1. FOI Complaints Project Revising our approach, Revisiting our process, Continuing improvements… Graham Smith – Director of Freedom of Information Andy Laing – Head of Complaints Resolution August 2011

2. Aims and Objectives To review our progress with Freedom of Information casework To share some of our thinking and outcomes from the FOI complaints project To air and talk through some of the issues raised To explain how we intend to continue to deliver service improvements To explain your role in making them happen

3. Recognising our history More demand than the ICO could cope with Queues of outstanding work Time taken to deal with cases was far too long The types of request were complex or technical and we were working to find and set precedents There was perceived need to anticipate adverse comment and to avoid public criticism

4. Where we are now We have considerable casework and appeals experience We have a significant amount of guidance and reference material The service we provide in dealing with complaints has been dramatically improved Queues of outstanding cases are manageable 80% + of cases are less than 6 months old

5. Significant changes New group structures for complaints handling More trained and pro-active signatories Closer working with case officers before decisions are drafted Less double handling through review mechanisms FOI monitoring through our Enforcement dept

6. A new FOI process ? Managing our own expectations… No fanfare or big bang… Prepare for cliché overload… …it’s about evolution not revolution Empowerment, cultural changes, shifting emphasis, application and attitude to our work are all as important as new rigid procedures

7. A Process overview Stage 6 Enforcement Case review Tribunal Final Closure Point Potential Decision Points Final Decision Point Potential Decision Point Freedom of information complaints – staged process Potential Decision Points Stage 1 Receipt And Set up Stage 2 Information Gathering Complainant Stage 4 Investigation Analysis Stage 3 Information Gathering Public Authority Stage 5 Decision Notice Chase up and Information notice

8. Key features We expect more of public authorities now we are involved One further chance to revisit decisions already made We expect an argued submission based around our guidance We encourage negotiated resolution There should be proportionate investigation

9. Decision notices Clear and understandable outcomes Plain language aimed at the complainant Explain procedural or service issues succinctly If possible then include actions to avoid making the same mistakes again

10. Quality control Responsibility for reaching balanced and proportionate decisions lies with a case officer and signatory partnership Case officers will reach decisions that follow existing lines Depth of analysis and detail of deliberation will depend on the nature of the case Policy advice, help and guidance will be available for all cases No mandatory requirement for policy review

11. Some new resources Knowledge base and lines to take Potential questions to public authorities “How we handle Complaints” guidance for both parties Communications plan FOI procedures manual to be revised New DN template

12. Taking things further Case officers to work with signatories, team managers and group managers to facilitate changes Guidance for Public Authorities and complainants to be available by month end Website pages and “Complaints” content to be revised by end September Review of effectiveness to be carried out at year end

13. Ongoing Governance Role for the Department management team Signatories board Operations and Policy Liaison Commissioner and Executive Team accountability Management Board oversight

14. Discussion & Questions

15. DECISION NOTICES

16. New Decision Notice Template Decision Steps Ordered Request & Response Scope of the Case Reasons for Decision Right of Appeal

17. What’s not included:- Summary The Commissioner’s Role Chronology Background Findings of fact Analysis Legal annex

18. The approach Ease of understanding Addressing the audience Avoiding Jargon Focus on the complaint What is directly relevant to the decision

19. Ease of Understanding Avoid section shorthand Refer to exemptions as e.g. national security, personal information, commercial interests Be clear when re-stating PA or complainant’s arguments Avoid long sentences Be consistent Grammar and punctuation

20. Addressing the Audience Primarily the complainant Public authority Consider their experience of FOI Not the Tribunal Not the signatory

21. Avoiding jargon Focus on substance of decision rather than legal references Refer to (not quote) ICO guidance Avoid quoting chunks from court or tribunal judgments Consider footnotes for essential references Does it flow?

22. Focus on complaint/what’s relevant Complaint established in “Scope” What has influenced your decision? Address points raised by parties Add own points if relevant … … but not, if not relevant Be clear and crisp!

23. Unhelpful phrases It is the opinion of the Commissioner that … The Commissioner believes that … The Commissioner is persuaded that … The Commissioner is not convinced that … The Commissioner understands that … The Commissioner has considered the matter very carefully

24. More assertive language The Commissioner considers that … The Commissioner accepts that … The Commissioner’s view is … In all the circumstances …

25. A Decision Notice is not … A measurement of how much work you’ve put in A place to show how much you’ve learned about something A therapeutic outpouring giving vent to your exasperation with the PA or complainant

26. Questions?