovation in public services. As a benchmark for the development of agencies complaints management systems, we have used the Australian Standard AS 4269-1995 Complaints Handling. At the time of commencing the project a draft International Standard ISO 10018 Complaints Handling Guidelines for Organisations was being developed. This draft also informed our recommendations. It was adopted as International Standard ISO 10002:2004 Quality Management Customer satisfaction Guidelines for complaints handling in organisations in July 2004. The new draft Australian Standard DR 05006 proposes the adoption of the ISO 10002:2004 and is set to replace AS 4269-1995. Adoption of this standard should occur in late 2005. Throughout Phase 1 we worked in close partnership with 11 agencies with this end in mind. In particular we developed a number of tools to assist agencies to review their existing complaints handling systems and provided guidance for developing systems that would comply with the relevant Standards. Phase 1 did not include an operational audit of the effectiveness of agencies complaints handling systems, though this is something we will consider doing at a later time. 7 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

1. Introduction 1.2.2 Phase 2 Phase 2 of the project will utilise the outcomes of Phase 1 to provide State and local government agencies in Queensland with the tools and support necessary to implement a complaints handling system that meets the Australian Standard. In particular we will provide links on our website to complaints handling models developed during Phase 1, and other agencies will be able to adopt or adapt the model most relevant to their own requirements. In October 2005, I wrote to the Public Service Commissioner recommending that he consider issuing a directive requiring departments and other agencies within his jurisdiction to implement, within a timeframe he specifies, complaints systems that comply with the relevant Australian Standard. In making this recommendation, I was aware that in March 2004, the Premier of Western Australia issued a circular to the like effect in that State (a copy appears as Appendix 6 to my report). The circular indicated that the Government had made a formal commitment to the principles of the Australian Standard on Complaints Handling (AS 4269). The Premier required each agency to: put in place a complaints management system that conformed to the principles of AS 4269; and have a direct link on the front page of its website to information assisting people to make a complaint about the agency. The policy objectives for issuing the circular included: increasing community access to complaints mechanisms; increasing community awareness of these mechanisms; increasing agency capacity to meet the appropriate standard of complaints management; and monitoring and evaluation of complaints process and data to ensure improved service delivery. All of these objectives are apposite to our project. I am pleased to say that the Commissioner responded positively to my request and has indicated his in-principle support. He has also indicated that he will develop the wording of the directive after consulting with the heads of departments and other relevant agencies. The issuing of a directive will substantially assist the objectives of the second phase of the project. Furthermore, the directive will reinforce within the public sector the importance the Government attaches to accountability and high levels of service to the community. I thank the Commissioner for his support. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 8

2. Implementing Phase 1 2. Implementing Phase 1 2.1 Strategies The broad strategies for implementing Phase 1 of the project comprised: 1. Securing the participation of 11 appropriate agencies; 2. Developing among those agencies awareness of the principles of effective complaints management; 3. Reviewing existing complaints management systems in those agencies; 4. Providing recommendations to those agencies for improvement in their existing complaints management systems or for the establishment of new systems where none previously existed; and 5. Assisting those agencies to implement those recommendations. A summary of the steps involved in each strategy is provided in Appendix 1. This section provides a brief overview of the activities and tools developed for each segment of the project. 2.1.1 Selecting participating agencies Given our strategies of: assisting complainants to resolve their problems with agencies quickly and directly; and reducing the incidence of complaints to our Office, we initially selected 10 agencies that generated high complaint numbers, as reflected in our complaints data. Eight of those agencies were State Government agencies and two were larger councils. They commenced their involvement in May 2003. Because most councils in Queensland are not comparable to the large State Government agencies or the two large councils selected, Boonah Shire Council, a small rural council, was invited to take part in the project in April 2004 to develop a practical example of an effective complaints management system for the many small councils throughout the State. 2.1.2 Agencies participating in Phase 1 State Government Department of Child Safety Department of Corrective Services Department of Industrial Relations Department of Education and the Arts Department of Natural Resources and Mines Queensland Health Queensland Transport WorkCover Queensland 9 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

2. Implementing Phase 1 Local government Boonah Shire Council Gold Coast City Council Maroochy Shire Council Having regard to the diversity and complexity of some of the participating agencies, it was not practicable in their cases to attempt to implement a single complaints management system across the entire agency. Instead, by agreement with those agencies, we selected a business unit of each agency that was among the most significant in terms of either numbers of complaints (to the agency or the Ombudsman s Office) or interaction with the public. For example: As the Department of Natural Resources and Mines had 10 or more large business units, we focused on the important area of land valuations. As an outcome of our major investigations into workplace electrocutions, we recommended to the Department of Industrial Relations that its Workplace Health and Safety Unit participate in the project. During the project, an overarching complaints management policy and procedure was developed for the department as a whole. However, we also worked with the Workplace Health and Safety Unit to develop policy and procedures which were specific to its requirements but nonetheless aligned with the overarching departmental policy and procedure. Queensland Transport commenced the project with its Services Group as the focus. The project outcomes included an umbrella complaints management policy and procedures. They are currently being trialled in one section of the department, but are intended for agency-wide implementation after evaluation. The Services Group comprises call centres and more than 60 Customer Service Centres across Queensland. Collaboration and consultation between each agency and our Office were fundamental to the success of the project. It is a basic tenet of policy development such as this that to be successful a project must have, and be seen to have, support at the highest levels of the agency concerned. I therefore personally sought and gained support for the project from the Director-General or Chief Executive Officer of each participating agency. 2.1.3 Developing awareness Investigation officers from our Office with expertise in dealing with complaints about the participating agencies, supported by my Assistant Ombudsmen, were appointed to work with the nominated liaison officer/s from each of the 11 agencies during the life of the project. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 10

2. Implementing Phase 1 We hosted a number of forums and prepared a series of detailed information sheets (Effective Complaints Management Fact Sheets) to ensure participating agencies and their officers working on the project had a fundamental understanding of the general principles, requirements and practical issues involved in developing a complaints management system. 2.1.3.1 Lunchtime forums We hosted two lunchtime forums with guest speakers from AAMI, Centrelink, Queensland Health, and Disability Services Queensland. Each speaker provided their insight into different aspects of the complaints management systems within their respective organisations. Private sector experience was particularly important to provide public sector agencies with fresh ideas on how they could better interact with their dissatisfied clients. The forums enabled project participants and other interested parties, such as the Crime and Misconduct Commission and the Office of Public Service Merit and Equity, to consider the experiences of both public and private sector organisations and to discuss any areas of concern or interest both with presenters and other project participants. The forums were well attended and participants indicated they found them very relevant. 2.1.3.2 Effective Complaints Management Fact Sheets We conducted an extensive literature review to identify the essential criteria for an effective complaints management system. This review included in particular: Australian Standard AS4269-1995 Complaints Handling, which sets out the general criteria for handling complaints; draft International Standard ISO 10018 Complaints Handling Guidelines for Organisations, which subsequently was published as ISO 10002-2004; and complaints handling policies and procedures of other agencies and complaints handling bodies in Queensland and elsewhere. We also drew on our own corporate knowledge based on years of experience in receiving and investigating complaints. Given that many, if not most, of the complaints handled by our Office have already been raised directly by the complainant with the agency and the complainant has been dissatisfied with the agency s response, we were in a unique position of being able to identify deficiencies in agencies internal complaints handling. We had regard to this source data in developing a series of 14 information sheets on complaints handling, which we called Effective Complaints Management Fact Sheets. We distributed them to project participants and other public sector agencies and published them on our website. The fact 11 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

2. Implementing Phase 1 sheets outlined the essential elements and principles of complaints management theory and practice, and highlighted important aspects of complaints management through examples and case studies. The fact sheets were, and remain, a valuable tool to assist agencies to design appropriate processes for handling complaints. The fact sheets topics are: 1. Setting the Scene 2. Commitment 3. Complaints Management Models 4. Communication 5. Visibility and Access 6. Responsiveness and Fairness 7. Resources 8. Personnel and Training 9. Assessment and Investigation 10. Remedies 11. Business Improvement 12. Reviewing Internal Systems 13. External Review 14. Reference Material The fact sheets were revised in July 2005 to ensure they complied with the recently published International Standard ISO 10002 and to include references to recent legislative developments. All the fact sheets are provided in Appendix 3. They are also available on our website www.ombudsman.qld.gov.au. 2.1.4 Reviewing existing complaints management systems in agencies We then reviewed each agency s existing complaints management system. We adopted the following process (with minor variations in some cases): 1. We developed a self audit checklist for agencies to complete. 2. We provided a copy of the checklist to each agency and asked them to complete and return it. 3. Upon receipt of the completed checklists, our project officers met the designated agency officers to discuss the results and obtain any documentation relating to the agency s complaints procedure. 4. Following that discussion, and after perusing agency documentation, our project officers considered the extent to which each agency s complaints handling arrangements complied with: the principles set out in the Effective Complaints Management Fact Sheets; and the Australian and international standards on complaints handling. The Deputy Ombudsman responsible for the project chaired regular meetings of our project team to discuss developments and initiatives in complaints Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 12

2. Implementing Phase 1 management, progress in each agency, different approaches to common issues, and any problems that required higher level intervention. We also established a series of milestones to monitor progress with each agency, both individually and comparatively. The milestones are contained in Appendix 2. Our project officers also completed monthly agency status reports which enabled issues to be identified and, where necessary, to form the basis for discussion at our monthly project team meetings. 2.1.4.1 Effective Complaints Management Self Audit Checklist We developed the Effective Complaints Management Self Audit Checklist as an auditing tool for agencies to use to assess their own complaints management policy and practices. The checklist is comprehensive, covering all facets of good complaints management. It is based on the fact sheets, the Australian Standard AS4629-1995 and the draft International Standard ISO 10018. Each agency evaluated its system against the criteria in the checklist. Our project officers analysed the completed checklists and discussed them and relevant agency documentation with agency officers. The outcome of these analyses and discussions was incorporated into a feedback report we provided to each agency. Comments from agencies on the effectiveness and relevance of the checklist indicated that, while completing the checklist was time consuming and required some effort, it was a very valuable tool for analysing the strengths and weaknesses of existing systems. Based on suggestions made by agencies, we have made minor amendments to the checklist for use in future phases of the project. This revised Effective Complaints Management Self Audit Checklist is contained in Appendix 4 and is also available on our website www.ombudsman.qld.gov.au. 2.1.4.2 Agency Feedback Reports We prepared an Agency Feedback Report for each agency in response to the information gathered through the audit process. The Agency Feedback Report reviewed the agency s existing complaints management systems and provided detailed recommendations for improved practice. Before finalising our recommendations, we discussed them in draft form with the agency to ensure that they were workable and that all relevant issues had been addressed. The feedback reports essentially identified the way forward for agencies to bring their complaints management systems up to best practice standard. 13 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

2. Implementing Phase 1 2.1.5 Developing effective complaints management systems As noted, after a thorough assessment of each participating agency s complaints management system, we prepared a formal feedback report for each agency containing recommendations for improvement. The two most common recommendations we made to agencies were that they should: develop or enhance formal complaints management policies and supporting procedures; and record, analyse and report on complaints data in order to identify, and take steps to address, recurring or systemic problems and to identify business improvements. To assist agencies to implement our recommendations, we prepared a how to guide entitled Developing Effective Complaints Management Policy and Procedures. This guide provides a framework to assist agencies in developing complaints policies and procedures that address the essential components of good complaints management. Explanations, examples and references are included to clarify the development process and ensure the critical elements are considered. Developing Effective Complaints Management Policy and Procedures is contained in Appendix 5 and is also available on www.ombudsman.qld.gov.au. Further, in August 2004, we conducted a survey of complainants we had initially referred back to agencies for internal review. A component of this research explored the complainant s experience in dealing with the agency when they attempted to resolve their complaint. Where an adequate sample was obtained, we provided the results to the relevant agency with comments. 2.1.5.1 Database demonstration Nearly all of the participating agencies had inadequate or non-existent recording and reporting systems for complaints information. To assist agencies address this deficiency we organised and hosted a demonstration of several complaints management databases. Two leading commercial providers of complaints management databases presented an overview of their products. The Energy Consumer Protection Office, a Queensland complaints handling agency which considers complaints by the public against energy providers in Queensland, also demonstrated a system it had developed in-house. QComp, a body which conducts reviews of workers compensation decisions, discussed their development process and experiences in building an in-house system. More than 20 agency representatives attended the demonstration. The demonstration provided a valuable opportunity for agencies to explore a variety of systems and options and share the experiences of other agencies. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 14

2. Implementing Phase 1 The demonstration also served to highlight that a good electronic database could be developed or acquired at reasonable cost. Of course, this depended on the complexity and sophistication required for the database to meet each agency s needs. 2.1.5.2 Research The Ombudsman has the statutory discretion not to investigate matters where the Ombudsman believes investigation is unnecessary or unjustifiable. We commonly apply this discretion where the complainant has not attempted to resolve the matter with the relevant agency. We currently apply the discretion on this basis in approximately a third of the complaints we receive. In 2004 we undertook a survey of complainants whose complaints we had responded to in this way. One aspect of the survey focused on the experience of complainants who contacted the agency after speaking with our Office. The results of this survey provided valuable insight into complainant satisfaction with the complaints handling processes within agencies. We provided a brief analysis of the survey outcomes to each agency for which an adequate sample had been obtained. This insight into complainant satisfaction with the complaints handling processes of agencies was particularly relevant for agencies participating in the Complaints Management Project. The survey findings in many cases confirmed the key recommendations we made in our Agency Feedback Reports. 2.1.6 Assisting with implementation Our project officers continued to work closely with each agency to implement our recommendations. We saw it as our role not just to make recommendations on how systems could be devised or improved, but to ensure, wherever possible, that the agencies achieved the desired outcome of putting in place a best practice complaints system. Our project officers therefore assisted agencies to prepare complaints management policy and procedures and, in particular, reviewed and provided comment on draft documents. On some occasions, I, the Deputy Ombudsman responsible for the project and/or individual project officers met with senior officers of agencies to seek their support in progressing the implementation of recommendations and to discuss how to eliminate obstacles to progress. 15 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

2. Implementing Phase 1 2.2 Factors affecting the implementation of Phase 1 Several factors delayed the completion of the first phase of our project. The first was that over the two years of the project some agencies experienced a high turnover of staff assigned as liaison officers to the project. In relation to these agencies, the project lost momentum until new liaison officers were appointed and had been brought up to date on the project. A second problem was that, quite appropriately, agencies appointed officers to the project on the basis of their understanding and participation in complaints management within their organisation. However, in several cases, it became apparent during the project that the changes recommended to the organisation s procedures were so significant that they required the endorsement of the senior management team. Inevitably, the process of obtaining this approval took some time. The progress of the project within one department was delayed while the department underwent a major business review. Although the department continued to express its commitment to the aims of the project, it was unable to proceed until certain internal matters arising from the review had been finalised. Finally, several agencies were concerned about the cost of implementing some of the recommendations, particularly our recommendation that they needed to implement an electronic complaints management database with the necessary analytical and reporting functionality. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 16

3. Project achievements 3.1 Overview of achievements While each agency was unique in its existing approach to complaints management, our assessment of the Effective Complaints Management Self Audit Checklist completed by agencies revealed some common issues. These gave rise to recurring recommendations to agencies, namely, that they should: implement a formal and accessible complaints management policy and procedures containing several key features such as clear lines of responsibility and timelines; provide relevant staff with training on the policy and procedures and complaints management generally (including cultural training); and develop a centralised system for recording, analysing and reporting on complaints issues so as to identify and address recurring or systemic problems. All participating agencies now have in place, or are well on the way to putting in place, complaints management policies and procedures that address: the specific needs of their organisation; the current Australian and international standards; and the recommendations of this Office. As mentioned earlier, some agencies, though acknowledging the desirability of being able to report on complaints data, have baulked at the cost of implementing our recommendation to develop a centralised system for recording complaints. However, such a system is essential to enable agencies to proactively identify problems and improve service delivery. Six of the participating agencies have implemented or are in the process of implementing electronic complaints management databases, mostly developed in-house at reasonable cost. Two of the other agencies are reviewing the implementation of a complaints database as part of their overall IT strategy. All agencies have also acknowledged the importance of properly training officers who have a role in complaints management, and have been or are working towards implementing our recommendations. The Agency Summaries that follow provide further information on the results of our assessment of each agency s complaints management system. The summaries also provide an overview of our recommendations to the agency, the agency s response and the current position. Each agency has also provided a brief comment on the Complaints Management Project and their plans for the future. As a result of the project, nine major service delivery agencies in the Queensland State and local government sectors (as well as Boonah Shire 17 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

Council) now have or soon will have complaints management systems that comply with Australian and international standards. These agencies are now better equipped to effectively and consistently manage complaints from the Queensland community. 3.2 Agency summary reports 3.2.1 Department of Child Safety 3.2.1.1 Background The former Department of Families was one of the original agencies invited to participate in the project. Historically, we have received a significant number of complaints about the Department. Its successor, the Department of Child Safety, was the subject of 434 complaints to my Office in 2004-2005. An intensive audit and assessment was undertaken by project liaison officers from the former Department of the complaints handling processes available at that time, represented by the Complaints System Policy and Complaints System Additional Resources for Complaints Officers. These documents now form the basis of the complaints management system of the new Department of Child Safety (DChS). DChS was created in accordance with a recommendation in the Crime and Misconduct Commission Foster Care Inquiry Report in January 2004. The Department of Families was abolished on 12 February 2004 and its functions were taken over by the Department of Communities until 20 September 2004 when DChS commenced operation. The project s profile was boosted within the previous Department of Families by the CMC Report, which contained the following comment concerning our project (p.158): "The Ombudsman has recently undertaken a project designed to assist Queensland public sector agencies in undertaking and dealing more effectively with their complaints-handling processes. The Department of Families has participated in this project. The Commission considers that the materials published by the Ombudsman in furtherance of this project would undoubtedly assist the [Department] in developing an effective capacity for handling, and responding to, complaints." The CMC report contained the following recommendation (5.20): "That the [Department] establish a unit and clear procedures for receiving, assessing and responding to complaints." As a consequence of that recommendation, DChS established a project team within the Review and Evaluation Branch (now called the Complaints, Case Reviews and Investigations Unit) to consider the recommendations by my Office and the CMC in order to establish an appropriate complaints management process. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 18

Since that time, meetings have been held with a number of project officers who have assisted in progressing and implementing the recommendations. 3.2.1.2 What we found The complaints management system of the Department of Families demonstrated in its language, a commitment to effective complaints management practices. However, although many of the theoretical components were well covered, in practice there appeared to be a number of deficiencies. Relevant training in key areas of complaints management, not only for the designated complaints officers but also for staff in general, appeared to be minimal. There was also an absence of technological support, by way of systems for monitoring complaints issues and evaluating how effectively complaints were being managed. The complaints management system was regionally based to allow for the resolution of complaints at a local level. Although we support this approach, it gives rise to potential problems. In particular, special arrangements need to be put in place to give the agency the capacity to identify complaints trends and improvement strategies or to ensure an appropriate level of consistency in the management of complaints across all regions. This can be managed by giving these functions to a dedicated central complaints management unit. In the case of DChS, as the areas that needed to be addressed were both operational and strategic in nature, we considered that responsibility for the future development of the complaints management system required clarification. 3.2.1.3 What we recommended In formulating our recommendations, we recognised that the resources required to implement changes had to be commensurate with the expected benefits to be gained. It is noted from Future Directions the strategic plan of the Department of Families (2003 2008) that a strategic priority of that department was the provision of a new integrated client management system. The main areas where we believed DChS should enhance its complaint and objection handling policies and procedures were as follows: Establish a central complaints management unit comprising persons with operational and policy experience to implement DChS s complaints policy and procedures, monitor the performance of complaints management by all regions and develop a central or common complaints database to enable complaints data from all regions to be collated and analysed. Provide comprehensive training in key areas of complaints management for relevant departmental officers. 19 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

Develop measures to promote the system and to ensure officers across all regions are aware of the complaints management system. Raise the profile and priority of complaints management within the defined strategic goals of DChS s current strategic plan. 3.2.1.4 What resulted from our recommendations DChS accepted all our recommendations. It established a Complaints Project Team to undertake work including a review of the Department of Families complaints policy and procedures and development of a data management system. We worked with departmental officers in the development of the new policy and procedures and participated in the External Reference Group consultation process that was undertaken. DChS also developed a central complaints database that uses the same platform and complaints categorisation system as our own. 3.2.1.5 The current position The Department s new Complaints Management Policy and Procedure has been approved by the Director-General. DChS has also prepared a draft complaints handbook to supplement the policy and procedures and has sought feedback on the contents from us and other interested parties. The Central Complaints and Review Unit became operational in May 2004 and has been working with its full complement of nine officers since February 2005. Since December 2004, over 800 matters have been raised by parties concerned with DChS s decisions or service or the behaviour of its officers. The Department implemented a complaints management database in August 2004. The system went live in December 2004. This system is used by all dedicated complaints officers in the Central Complaints and Review Unit and is intended to be used by all departmental complaints officers across the State, which includes the client relations officers comprising one officer in each of the department s seven zones and the managers of the Department s 46 Child Safety Service Centres. Comprehensive training is currently being provided to team leaders, managers and zonal client relations officers on the complaints management policy and procedures, and the value of complaints management. This training will be ongoing. Further training and information packages are being developed for dedicated complaints officers, community agencies, senior management, and clients. A Complaint Management Communication Strategy has also been developed. This strategy will ensure external and internal target audiences are informed about the complaints management system. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 20

3.2.1.6 Agency comment The Complaints Management Project managed by the Queensland Ombudsman has been a significant contributor to development of the Department of Child Safety s new complaint management system, both strategically and operationally. At the strategic level the project has provided integral resources, review and learning opportunities on complaint management holistically, and as a globally recognised force. Operationally the support provided by the Ombudsman project has facilitated the completion of a comprehensive new complaint management policy. Additionally feedback on operational guidelines has been provided enabling the development of a comprehensive procedures manual for use by departmental officers when responding to complaints. 3.2.2 Department of Corrective Services 3.2.2.1 Background The Department of Corrective Services (DCS) was selected to participate in the project in view of the volume of complaints received by us from prisoners in correctional facilities, their families, and persons on community supervision orders. In 2004-2005, we received 1335 complaints about DCS. DCS recognised that there was a need to improve its complaints management processes. The Report of the Business Model Review of the Department in July 2004 stated: Currently the complaints management process within the Department is somewhat disconnected. There are many ways of lodging complaints but no clear systems articulated to deal with complaints, and respondents to the review team noted that they were unsure as to where they should take their complaints. Consequently, a recurring issue brought to the attention of the review team concerned the lack of consistency in dealing with complaints. DCS s involvement in the Complaints Management Project was put on hold pending the finalisation of the Business Model Review and implementation of the report s recommendations. 3.2.2.2 What we found At the request of DCS, we confined our consideration of the existing complaints management system to prisoner complaints in custodial correctional centres. Although DCS s complaints management system is a fragmented one, some of its procedures and processes provide a sound platform on which to build a more coordinated and efficient system. 21 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

The existing system primarily consists of: a privileged mail process that allows prisoners in centres to lodge complaints confidentially with the general manager of the centre; the Official Visitor (OV) Program; and the Department s Ethical Standards Unit. In our experience, most complaints made by prisoners in a custodial setting are made either by direct submission through the privileged mail system or as referred complaints from OVs. In the first instance, general managers, managers and corrective service officers, who have delegated authority to deal with and resolve prisoner complaints, are primarily responsible for dealing with the complaints. There is little capacity in DCS s system to identify complaints trends and collect and analyse data relating to serious or systemic complaints received at centre level. Another deficiency was the absence of clear policy and procedures, which leads to a lack of consistency in dealing with prisoner complaints at centre level and a consequential inability to identify and implement strategies to prevent recurring complaints or address systemic issues. 3.2.2.3 What we recommended The main areas where we believed DCS could enhance its complaints management system were as follows: develop a stand-alone, whole of department complaints policy and procedure; promote the role and functions of the OV program and ensure adequate resources are available to enable OVs to perform their role; establish criteria to identify serious and systemic issues relating to complaints to enable data relating to such complaints to be collected and analysed; provide comprehensive training in key areas of complaints management for OVs and complaints management staff including general managers of correctional centres; develop measures to promote the system and to ensure departmental officers are aware of the complaints management system; and raise the profile and priority of complaints management within the defined strategic goals of the Department s current strategic plan. We also suggested to DCS that it explore the possibility of utilising the current OV monitoring system to collate and analyse data from correctional centres. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 22

3.2.2.4 What resulted from our recommendations DCS s review team involved with the Report of the Business Model Review had regard to our recommendations. The report states (p. 78): The review team is cognisant of the fact that the Department is currently working with the Ombudsman on improving its approach to complaints management in the context of custodial offenders. While it accepts that this is a step in the right direction, it believes that a more comprehensive complaints management system covering a broader range than custodial offenders is required. The review team proposes that the Department develop an effective, comprehensive complaints management approach based on the Ombudsman s Developing Effective Complaints Management Policy and Procedures document and that it builds on the work already done with the Ombudsman, but extends it to a broader range of users. Its processes should be especially visible to those groups and individuals (stakeholder groups, offenders whether they be in community or custodial corrections, their families and other supporters, or staff) whose contact with the custodial and community corrections system is a critical factor in their daily lives or their goals as offender support organisations. The Department should publish its complaints management policy and procedures and distribute it widely throughout the law and order sector. It should use the Official Visitors to ensure the process is available and fully understood within the custodial corrections system. The report was approved and DCS continues to work on implementing its recommendations, including those for enhancing the OV program. Responsibility for the development, ongoing management and monitoring of the complaints management system was placed with the Department s Ethical Standards Unit. DCS will reactivate its involvement with us in our project when it makes an appointment to its newly created position of senior adviser, complaints management, within that unit. 3.2.2.5 The current position DCS is committed to improving its capacity to manage complaints and to become more effective in its decision-making processes. A draft procedure on complaints management that outlines the requirements for staff in dealing with and managing complaints has been prepared to provide general direction and a complaints handling model. DCS is also giving consideration to the complaints databases of other agencies. As mentioned, DCS will shortly appoint a Senior Adviser, Complaints Management, whose role will include the coordination of DCS s complaints management system, including the development of appropriate policies, procedures and awareness programs which meet best practice and focus on continuous improvement. 23 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

3.2.2.6 Agency comment The Department believes that many of the components of an effective complaints management system are already in place. However what has been lacking is a coordinating mechanism to draw them together. The model currently being considered by the Department will maintain a focus on complaints resolution at the local operational levels where it currently exists. However, the system will be coordinated by the Ethical Standards Branch, which will: develop and implement appropriate policy and procedure; monitor complaints data; identify systemic issues; report to senior management; instigate and coordinate remedial action within the agency to identified problems; and provide training and support to a network of complaints handling officers. A selection process is currently under way for the position of Senior Adviser, Complaints Management, within the Ethical Standards Branch and the Department anticipates that significant progress will be made towards developing and implementing the complaints management system over the coming months. The Official Visitor program is soon to be revitalised with the appointment of the Department s Chief Inspector, who will have responsibility for its oversight and development. The assistance provided by the Ombudsman s Office has been of considerable benefit in progressing the development of the Department s complaints management system. The Department will continue to work with the Ombudsman s Office in implementing the system. 3.2.3 Department of Education and the Arts 3.2.3.1 Background The Department of Education and the Arts (ED&A) was one of the original agencies selected for the Complaints Management Project. In 2004-2005, we received 162 complaints about ED&A. An intensive audit and assessment was undertaken of ED&A s existing complaints management system. The Murrumba District Office was chosen as the subject of this process in view of initiatives already taken by that office to improve complaints management. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 24

Murrumba District Office completed our Effective Complaints Management Self Audit Checklist. The district s response to the checklist indicated a high level of commitment to improving its complaints handling processes and to delivering improvements, through actively participating in the project. We provided detailed feedback to ED&A based on the completed checklist and our discussions with ED&A s project officers. 3.2.3.2 What we found ED&A s existing complaints management process encourages complainants to resolve any school-related difficulties by directly approaching the teacher or principal to discuss the issues. District offices provide support to schools in managing complex complaints and investigations. The commitment of schools to conflict resolution is reinforced by an informal guideline known as Putting Things Right A Guide to Managing Complaints. This sets out a process that can be applied to complaints management and provides an overview of the responsibilities of schools, district offices and central office in the resolution of complaints. Policy, procedures and advice for use by state schools and departmental staff are listed on ED&A s website under the Department of Education Manual. While the manual includes a wide range of topics from asset management through to student management, it does not include any written policy to support complaints management. While ED&A has a solid basis for complaints management, there is no centralised or common database to enable the collation and analysis of complaints data across districts. As a consequence, there is no capacity to identify complaints trends or improvement strategies or to ensure an appropriate level of consistency in the management of complaints across all districts. 3.2.3.3 What we recommended We recommended that ED&A consider the development of an agency-wide complaints management system and formulate written policy to support existing complaints management processes and procedures. We also recommended that ED&A provide comprehensive training in key areas of complaints management for relevant ED&A officers and develop measures to promote the system to ensure awareness among ED&A officers across all districts. 25 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

3.2.3.4 What resulted from our recommendations ED&A indicated its commitment to implementing our recommendations. It established a Complaints Project Team and developed draft policy and procedure documents, including Complaints Management Policy, Complaints Management Procedures and a Complaints Management Handbook. We provided our feedback on the draft documents in December 2004. ED&A commenced work on enhancing its existing complaints management databases with a view to implementing a common complaints database system for use within all district, regional and central office units. Project officers of both my Office and ED&A continued to work together to facilitate ED&A s implementation of our recommendations, particularly with respect to finalising the policy and procedure documents. 3.2.3.5 The current position In April 2005, we became aware of an apparent change of approach by ED&A to implementing our recommendations. We were advised that rather than implementing a comprehensive complaints management policy and procedure to be applied across all districts, ED&A intended to introduce a policy that contains, in essence, its commitment to a statement of principles and a requirement for schools to develop a procedure for managing complaints from students, parents, staff, teachers and the broader community. The policy is to be supplemented by a brief document setting out a five-step approach on how to make a complaint. This document is intended to be placed on the ED&A website and is essentially for use by parents wanting to complain about issues impacting on their children s education. In addition, ED&A has developed a template procedures document as an attachment to the policy entitled State School Complaints Management Procedure for schools to adapt and use as a basic requirement for managing complaints at the school level if they have not developed their own procedure. 3.2.3.6 Agency comment Education Queensland has embraced the initiative of the Queensland Ombudsman to establish a policy and to review internal processes for complaints management. ED&A is a complex and diverse organisation with a large network of business units and schools. In consultation with a broad range of stakeholders, both internal and external, ED&A has developed a draft Complaints Management Policy and a process for complainants to follow called Making a Complaint. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 26

There are currently 1280 schools in Queensland and Principals of those schools are now required to have a procedure for managing complaints at the local level. ED&A has committed to develop a procedures template for schools to adopt should they need assistance. It is noted that 33% of schools in Queensland are considered small schools with less than 100 students and that a procedures template to assist with the management of complaints at the school level may be of benefit to those small schools. On 1 July 2005, development work was finalised on a centralised electronic Complaints Management System in line with Queensland Ombudsman s recommendation that ED&A develop an agency wide complaints management system. Full implementation is expected to occur after training of appropriate staff. 3.2.4 Department of Industrial Relations 3.2.4.1 Background The Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) is the Queensland Government's lead agency for industrial relations, including workplace health and safety and electrical safety. It develops and implements legislative, compliance and enforcement frameworks to improve workplace health and safety in the State through Workplace Health and Safety Queensland (WHSQ). In 2004-2005, we received 61 complaints about DIR. In February 2003, we issued to DIR a report on part of our Workplace Electrocutions Project (WEP). We had commenced the project in response to a significant number of serious complaints we had received alleging WHSQ and the Electrical Safety Office (ESO) had inadequately investigated 12 workplace electrical fatalities and had not taken appropriate enforcement action against the relevant employers or other persons. The WEP reviewed WHSQ's and ESO's actions in response to these fatalities in order to determine whether they had complied with their legislative responsibilities and to improve the investigation of electrical incidences in Queensland 1. One recommendation in our February 2003 report to DIR was that, in conjunction with us, DIR establish an effective internal review process to deal with complaints that cannot be dealt with under Part 11 of the Workplace Health and Safety Act 1995, including complaints about the quality of WHSQ investigations. Part 11 provides that a person whose interests are affected by a decision of an inspector or the Director-General under the Act (other than an enforceable undertaking decision in Part 5) may apply for the decision to be reviewed by the Director-General and may appeal the decision to the Industrial Court. As a result we focused on how DIR and, in particular, WHSQ manage complaints about their own decisions, actions and services. 1 The Workplace Electrocution Project, Queensland Ombudsman, June 2005 27 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

3.2.4.2 What we found In accordance with our recommendation, WHSQ developed a draft complaints procedure. Our evaluation of this procedure indicated that in many respects complaints handling is managed as part of WHSQ's core business. However, the evaluation also highlighted significant areas for further development and improvement. In particular it identified that DIR did not have an overall policy setting out its approach and commitment to, and the underlying principles of, complaints management to ensure a common approach by all departmental divisions and officers. DIR recognised this and developed a whole of department complaints management policy and procedure. DIR's policy/procedure enables each division, including WHSQ, to further develop and/or review their complaints management procedures within the policy framework to align with the whole of department approach to frontline or customer service function, complaints consideration, review and reporting and business improvement. In our opinion, WHSQ's draft complaints procedure did not fully align with the DIR policy/procedure and required further development in order to satisfy the critical elements of an effective complaints management system that would meet the requirements of the Australian Standard for Complaint Handling. This was acknowledged by DIR. 3.2.4.3 What we recommended In total, we made 29 recommendations relating to DIR's complaints management policy/procedure and 20 recommendations relating to WHSQ's complaints procedure. The main improvements we recommended to the policy/procedures were to: give frontline staff authority to resolve straightforward complaints; provide assistance for people with special or cultural needs; provide notification of any statutory right of review/appeal at the time the original decision is communicated; incorporate a two stage internal complaints process before the external review stage; provide access to all relevant information for the purposes of an external review; in defined circumstances, notify complainants of their right to seek an external review by the Ombudsman; categorise complaints to reflect seriousness and complexity; list the types of remedies available for addressing/resolving complaints; evaluate the application of the policy/procedure; Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 28

provide appropriate training on complaints handling for existing and new staff; and implement performance standards for accessibility, timeliness, satisfaction, effectiveness and compliance. 3.2.4.4 What resulted from our recommendations We discussed our feedback and recommendations with DIR and WHSQ officers. The majority of our recommendations were substantially or totally accepted and are reflected in DIR's policy/procedure and WHSQ's procedure. For the few remaining recommendations, we considered and accepted DIR's advice. In particular we recommended that the DIR complaints management policy/procedure include a provision to the effect that if a decision is subject to a statutory review/appeal process or another process created by DIR for a specific category of matter, a person adversely affected by the decision must be notified of the right of review/appeal at the time the decision is communicated. We also suggested improvements to the procedure in relation to: providing assistance to persons making complaints, particularly persons with special needs; addressing special types of complaints including vexatious complaints or complaints made by agents or whistleblowers; ensuring that complaints are assessed consistently and within set timeframes; assessing complaints in terms of severity, safety implications, impact and the need for immediate action; and incorporating specific performance standards. DIR advised it would address these matters in its first review of the complaints management policy/procedure due in 2006. 3.2.4.5 The current position DIR has developed a whole of department complaints management approach. The Executive Business Team originally endorsed DIR s policy on 6 January 2004. The changes resulting from our review and recommendations have been reflected in DIR's complaints management policy/procedure and were approved by the Director-General on 7 December 2004. The DIR policy/procedure is now operational across the department. The Electrical Safety Office has realigned its draft complaints procedure with the overall DIR policy/procedure. WHSQ has now developed and implemented its own complaints procedure. The changes resulting from the alignment of this procedure with the overall DIR policy/procedure and our review and recommendations have been reflected in this procedure and were approved by the WHSQ General Manager on 20 June 2005. 29 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

Training on the DIR complaints management policy/procedure has been delivered to regional managers and senior business services officers. These managers/officers are responsible for training existing staff on complaints handling. For new staff, complaints handling will form part of the on-line induction process that is currently being redeveloped. We are satisfied that DIR's complaints management policy/procedure and WHSQ's procedure for complaints handling now meet the Australian Standard for Complaint Handling. The Department s Executive and Strategic Services, Public Sector Industrial and Employee Relations, and Private Sector Industrial Relations divisions have not developed their own complaints procedures at this stage. 3.2.4.6 Agency comment The Department of Industrial Relations would like to thank staff of the Ombudsman s Office for their assistance in developing DIR Complaints Management Policy and Procedures to satisfy the national standard. 3.2.5 Department of Natural Resources and Mines 3.2.5.1 Background As the Department of Natural Resource and Mines (DNR&M) had a number of large business units spread across the State we agreed to focus on an area of operations that had both high public impact and generated a significant number of complaints to our Office over recent times. We therefore agreed with DNR&M to review how it handled complaints associated with land valuation notices issued to landowners throughout the State. These valuations are used as the basis for, among other things, local government rates and State Government land tax. In 2004-2005, we received 127 complaints about DNR&M. The processing of valuation objections is regulated by the Valuation of Land Act 1944. However, based on our experience, we believed that a review of the administrative procedures supporting the statutory requirements would identify significant improvements to those procedures. Quite often in public administration, the process for implementing a legislative requirement is as important as the requirement itself. For example, while the Act stipulated that aggrieved landowners could object to a valuation and seek an objection conference with a departmental valuer, the Act was silent on how applications for conferences were to be decided and conducted. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 30

Valuation objections not only concerned the amount of a valuation, but also the process involved, for example, the actions or attitude of a valuer at an objection conference. Complaints about process related issues were not sufficiently covered by the Act or procedures. On this basis, we conducted a collaborative review of the Department s valuations objections/complaints procedures. 3.2.5.2 What we found DNR&M s commitment to customer service was built into its corporate documents, which include the Corporate Plan and the Service Delivery Strategy. Customer service also had a high priority within the largely statutory based, valuation objection system. Well developed procedures existed for dealing with the wide range of valuation related issues that arose from DNR&M s important and extensive valuations program. These procedures were mainly sound. At the time of our review, the processing of valuation objections was costing DNR&M in the order of $5 million per annum. DNR&M was receptive to suggestions on how this impost could be reduced or at least contained, in line with good client service and timely fulfillment of statutory responsibilities. The basic procedures for dealing with valuation objections are laid down in statute. However, complaints could be made about the way the statutory processes were applied, as some valuation-related complaints could not be resolved by this process. The policies and procedures for dealing with such matters were either fragmented or non-existent. In the main they were contained in, or could be gleaned from, various documents but no consolidated policy and procedures document dealt with complaints. The absence of a single policy and procedures document meant that the public did not have easy access to an important source of complaints information. Therefore, people may have been unaware of how to challenge decisions or the types of issues they could raise. DNR&M had not attempted to use its valuations database (or any other database within the Department) to collate and analyse objection and complaints data across all regions. Consequently, there was limited capacity to: identify complaints trends and improvement strategies; and ensure an appropriate level of consistency in the management of objections and complaints across all regions. 31 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

3.2.5.3 What we recommended As was our policy throughout the project, we were keen to ensure that the resources required to implement changes were commensurate with the likely benefits to be gained. The changes we believed were necessary to bring DNR&M s policy and procedures up to an appropriate standard did not actually require an extensive allocation (or reallocation) of resources. The main areas we believed DNR&M should focus on were: 1. Develop a stand-alone valuations objections and complaints policy and procedure so that both staff and the public know how matters will or should be handled. 2. Develop a reportable and measurable customer service charter to increase the public visibility of the standards of service contained in the Service Level Agreement and other agency documents. 3. Adapt the Delegate s (Objection Conference) Report to make it a mechanism for identifying any systemic complaints issues and developing strategies to minimise complaints and improve processes. 4. Explore ways to capture data on complaints relating to the valuation process rather than the valuation quantum and identify systemic issues and facilitate remedial action with time saving benefits. 5. Explore the feasibility of establishing a call centre to handle public inquiries in high volume valuation areas. 6. Expand the objection guidelines contained in Form 58 sent to landowners with their annual valuations, by outlining common misconceptions regarding valuations, in particular what do and do not constitute valid grounds for objection. This may help to minimise unnecessary inquiries and unmeritorious objections. 7. Require the Director, State Valuation Service to report annually to the General Manager, Land Management and Use on the effectiveness of the complaints management system. 8. Conduct training for relevant staff in the areas of interviewing, interpersonal skills, assertiveness, dispute resolution and possibly cross-cultural issues. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 32

3.2.5.4 What resulted from our recommendations DNR&M formed a steering committee and a number of working groups, one of which was to oversee and develop a stand-alone, valuation objections and complaints policy and procedure. The other working groups implemented the other recommendations. Monthly progress reports were provided to me on the key actions taken to implement each of the recommendations. DNR&M integrated the process for implementing the Ombudsman s recommendations with the preparations for the release of revaluations for 94 local governments in March 2005 (the largest revaluation undertaken by the department to date). Accordingly, the department had a target date by which to implement the recommendations as well as an opportunity to test their effectiveness during the objection period following the release of the valuations. The key outcomes are: a new consolidated policy and procedure for processing objections to valuations; a new procedure for dealing with complaints about process at an objection conference rather than the quantum of valuations; a new Customer Service Charter; improvement of delegates (objection conference) reports; enhancement of the Queensland Valuation and Sales System database to record the reasons for delegates granting reductions in valuations (to ascertain trends across the regions); improvement of various forms and reports integral to the objection process; development and trial of software that captures data on complaints relating to the valuation process; engagement of the Smart Service Queensland Call Centre to operate during the 2005 revaluation period; improvement to internal assessment and reporting on the revaluation process, focusing on improving business processes; and implementation of training for all valuers and valuation administration staff across the State in conflict management skills covering negotiation, communication, and managing difficult people. Training commenced in December 2004 and was completed in March 2005. 3.2.5.5 The current position DNR&M s new complaints policy and associated procedures for its valuation service incorporates all of the features contained in our recommendations. We are satisfied that DNR&M s policy and procedures and its system for handling complaints associated with its land valuation function now meet the recognised Australian and international standards. 33 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

The improvements made by DNR&M to complaints management as a result of its involvement in our project include: a more effective, integrated, streamlined and easy to access policy and procedures process that will be continuously monitored and evaluated based on staff and public feedback; an amended procedure for dealing with complaints about the objection process that now provides a clearly defined process for internal and external stakeholders; implementation of a customer service charter that focuses on quality customer service and key performance indicators; development of a methodology for the capture of complaints data to better inform decision-making; improvements to communication information included on forms, brochures and DNR&M s website; inclusion of guidelines relating to the grounds which an owner could use when lodging an objection on Form 58 (the Objection Form); changes to procedures and practices based on information gathered from the objection conference delegates and Queensland Valuation and Sales database reports; the successful use of the Queensland Smart Service call centre during the recent valuation. The call centre was the first point of call for landowners for 94 local governments, dealing with 16,786 phone calls during the 42 day objection period. The call centre provided an efficient and professional communication and customer service approach; and the completion of a comprehensive conflict management and negotiation training program. 3.2.5.6 Agency comment The Ombudsman s Complaints Management Project has resulted in considerable improvements in the effectiveness and efficiency of the valuation objection process. There is now a more transparent, customer focused process for considering and deciding objections. The Department recognises that an effective complaints management system is essential to provide quality customer services and to achieve greater business outcomes. The improved system for data collection has, and will continue to, enable the Department to identify system wide or legislative problems, and develop and implement more effective communication strategies, business practices or necessary amendments to legislation. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 34

The 2005 revaluation released on 29 March 2005 has been the largest valuation the Department has undertaken to date. The use of the call centre during this period was critical and enabled the Department to provide a professional, informative communication response to landowners. The Department will build on the work undertaken in this project to further enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the valuation objection process and other related matters. 3.2.6 Queensland Health 3.2.6.1 Background In 2001, Queensland Health (QH) commenced the development of a complaints management model for the stated purpose of aligning people, structures and systems with its Complaints Management Policy. Therefore, at the time we commenced our project, QH had in place a comprehensive set of complaints management policies and procedures. In light of this and the number of complaints we received about QH, it was selected as a participant in this project. In 2004-2005, we received 256 complaints about QH. QH s complaints management system is based on a policy that relates to complaints made by or on behalf of a consumer or a group of consumers regarding the provision of a health service. The policy does not include complaints made by departmental employees (whistleblower complaints), nor does it relate to staff grievances or public health issues. 3.2.6.2 What we found QH has a comprehensive and well structured complaints policy, handbook and handbook guidelines. QH s system (at least, on paper) compares very favourably to those in other departments and agencies and meets nearly all the criteria for effective complaints management. Under the policy, there is a requirement to have a complaints coordinator within each health service district whose duties include: coordinating the Complaints Management Project within the district; ensuring that complaints information is considered as part of district quality improvement and risk management processes; managing and reviewing outcomes and investigations; and coordinating staff training on complaints management. 35 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

However, we considered that QH needed to improve this system, as there was no centralised or common database to facilitate the collation and analysis of complaints data across all health service districts. Consequently, there was limited capacity to identify complaints trends or improvement strategies or to ensure an appropriate level of consistency in the management of complaints across all districts. In addition, we considered that there was limited and inconsistent staff awareness of the system across the districts. It is essential that departmental staff, especially those who deal directly with the public, are aware of the system so that it can be utilised when complaints are received. We suggested that consideration be given to surveying staff awareness of the system in conjunction with the regular system review. 3.2.6.3 What we recommended The main improvements we believed QH should make to its complaints management system were to: develop and establish a central or common database to enable complaints data across all districts to be collated and analysed; and improve awareness of the system by departmental staff across all districts. In the course of evaluating the system, we also made several suggestions to departmental officers, including the need for a dedicated complaints section on QH s website containing details of the complaints management system. 3.2.6.4 What resulted from our recommendations QH accepted all our recommendations. We worked with departmental officers in the development of: a statewide consumer feedback information system/database; and a website to inform consumers on making complaints. The information system/database, which is to be used for the management and tracking of consumer complaints as well as receiving information concerning critical incidents and risk management, is currently being tested. The statewide rollout has commenced and will continue during this year. Further training and awareness of the system will be provided to departmental staff in conjunction with training associated with the implementation of the new database. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 36

3.2.6.5 The current position As stated, the database will become operational across all districts, after which further awareness training of the complaints management system will be provided. We consider that QH s policy and procedures for complaints management provides a sound foundation for a good complaints management system. It addresses all of the relevant principles including commitment, transparency, fairness, timeliness and assistance to consumers. However, evidence given at the Bundaberg Hospital and the Queensland Public Hospitals Commissions of Inquiry suggests that the system has not operated effectively in practice and that further changes to the system are needed, as well as more resources and greater commitment from supervisors and officers with complaints handling responsibilities. In response to a request by Commissioner AJ Morris QC of the former Bundaberg Hospital Commission of Inquiry, I provided a detailed submission to the inquiry outlining some deficiencies in QH s current internal complaints management system, identified during a major investigation being undertaken by my Office. My submission included a number of proposals for improvements, the most significant being the need to enhance the role of the Health Rights Commission in respect of complaints currently handled by QH and the need to establish a central complaints management unit within QH, which would be responsible for: designing, reviewing and improving QH complaint handling systems, and providing advice and training for complaints staff; oversighting complaints handling in the districts to ensure timely and appropriate outcomes; monitoring investigations by the districts of the more serious complaints or taking over any of those investigations; and analysing complaints data to provide appropriate feedback to districts, and inputs for quality improvement initiatives. I have also provided a copy of my submission to the Honourable G. Davies AO QC, Commissioner of the Queensland Public Hospitals Commission of Inquiry. 3.2.6.6 Agency comment Queensland Health has been pleased to participate in the Ombudsman s Complaints Management Project. The project provided an invaluable opportunity for Queensland Health to have its complaints management system externally reviewed. Mechanisms for receiving, processing, investigating and resolving health complaints are currently subject to various reviews and inquiries. As an outcome it is anticipated that Queensland Health s complaints management processes will be further improved. 37 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

As part of this review process, Queensland Health investigated, analysed and reported on current and recommended complaints management processes. This information has been submitted to Cabinet and the Bundaberg Hospital/Queensland Public Hospitals Commissions of Inquiry. Queensland Health is currently awaiting the outcomes of the reviews and encourages all interested parties to submit their feedback to either the Queensland Public Hospitals Commission of Inquiry or the Queensland Health Systems Review (Forster Review). 3.2.7 Queensland Transport 3.2.7.1 Background Queensland Transport (QT) represents the largest service delivery network in the Queensland Government. QT reports that over 40% of all general public transactional contact with the State Government is with QT. It is not unexpected then, that a significant number of complaints made to the Ombudsman s Office relate to actions and decisions by QT. In 2004-2005, we received 244 complaints about QT. The vast majority of complaints made to this Office regarding QT relate to the activities of the Services Group, which includes QT s call centre facility, Customer Service Direct, and more than 60 Customer Service Centres across the State. Again, the concentration of complaints is not unexpected, given the large volume of motor vehicle registration, driver licensing and other transactions and decisions carried out by the Services Group. In view of the Services Group s functions and the high volume of contact the group has with the public, including contact arising from complaints, we agreed to focus on the activities of this group for the purposes of the project. 3.2.7.2 What we found In conducting our collaborative review of QT s system for managing complaints in the Customer Service Centres and Customer Service Direct, we found that the corporate communications and agency structures demonstrated a high level of public commitment to client service. For example, QT conducts regular interviews with clients on aspects of its service delivery as part of its customer satisfaction surveys. Furthermore, survey outcomes are reported quarterly against a specific performance indicator, Level of client satisfaction with the quality and timeliness of our service, advice, engagement, consultation and decision-making. This public commitment is supported by a governance framework that emphasises the importance of stakeholder relationships, including client relationships, as a prerequisite for organisational stability. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 38

There are several tools that support the leadership, ethics and cultural agenda in QT. These include QT s Code of Conduct and the Working in Government training package, which is used to promote ethical and professional decisionmaking. There are various general procedures and processes in place which assist with the management of complaints received through each of the three main access channels: telephone, face-to-face/counter and internet. However, at the time of the review, QT lacked a clearly defined complaints management policy and procedures framework. Consequently, complaints management practices varied and it is likely that there were also variations in the quality, efficiency and effectiveness of complaints management across the organisation. We also concluded that improvements in complaints recording and reporting would enhance the organisation's ability to take advantage of the lessons that can be learned from customer feedback. 3.2.7.3 What we recommended The main recommendations we made for the improvement of QT s complaints management were to: formulate and adopt a complaints management policy (CM policy) and supporting procedures (CM procedures) that, as far as relevant, are based on our publication titled Developing Effective Complaints Management Policy and Procedures; develop a procedure for resolving complex, serious or sensitive complaints; continue to provide training in basic complaint-handling skills for frontline staff; provide decision-makers with guidance as to the remedies which they may apply; include as part of the CM procedures a requirement that escalated complaints are placed on QT s Business Improvement Database (BID) by the ultimate decision-maker (including reasons for decision and the remedy provided) where there is a class of persons actually or potentially similarly affected; consider the appointment of a temporary or permanent complaints coordinator responsible for the strategic assessment of complaints made through QT s website email system HelpUs2HelpYou (HU2HY) and BID postings; integrate the existing HU2HY, Summary of Operational Issues (SOI) and BID reporting systems; and develop CM procedures that provide for the regular and systematic evaluation of the policy s effectiveness and for implementing improvements to the system. Regular audits (particularly of the treatment of more serious complaints) would aid the achievement of this objective. 39 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

3.2.7.4 What resulted from our recommendations QT reiterated its commitment to improve its complaints management and expressed the view that, overall, our recommendations were appropriate and sound. However, due to concerns regarding the operational and resourcing ramifications of some of our recommendations, QT further evaluated its existing processes for managing and reporting on complaints and conducted a cost-benefit analysis of implementation of the recommendations. A high-level Complaints Management Business Group has been established to determine the best medium to long term solution for the management of QT's complaints. This includes examining processes currently in place for the management of complaints and current information communication technology projects and initiatives, where there is a requirement for incident reporting, complaints management, investigation and/or case management. QT has found there is a high level of synergy between the requirements of several projects. They support a coordinated approach and the purchase or development of a common 'generic' type of complaints/investigation system. 3.2.7.5 The current position In consultation with the Ombudsman s Office, QT developed comprehensive complaints management policy and procedures that, when fully implemented, will address our recommendations. The HU2HY email facility on QT s website, used by customers to lodge enquiries and some complaints about QT s services, was replaced in May 2005 by the Fastinfo email box. The Fastinfo email box provides a single entry point for email to QT. All enquiries and complaints made through Fastinfo are recorded including emails forwarded to other business areas for action. The complaints management policy has already been adopted on a whole of department basis. The draft procedures will be tested as part of a six-month pilot to be released prior to adoption, so that business impacts and other operational concerns can be fully assessed and addressed. The draft procedures will be tested in pilot sites in the Services Group. 3.2.7.6 Agency comment QT values customer feedback as a means of gauging and improving the quality of its service delivery, products and services. QT's policy and procedures for complaints management, developed as part of the Ombudsman's Complaints Management Project, provide a framework to manage and resolve customer complaints. When fully implemented, it is intended that the complaints management policy and procedures will provide: Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 40

a uniform and effective mechanism for managing complaints; and meaningful management information about any adverse trends or systemic problems associated with delivery of QT's products and services. QT however, is conscious of the organisational implications that have the potential to impact on service standards if the implementation of complaints management is not properly considered and managed. 3.2.8 WorkCover Queensland 3.2.8.1 Background WorkCover Queensland (WorkCover) is the main provider of workers compensation insurance to Queensland employers. Its stated aim is to deliver the best possible benefits to injured workers at the lowest possible premiums to employers. In working towards this goal, WorkCover must also maintain a commercially viable, fully-funded scheme. WorkCover s functions include claims management (statutory claims and common law claims), policy and premium management and compliance activities. In 2003-2004, WorkCover managed 73,286 statutory claims and 2,952 common law claims. In the same year, we received 165 complaints about WorkCover and in 2004-05 we received 134 complaints. WorkCover s key performance measures relate to customer service for injured workers and employer satisfaction. WorkCover s focus for the Complaints Management Project was the way in which it manages complaints about its decisions, actions and services. 3.2.8.2 What we found WorkCover's commitment to customer service and complaints handling was built into a number of documents, including an Issues Management Policy/Protocol and a staff training program. We worked with WorkCover to identify changes needed to ensure compliance with the Australian Standard for complaints handling. WorkCover undertook a project to develop a new complaints management policy, procedures and guidelines, implement a new automated customer relations database, undertake staff training and develop new customer communications. 3.2.8.3 What we recommended We provided extensive feedback to WorkCover on its new draft complaints handling policy covering such areas as the policy commitment statement, policy scope, frontline complaints handling, internal and external review stages, customer communication, complaints trend reporting and policy application evaluation. 41 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

We also reviewed and provided feedback on WorkCover s draft document Complaints handling policy, procedures and guidance for managers. We made 11 recommendations covering such matters as complaint type/response timeframes, performance standards, internal complaint investigation and resolution, anonymous complaints and complaints made by agents. 3.2.8.4 What resulted from our recommendations WorkCover accepted and implemented most of our recommendations about its draft complaints handling policy and its Board approved the policy on 22 March 2005. After further discussion on the remaining recommendations, it became apparent they were already part of WorkCover s standard business practice. Of those, the most significant was our recommendation that the policy include a provision to the effect that if a decision is subject to a statutory review/appeal process, a person adversely affected by the decision must be notified of their right of review/appeal at the time the decision is communicated. WorkCover advised us that the communication of any statutory review/appeal rights to customers is already part of their business procedures. All letters providing reasons for the decision and relevant form letters contain standard paragraphs to this effect, and all staff are aware of this requirement. In view of WorkCover s advice we were satisfied that this requirement is being met. We also discussed with WorkCover our recommendations concerning its Complaints handling policy, procedures and guidance for managers document. WorkCover substantially or totally accepted each of our recommendations and the changes are reflected in the final document. 3.2.8.5 The current position WorkCover now has in place a combined complaints handling policy and procedures that provides for frontline complaints resolution and the escalation of more serious or unresolved complaints. A dedicated complaints advisor has been employed to coordinate the internal complaints resolution process, act as a liaison person for external agencies, and analyse information to identify ongoing opportunities for improvement. The new WorkCover website contains a customer relations section that can be accessed from every page within the site. This section includes a customer friendly, condensed version of the policy. People have the option of making a verbal complaint to a frontline officer as well as lodging complaints in an electronic form. A fact sheet covering similar information has been developed for customers who do not have internet access. WorkCover s new customer relations system, developed in-house, was released on 1 July 2005. The new system automates the complaints handling Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 42

process and provides a series of checks and balances to ensure that deadlines are met and issues are resolved appropriately. Regular reports have been created to update management and analyse trends. Recommendations are provided to management on areas for improvement. Training has been provided for all WorkCover managers on the new complaints handling policy and procedures, the new customer relations database and communication material. Appropriate training for frontline staff involved in complaints handling has been completed. Complaints handling information will also be included in induction, customer service and statutory claims training courses. All training is complemented by a full range of resources including a Complaints handling policy, procedures and guidance for managers document, PowerPoint presentations and laminates for all frontline people. We are satisfied that WorkCover s complaints management system, policy and procedures now meet the recognised Australian and international standard. 3.2.8.6 Agency comment Following discussions with the Queensland Ombudsman and extensive research into industry best practice, WorkCover undertook an analysis of its complaints handling and identified a number of areas for improvement. The feedback received to date from our people, customers and stakeholders has been extremely positive. We look forward to reducing the number of complaints being made directly to external agencies such as the Queensland Ombudsman, using complaints information to identify opportunities for continuous improvement, and ultimately improving our annual customer satisfaction survey results. 3.2.9 Boonah Shire Council 3.2.9.1 Background The Complaints Management Project initially included two local governments: Gold Coast and Maroochy. It was subsequently felt that the policy and procedures developed for these larger local governments may not be suitable for the many small local governments in Queensland. We therefore decided to include a smaller, rural local government in the project in order to develop a policy and procedures model that smaller councils in the State could adopt or use in developing their own policy. Boonah Shire Council s Chief Executive Officer, who at the time was President of the Local Government Managers Association (Queensland), readily accepted our invitations for the council to participate in the project. In 2004-2005, we received 19 complaints about Boonah Shire Council. 43 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

3.2.9.2 What we found The council s commitment to customer service was evident in several documents, including: the Corporate Plan 2001-2006; the Operational Plan 2004-2005; and Service Edge (Totally competitive service delivery). However, there was no comprehensive policy or guidelines that dealt specifically with the handling of, or response to, any complaint received. Accordingly there was no centralised recording of complaints data or specific staff training on how to handle or respond to a complaint. The process generally followed by the council was to refer any complaint received at the front counter, or in writing, to the council department involved for further attention. 3.2.9.3 What we recommended As no written policy existed, we offered to prepare for council s consideration a draft policy and procedures, based on: our Effective Complaints Management Fact Sheets; our publication titled Developing Effective Complaints Management Policy and Procedures; and the relevant Australian and international standards. In the course of preparing this draft, my officers held several meetings to consult with council officers and forwarded drafts by email for comment. The Complaints Management Policy and Procedures that resulted incorporates features such as: a centralised recording system; publication of the policy and procedures on the council s website; appropriate staff training; and a three monthly report to the council s Chief Executive Officer on all complaints received. 3.2.9.4 What resulted from our recommendations On 18 February 2005, the council s Executive Management Team (CEMT) endorsed the policy and procedures. Among other things, the council will endeavour to ensure that complaints are properly monitored with a view to continual improvement of its services, systems and staff skills. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 44

3.2.9.5 The current position The CEMT has included the introduction of the Complaints Management Policy as part of the organisational improvement process of the council. A review of systems and processes is being undertaken to facilitate this organisational improvement. The CEMT has made a commitment to implement a complaints management database as part of its project to introduce a new IT system incorporating a customer service module. 3.2.9.6 Agency comment Boonah Shire Council has appreciated the assistance and cooperation of the Queensland Ombudsman s Office in the preparation of a Complaints Management Policy. The council decided to incorporate the policy into the implementation of its Document Imaging system. Stage one of the document imaging system has been implemented. This did not include the customer service module. It is anticipated this module will be implemented later this year. The rollout of the Complaints Management Policy is dependent upon this implementation and its functionality to record requests and complaints. Currently customer service staff are developing procedures to utilise this system. This process forms part of, and is dependent on, an organisational review currently in progress to enhance our customer service and communications systems as part of our organisational improvement strategy. It is anticipated that the revised complaints management system will fit into this and will form part of our considerations in the forthcoming budget. 3.2.10 Gold Coast City Council 3.2.10.1 Background When we commenced our project, the council was already working on a plan to develop a whole of council computer based complaints management system called the Corporate Customer Request Management System (CCRMS). The project had progressed to approval of business case stage. The CCRMS project was subsequently placed on hold indefinitely pending further decisions regarding the priority of all council s corporate development projects. The project team was disbanded and the CCRMS project was discontinued. 45 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

We asked the council whether there was another system used to record and track complaints across the organisation that the council might assess using our Effective Complaints Management Self Audit Checklist. The council referred us to its Councillor Request System (CRS), which assists the council to manage complaints and requests for service arising through individual councillors. The CRS is a computerised tracking system that sits across all council directorates. However, day-to-day management of system outcomes is decentralised, by directorate. On average, the CRS receives 11,430 requests each year. While the CRS handles a considerable volume of business, far greater public contact occurs through customer service centres, with directorate staff and through the Chief Executive Officer s Office. Accordingly, the CRS does not constitute a centralised complaints management system within council. Evaluating the CRS was the initial focus of the Complaints Management Project. However, as the project evolved and in view of our recommendations, this focus was broadened to encompass issues of policy, procedures and staff training across the organisation. In 2004-2005, we received 166 complaints about Gold Coast City Council. 3.2.10.2 What we found The CRS operates as a reasonably effective tool to record and respond to customer complaints and requests for service made to councillors. However, there are deficiencies in its capacity to collate, analyse and report on the recorded information. This means that the CRS is limited in its capacity to identify improvements to customer service business processes. Our recommendations focused on improving the CRS s capacity in this area. In preparing our recommendations we took into account that council s resources are fully committed and CRS procedures are integrated into existing job descriptions and roles as extraordinary duties. We also understood that the CRS computer resources, while still supported as part of the council s larger Citipac system, are aged and therefore unlikely to be able to be significantly enhanced in automated function without significant expenditure. We also noted that the council was intending to undertake a major review of its entire customer services in the near future and the CRS is anticipated to be included in this review. Accordingly, we made modest but significant suggestions to improve the existing system without significant cost or undertake a major computer system upgrade. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 46

3.2.10.3 What we recommended We made three key recommendations to the council. Starting at the highest level, we recommended that council develop a whole of council complaints management policy and procedures. This is the key to the council demonstrating its commitment to good complaints management. Second, we recommended that the council conduct a staff training program to assist in the implementation of the new policy and procedures. For the future, we recommended that the council consider re-activating the CCRMS project, or similar project, to help integrate and operationalise the complaints management system across all council services. We made a number of other recommendations specifically to enhance the strategic and operational effectiveness of the CRS should council desire to utilise the system to manage a broader range of complaints. These included to: develop measurable objectives against which CRS performance can be assessed and reported on; introduce half yearly reporting to the CEO by each directorate dealing with performance against the CRS objectives; consider designating an overall CRS coordinator and/or directorate coordinators; develop guidelines or procedures for staff who handle CRS complaints dealing with, among other things, staff authority and delegations, assessment of complaints and the conduct of investigations; consider categorising complaints by complexity, seriousness or risk and establishing different response timeframes for each category; provide comprehensive ongoing training in key areas of complaints management for relevant officers; and conduct an annual audit and review of CRS processes. 3.2.10.4 What resulted from our recommendations The council established a reference group comprising officers from the relevant directorates to consider the key recommendations. This was led by an officer from the Chief Executive Officer s Office. The reference group developed a draft Customer Complaint and Feedback Policy and Procedure based on our Guidelines and submitted it to the group s Corporate Governance Committee (comprised of the council s directors). My officers provided input to the draft developed. The Committee modified the draft and endorsed that a submission be made to council for approval. The council approved the Customer Complaint and Feedback Policy and Procedure on a trial basis for six months. Following the trial, a review will be conducted to make any necessary changes and to ensure compliance with 47 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

new statutory requirements in the amended Local Government Act 1993 for general complaints processes. The procedure requires each directorate to establish complaints management systems that meet minimum requirements using existing IT systems. At this stage the council has not made any decision in response to our recommendation to re-activate the CCRMS project or the specific recommendations we made in relation to the CRS. The council says that these matters are being considered in the context of the overall IT system needs of the council. 3.2.10.5 The current position The council is required, under its corporate activity framework, to develop a project management plan encompassing all the tasks required to implement the Customer Complaint and Feedback Policy and Procedure. The process is currently underway. My officers will provide input into the development of the plan and, where required, provide advice and assistance on the implementation approach. The council has approved a communication plan for the release of the policy and procedure, most of which will happen following the trial period. The plan involves: an official public launch; production of pamphlets to be made available in key public areas such as council administration centres, libraries and depots; establishment of a page on the council s website; placement of articles in divisional newsletters and the Mayoral column; development of a staff training program; and information about the policy to be included in induction programs. My Office has been engaged by council to provide training to council officers on good decision-making. The training teaches officers to follow a checklist in making decisions and, by so doing, reducing the risk of the decision becoming the subject of a conflict. This training is being provided through a program we have developed for public sector agencies to improve administrative decisionmaking. 3.2.10.6 Agency comment An efficient complaints management system has the potential to enhance Council's reputation as being transparent and accountable in its decisionmaking processes. The system will also improve the consistency of the community's dealings with Council. Once a proper reporting regime is put in place, there will be improved management of information with respect to the nature and extent of complaints received by Council, together with the remedies put in place where appropriate. Council recognises the importance Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 48

of customer complaints handling and has engaged a Complaints Review Coordinator within the Office of the Chief Executive Officer. In effect, this position operates as a quasi internal Ombudsman. Council's "Customer Service" Strategic Priority commits Council (in part) to: consistent and reliable service; being recognised as easy to deal with; and a seamless response to requests. A complaints policy and procedure has the potential to make an immediate contribution to the achievement of this important Strategic Priority by focusing on the highest risk factor in relation to customer service i.e. customers who are dissatisfied with a decision, action or service of Council. GCCC has been pleased to participate in the pilot Customer Complaints Handling Policy project coordinated by the Ombudsman. This project has provided us with a good insight into the improvements we needed to put in place to provide an effective review process. Our service delivery areas have embraced the project and in excess of 200 staff have been identified for training, both in complaints handling and good decision-making. 3.2.11 Maroochy Shire Council 3.2.11.1 Background In May 2001, the council s Chief Executive Officer approved a Complaints Management Policy for internal use by staff to deal with complaints from dissatisfied customers about the delivery of a product or service offered by the council or misconduct of an officer. In general terms, the policy contained brief details about making, recording, processing, reviewing, responding to and reporting on complaints. It also provided for the appointment of a complaints administrator (CA), the role of that officer and the establishment of a Complaints Register. Monthly reports on complaints received, management issues and emerging trends were to be made by the CA to the council s Corporate Management Team (CMT). If a customer was dissatisfied with the outcome of an initial complaint to a line manager, the customer could request a review of the decision. The CA would, in consultation with the relevant manager, undertake the review and make any necessary recommendations to the CMT. A report for the consideration of the council was prepared when a decision by resolution was required. No authority was delegated to the CA to make a fresh determination. The CA had a recommendatory role only in the assessment of requests for review of decisions. 49 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

Participation in the Complaints Management Project provided the council with an opportunity to upgrade its Complaints Management System (CMS) to best practice standards and align it with the council s corporate goal of maximising quality customer service. In 2004-2005, we received 91 complaints about the council. 3.2.11.2 What we found The council considered that the existing policy was suitable for its use at that time, given the relatively low volume of complaints being received by the council (approximately 50-60 per year). However, we were concerned that the low number of complaints could have been due, in part, to a lack of awareness among the public of the policy. No direct reference was made to the policy or to a complaints procedure on the council s website at the time our project commenced. The council had been using existing software to support the recording and reporting function of its system. Council readily acknowledged that upgraded computer resources would probably be required in due course to underpin any new CMS that might emerge from our joint project. This upgrade would ultimately be necessary if council were to meet all the criteria for a best practice complaints management system and derive optimum benefits from its implementation and ongoing use. We agreed with council s proposal that any computer upgrade should not be undertaken (and funds not committed) until the full implications of the new CMS were ascertained. On this basis, computer resource requirements would be reviewed approximately 12 months after the new system had been introduced. Our review of Maroochy s complaints management system revealed a fundamentally sound system. Most criteria identified in our checklist were met, or substantially met, by the system. 3.2.11.3 What we recommended As a result of our review of the council s existing CMS, we recommended that it: formulate and adopt a complaints management policy and supporting procedures that, as far as applicable, are based on our document titled Developing Effective Complaints Management Policy and Procedures; develop a staff training program that focuses on the implementation of the policy and supporting procedures and the positive benefits of effective complaints handling; develop measurable objectives for the CMS and report against them; report on the CMS and processes through regular audits; review publicity strategies to ensure that special needs groups have access to, and may effectively use, the CMS; Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 50

consider categorising complaints, for example, by complexity, seriousness or risk and establish timeframes for response for each category; provide regular reports to the CMT that analyse the complaints information and, where appropriate, include recommendations for improvements to business processes; and upgrade or replace (as necessary) the CMS software to facilitate the collection and analysis of complaints data and the development of complaints reduction and business improvement strategies. 3.2.11.4 What resulted from our recommendations The CMT considered the above recommendations in conjunction with the detailed comments we made on the audit they conducted of their CMS using our Self Audit Checklist. They proceeded to develop a revised document that would meet our project objectives and be suitable for use by the council in dealing with customer complaints. We reviewed the revised draft policy and procedures and held further detailed discussions with council officers on issues we considered needed to be addressed. The CEO then approved the Complaints Management Policy on 30 March 2005, and the Complaints Management Procedures became operational. Both documents have been implemented and will be further reviewed in the light of recent amendments to the Local Government Act 1993. These amendments require every local government to establish a general complaints management process that contains certain prescribed features. Many of those features are not included in the interim documents. 3.2.11.5 The current position The CMS Policy and Procedures have been operational since 31 March 2005. Advice from the council is that there have been no noticeable teething problems in their introduction. The first quarterly report was generated for the period ending June 2005. Complaints received for the first three months (April, May and June) totalled 102. This increase in complaint numbers may, in part, be due to the inclusion of the new Policy and Procedures documents on the council s website. Further enhancements to the website are scheduled to occur early in 2005-2006 to give greater prominence and exposure to the council s complaints process. A greater understanding of the complaints process among council staff may also have contributed to the increase in complaint numbers as the complaints process encourages the proper recording of complaints. A staff training program is well underway. It will be ongoing as part of a continuous staff learning and development process. Public information on the new CMS in the form of brochures and other material is available at all Customer Service Centres. Complaints management issues are also being considered for greater emphasis in council's staff induction programs. 51 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

3.2.11.6 Agency comment Maroochy Shire Council welcomed the opportunity to participate in the Complaints Management Project with the Queensland Ombudsman with a view to developing a system that reflected best practice. Whilst Council already had a Complaints Management Policy we recognised the need to review it from time to time, and the initial review was scheduled for about the time the Queensland Ombudsman approached us on the subject. The Complaints Management Policy and Procedures, developed as part of the Queensland Ombudsman s project, improves on the earlier system from both a customer and administrative perspective. Its development also provided us with the opportunity to review and refine our processes and provides a framework for their ongoing review. Maroochy Shire Council looks forward to the opportunity to continue to work in collaboration with the Queensland Ombudsman in improving its service delivery to its customers. The Complaints Management Policy and Procedures provides an excellent platform for the future. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 52

4. Looking forward 4. Looking Forward 4.1 Phase 1 As noted, during Phase 1 of the project, we worked intensively with 11 agencies to assist them to implement effective complaints management systems. We also developed a number of valuable resource tools, particularly: Effective Complaints Management Fact Sheet Kit; Effective Complaints Management Self Audit Checklist; and Developing Effective Complaints Management Policy and Procedures. Most of the agencies that participated in Phase 1 have achieved the project s outcomes. We will continue to work with the agencies that have not yet implemented their complaints management policy and procedures (namely, the Department of Corrective Services and the Department of Education and the Arts) to encourage and assist them to do so. We will also continue to work with those agencies that are undertaking the staged implementation of their new complaints system, namely, Queensland Transport and the Department of Natural Resources and Mines, as well as the Department of Industrial Relations, where business units are modifying broad departmental procedures. Finally, we will continue to encourage agencies involved in Phase 1 to establish a central (preferably electronic) database for capturing and analysing complaints data in order to identify systemic issues and opportunities for business improvements. 4.2 Phase 2 With one exception, the agencies involved in Phase 1 fall into the category of large public sector agencies. Some provide services on an enormous scale. However, we are also conscious that much work remains to be done in the many other State and local government agencies. Accordingly, the project will move into a second phase. In Phase 2 our role will entail: urging all other agencies (State and local government) to implement their own quality complaints management systems; helping local governments to comply with the recent amendments to the Local Government Act 1993 that oblige them to meet certain additional requirements in their complaints systems. 53 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

4. Looking forward 4.2.1 Encouraging all agencies to implement good complaints systems In 2005-2006, my Office will actively encourage all agencies to develop their own complaints management systems. The tools developed in Phase 1 provide a comprehensive guide to assist agencies through the development process. The policies and procedures prepared by the agencies involved in Phase 1 will also provide working examples of best practice complaints management systems. These documents will be available to all agencies in Phase 2, through this report and our website, and will provide a strong foundation for the development of complaints management systems that address the individual needs of agencies. As mentioned in the Introduction to the report, the Public Service Commissioner has agreed in principle to my request that he issue a directive under the Public Service Act requiring departments and other public sector units to implement complaints systems that comply with the relevant Australian Standard. This initiative will significantly support the objectives of Phase 2. 4.2.2 Addressing the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993 Amendments to the Local Government Act 1993 passed by Parliament in May 2005 require councils to establish a general complaints process by 1 March 2006. These amendments impose some requirements not included in the complaints handling criteria used in our Complaints Management Project and the Australian Standard. We are working with the Department of Local Government, Planning, Sport and Recreation to assist councils to meet the requirements of the Act. It is anticipated that we will do this by helping a selected council develop policies and procedures that address the additional requirements of the Act. These policies and procedures will then provide a model for other councils to use. 4.3 Commissioner s directive In March 2004 the Western Australian Premier issued a circular indicating that the government of that state had made a formal commitment to the principles of the Australian Standard on Complaints Handling (AS 4269). In that circular, the Premier required each agency to: put in place a complaints management system that conformed with the principles of AS 4269; and have a direct link on the front page of its website to information assisting people to make a complaint about the agency. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 54

4. Looking forward The policy objectives included: increasing community access to complaints mechanisms; increasing community awareness of these mechanisms; increasing agency capacity to meet the appropriate standard of complaints management; and monitoring and evaluation of complaints process and data to ensure improved service delivery. A copy of the circular is provided in Appendix 6. I support a similar initiative being taken in Queensland. Therefore, I have written to the Queensland Public Service Commissioner recommending that he issue a directive under the Public Service Act 1996 in similar terms requiring all State Government departments and public sector units to implement, by a date he specifies, a complaints management system that complies with the relevant standards. I am pleased to say that the Commissioner responded positively to my request and has advised that he agrees in principle to issue the directive, and will consult further with the Directors-General of state public sector agencies. 55 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report

5. Supporting Projects 5. Supporting projects In meeting the obligation imposed on us by the Ombudsman Act 2001 to assist to improve public sector decision-making, we have developed two other initiatives which complement the Complaints Management Project. These initiatives are: the Good Decisions Training Program; and the redevelopment of our website. 5.1 Good Decisions Training Program In May 2005, we commenced a trial of the Good Decisions Training Program. As the name implies, this program is designed to assist public sector decisionmakers to make good decisions, both in the first instance and in response to a complaint about a decision already made. To date we have provided training to the Commission for Children and Young People and Child Guardian, Office of Adult Guardian, Department of Child Safety, the Caboolture Shire Council, the Kilcoy Shire Council and the Gold Coast City Council. The program targets non-legally trained public sector decision-makers, who may not have had any training in decision-making or who would find a refresher useful. The content covers the mechanics of making a good decision (including the need to observe natural justice), as well as record keeping, and communicating decisions to the people affected by them. It also includes relevant case studies developed in consultation with the participating agency. The training consists of a half-day workshop and involves taking participants through the basic elements of decision-making, using practical and relevant examples while building a checklist for future reference. Based on our experience in dealing with thousands of complaints, we believe there is a clear need for this type of training across the public sector. We aim to meet this need by delivering a high quality, accessible and relevant program on a cost recovery basis. 5.2 Website redevelopment We are currently redeveloping our website to enable agencies to easily find resources and access information. The new website will feature specific material for agencies on complaints management and good decision-making, including publications, fact sheets and workshop information. We will also provide links to the complaints management policy and procedures of agencies that participated in Phase 1 where possible. The redeveloped website is expected to be launched in late 2005. Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report 56

6. Conclusion 6. Conclusion Through this project, the Ombudsman s Office has utilised its expertise in complaints handling to improve public administration in this State. In particular, the project has led to improvements in agencies processes for responding to expressions of dissatisfaction from members of the public, with complementary benefits for both agencies and the public. The project has also laid the groundwork for similar improvements to be made to the complaints processes of all other State and local government agencies. The end result should be two-fold: a quicker and fairer system for resolving complaints by the public against public sector agencies; and improvements in business processes and outcomes in those agencies as they identify and rectify systemic problems revealed by better complaints management. 57 Complaints Management Project Phase 1 Report