SPSO’s role and function

Our role

The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman’s role is defined and created by statute. The Ombudsman’s powers and duties are set out in the SPSO Act 2002:

• we are the final stage for complaints about most devolved public services in Scotland including councils, the health service, prisons, water and sewerage providers, Scottish Government, universities and colleges
• we have specific powers and responsibilities to publish complaints handling procedures, and monitor and support best practice in complaints handling
• we are also the independent review service for the Scottish Welfare Fund with the power to overturn and substitute decisions made by councils on Community Care Grant and Crisis Grant applications
• we are the Independent National Whistleblowing Officer for the NHS in Scotland, since 1 April 2021

Like any other public body, we are also subject to other legislation and statutory guidance in relation to how we manage our staff and deliver our statutory functions.

Who does what?

Operational delivery by function

Corporate services

Corporate Services Manager

• Finance
• Governance and risk management
• ICT support
• Quality Assurance, audit and casework reviews
• Human Resource Management and Learning & Development
• Information governance
• Facilities management
• Health and safety
• Professional Advice service

Public Service complaint investigations

Two teams, each led by one of the Heads of Investigation supported by Team Managers

• Assessment and Guidance
• Public service complaints investigations

Scottish Welfare Fund review service

Transitional arrangements led by the Director supported by a Team Manager

• Handling of SWF review applications
• Advice on SWF applications handling

Independent National Whistleblowing Officer

Transitional arrangements, matrix managed by the Ombudsman and the Director, supported by a Team Manager

• Implementation support
• INWO complaints handling
• Stakeholder engagement for implementation

Improvement, Standards and Engagement

Head of ISE supported by a Communications Team Manager

• Monitoring compliance with Model Complaints Handling Procedures
• Advice and guidance on complaint handling standards
• Policy and business development
• Communications and engagement
• Data and trends reporting and monitoring

Progress against strategic themes

Although we did not deliver every item to plan, we made good progress against our strategic aims, as the examples below illustrate.

Accessibility

Everybody who uses Scottish public services can access them without barriers, when they need them, in the way they need to. People are always treated with dignity, respect and kindness.

Strategic aim	Progress
We will develop and monitor the Model Complaints Handling Procedures and Model National Whistleblowing Standards, to ensure accessibility is integral to public bodies’ complaints handling	We supported public bodies in achieving compliance with updated model complaint handling procedures We engaged with the NHS to support preparation of the Whistleblowing Standards in April 2021 We reported outcomes and findings of casework regularly, through a variety of media
We will make our own services as accessible as they can be	We made improvements to our online complaint form While we maintained a phone service, this was on reduced hours. We offered, and continued to offer, the service. It is available at different times on different days so it is accessible to all We continued to review and update our website to ensure all stakeholders received timely information about our services during lockdown
We will push for legislative change to enable us to make our services and those of other Scottish public bodies accessible	The pressure on resources and the impact on parliamentary business meant we did not publish a report calling for a review and extension to our powers (in particular the ability to take complaints in any format and to conduct investigations under our own initiative without the need for a complaint) as planned. This was carried forward to 2021-22 We contributed to a range of consultations
We will continue to develop relationships with our stakeholders to both learn from and to contribute to fair, accessible Scottish public services	We worked with the Scottish Government to implement the new Self-Isolation Support Grant We reviewed our memoranda of understanding with a number of public bodies, replacing some with information sharing agreements that enable sharing of learning

Access to justice

People have, and understand how to, access gateways to justice if things go wrong with public services. They receive proper explanations and fair redress, in a way that they feel listened to and supported.

Strategic aim	Progress
We will deliver our statutory functions in line with legislative requirements and our published customer service standards and performance targets	We maintained our full range of services during lockdown We did not meet all of our performance targets for public service complaints We met or exceeded all of our SWF Review service targets
We will contribute to the development of the wider access to justice environment through engagement with relevant groups and stakeholders such as the UK Access to Justice Council, the Open Government Partnership, and other commissioners and ombudsman services	We are active members of the Access to Justice Council We had regular stakeholder contact with other Ombudsman services and groups, to identify and share learning and good practice

Capacity

SPSO and Scottish public services have the capacity to deliver their functions effectively and fairly. They are adequately resourced, and have the necessary enabling infrastructure and well-trained staff who are supported to deliver the service.

Strategic aim	Progress
We will continue to push for adequate funding for our functions and seek to develop a more sustainable funding model, recognising the annual budget process but challenging, where appropriate, how it is applied	Ongoing dialogue with Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body (SPCB) and other Parliamentary office holders, interrupted by COVID-19 restrictions COVID-19 enduring impact will require additional resources for successful recovery in relation to public service complaints performance
We will assess and mitigate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on our capacity and that of public bodies and other stakeholders to deliver an effective service which meets published standards	We actively monitored the impact of COVID-19 through performance and governance systems We made temporary changes to some systems, such as flexitime recording to ensure we could monitor impact We accelerated our IT replacement programme to bring all staff onto the same IT platform
We will be acknowledged for having well-trained, properly supported people, who have the tools they need to deliver our services	We maintained our IIP Gold status
We will build or maintain our capacity, financial, human and infrastructure, to implement and deliver our statutory functions	We accelerated delivery of a number of IT projects to enable more efficient and secure electronic data sharing We put in place a range of wellbeing support resources We developed online induction training for staff We implemented and continue to develop use of online collaborative tools and platforms
We will review and develop the support, guidance and training we offer to public bodies, complainants and whistleblowers to enable them to develop their own capacity, in particular the NHS in developing its capacity in respect of whistleblowing	We developed, and delivered web-based complaint handling training We developed and delivered online training modules on the INWO standards We contributed to the induction of Whistleblowing Champions

Standards

Public services are delivered to the standard required and expected. They are supported and enabled by robust governance structures that ensure that public bodies comply with legislation and standards, and learn from experience; theirs and others, good and poor.

Strategic aim	Progress
We will monitor Scottish public bodies’ complaint handling, Scottish Welfare Fund applications and whistleblowing handling, holding them to account for poor performance and giving credit for good performance	We communicated with the Scottish Government about changes to SWF guidance We maintained our approach of identifying and raising learning for public bodies through recommendations, feedback and our Support and Intervention policy We communicated directly with Scottish public bodies about their continuing duties to respond to complaints
We will develop our capacity to gather and share information to enable us to make informed and beneficial interventions when complaint, whistleblowing and Scottish Welfare Fund services fall below accepted standards	We reviewed and redesigned our management reporting dashboard to improve our monitoring and decision-making in relation to resources and capacity We continued to develop our intelligence gathering from casework across all our functions We are members of the Sharing Intelligence for Health and Care group When able to work fully online, we continued to share learning and experience internally though a number of communities of practice
We will review the Model Complaints Handling Procedures and National Whistleblowing Standards, to ensure they remain fit for purpose	We developed additional guidance to support the updated public service model complaints handling procedures, e.g. guidance on vulnerability and a video overview of the changes made to the MCHP
We will contribute to the development and/ or review of other standards and guidance to ensure they deliver services to the standards required	We continued to monitor and report against customer service standards. While performance was generally good, complaints about delay caused by the impact of COVID-19 and the ages of unallocated cases, were upheld We contributed to a range of public consultations We contributed and continue to contribute to the Scottish Government’s implementation of a Patient Safety Commissioner We contributed to international standards discussion and development, for example The Venice Principles

Business plan

Strategic themes and aims drive our business planning. There is a direct link between every part of our business plan and our strategic themes and aims. Progress over the year was, as explained elsewhere in this report, impacted by COVID-19.

Of our 211 items in our business plan, we met our objectives in 158 of them. Some items we carried forward because we could not pursue them under lockdown, and some were completed but failed to meet performance targets (recorded as not achieved).

Further detail about our performance against our business plan is available on our website.

Business plan progress	Total
Exceeded	4
Completed	111
Ongoing work on target	43
Ongoing work where there is slippage	17
Not achieved	3
Discontinued	3
Not started	5
Carried forward	25
Total	211

First contact

Delivering a responsive and accessible frontline service during 2020-21 was testing. While working from home during the pandemic, our Assessment and Guidance team has continued to provide a largely uninterrupted service to members of the public and prisoners.

Where, when and how we deliver our service had to change. Our dedicated frontline team of six members of staff prioritised work and matched skills and resources to focus on continually changing pressure points. We worked hard to support service users and each other during an unprecedented year.

Whilst the year presented challenges, it also created opportunity to develop our communication channels and the guidance and support that we offer. As a result, we have experienced a channel shift in how members of the public are accessing our service and we have improved our capacity to process complaints entirely electronically.

67% of complaints that we received during 2020-21 were submitted via our webform.

We have offered flexible times for members of the public to contact us for advice throughout the week and offered advice on 2,359 calls.

We receive enquiries and complaints through a variety of channels:

• 0800 Freephone telephone number
• email and website forms
• post

During the last year we have experienced a rise in enquiries and complaints being submitted to our office via our website.

Electronic complaint submissions have increased; 67% of complaints that we received during 2020-21 were submitted via our webform. We developed our webform to ensure we are receiving the right amount of detail and supporting documentation from complainants. The improved form allows us to make an initial assessment of complaints as early as possible and offer a realistic timescale of when complaint investigation staff will be in a position to consider the complaint in detail.

We improved the accessibility of our service for prisoners by developing a telephone message function that prisoners can access at any time to tell us that they plan to submit a complaint and request a hard-copy complaint form.

We have offered flexible times for members of the public to contact us for advice throughout the week and offered advice on 2,359 calls. Our general email address was very busy and we had one dedicated staff member responding to all email messages within only a few days.

In recognition of the increased online contact, we have produced a video, which gives information on how to complain to public sector organisations and when and how SPSO consider complaints. The video is available on our website.

We met with the Patient Advice and Support Service, the Scottish Independent Advocacy Alliance and the Equality Advice and Support Service who advise and/or support members of the public with complaints to learn more about their services and when it is appropriate for us to refer to these organisations. Refreshing and developing our links and understanding of support and advocacy services was particularly important this year. Our frontline team regularly observed the difficulties that the pandemic had on our service users. We developed information about organisations that we can signpost to for specific support. Further to a presentation that was delivered to all SPSO staff from the Scottish Independent Advocacy Alliance, a page is now available on our website detailing the benefits of advocacy and how to access an advocacy service.

We have also been increasingly made aware of the delays and difficulties that complainants have experienced in receiving a response to their complaints from various public service providers during 2020-21. The team provided extra assistance to many complainants to help them to obtain a response to their complaint. This experience will help SPSO to develop an approach to support complainants effectively and highlight these issues to public service organisations and water providers during 2021-22.

Complaints overview

Caseload

We monitor casework numbers closely throughout the year. This is important for our performance management and resource planning. We publish and share this information with the organisations we work with and other stakeholders to help support and improve complaints handling at a local level, and to reduce the numbers which escalate to us. We also use it to inform how we design our own systems and measure effectiveness.

The fall in case numbers received in 2020-21 was largely as a result of a fall in cases within the first three months of the year during the first lockdown. Unlike other years, the cases received varied and by the end of the year the number of cases being received had returned to 2019-20 levels. As the cases received by quarter show, it was only in quarter four that case volumes were comparable with the previous year.

Cases carried forward - compared to the two years before 2020-21, the number of cases carried forward as a proportion of the total caseload for the year was much higher than normal. This is largely the result of the sharp rise in cases received towards the end of quarter three, and in quarter four.

Complaints at a glance

Cases closed per quarter

As with cases received, there was a significant impact for SPSO on closure rates during the first part of the year as a result of the lockdown, contributing to the overall lower output than the previous year. In line with Scottish Government guidance, SPSO moved to home-working for the majority of our team. We took quick and decisive steps to ensure that our complaints service continued to function throughout, but it took several weeks to equip all staff fully to be home-based. There was inevitably an impact on productivity during the year during the transition to home working. This is reflected in the drop in case closures and the lower output in the first quarter.

Lockdown itself had significant impact on us, for example working time lost for caring, home-schooling and simply the logistics of keeping the organisation running remotely. We tracked this and have calculated that during lockdown, we lost working days equivalent to 2.5 full-time complaints reviewers, 8.5% of our investigative capacity in COVID-19 related absences, as well as having to re-deploy some investigative resources to key worker duties.

Premature complaints rate

The actual number of premature complaints received fell along with all other areas of complaint (a premature complaint is one that has not been considered by the public body first). However, for the first time in a number of years the proportion of premature complaints within our overall caseload grew slightly (by 1%). Against a backdrop of good progress over several years, this increase reflects the fact that some public bodies have found it challenging to meet the timescales set out in the Model Complaints Handling Procedures during the pandemic. The SPSO issued advice to public bodies by letter and on our website about how to approach these challenges, ensuring that they continue to communicate well with service users even where they are unable to meet timescales, giving reasons and anticipated timescales.

Complaints received by sector

Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)

Responding to complaints in a timely manner is one of SPSO’s key service standards. Case age is monitored regularly and closely throughout the year. This year, performance indicator (PI) 3 has been particularly impacted by the process and resourcing challenges of lockdown, and we have not maintained the level of output to which we aspire.

Performance against KPIs by quarter

There have been different challenges throughout the year working to our three performance measures. For PI1, which measures timescales for providing advice, once we were able to have our systems and processes functioning as normal we were able to work to our usual PI. For PI2 and PI3, the lack of access to IT systems at the start of lockdown and ongoing resourcing challenges throughout, meant that whilst we have managed to raise productivity levels in line with 2019-20 levels, case ages have increased significantly and this impacted particularly on our investigation cases. This will be a trend that continues into quarters one and two of 2021-22, as we simply do not have the investigative capacity to close more cases.

Case assessment

We tell people as soon as we can what action we can and will take on a complaint. We explain whether their case can be resolved, is something that we can legally look into, and whether an SPSO investigation is beneficial to them. We call this stage assessment. In 2020-21 we introduced new ways of coding these decisions. This allows us to provide more transparent information about when and why we are making decisions not to investigate.

Impact of COVID-19

SPSO closed around 13% fewer cases at the assessment stage in the process compared to 2019-20, largely as a result of the impact of lockdown in particular at the start of the year. This is consistent with other performance and statistical information.

Cases closed at assessment stage per quarter

Normally, to help us manage our caseloads, following initial assessment all cases that require further consideration are held in an allocation pool pending allocation. Before cases are held, they are assessed to identify high priority, time critical cases.

We reviewed this approach in light of the pandemic, and as a result we extended our criteria for prioritising cases to ensure the most vulnerable complainants were prioritised.

We also reviewed what we communicate about cases being held in the allocation pool, as we felt it important to be realistic with people. As a result we confirmed the length of time people could expect for it to take before their case would be allocated and invited them to contact us with any additional information.

Despite operational and resourcing challenges, the number of unallocated cases remained around the same level throughout the year as a result of close monitoring and targeted work to manage it. The challenge for SPSO moving into 2021-22 is to continue to focus on reducing the waiting times for allocation for cases within the allocation pool.

Complaints investigation

Investigations completed

As with assessment cases, investigation case closures were lower for the year as a whole and in particular quarter one of the year due to the impact of lockdown. Lockdown impacted directly on both our capacity and the capacity of public bodies to respond to our enquiries. This had the double impact of resulting in few cases closed, and of the time taken to close them.

Cases closed per quarter

Public reports

Each year we publish a number of cases in full where there is evidence of significant personal injustice or hardship, systemic failure, significant complaints handling failures or where it is a test case in a new area that others could learn from. In 2020-21 we published seven public reports.

Cases that are not published in full as public investigation reports are usually published as decision summaries. Public reports and decision summaries can be found on our website.

Uphold rate

In 2020-21, we continued to develop our approach to ensure proportionate, but robust, investigation of cases. We want our case handling to deliver good outcomes, not unrealistically raise expectations of what we can achieve for complainants, promote learning and improvement and to be effective and efficient use of limited public resources. This means where we have evidence that the public body has already carried out a thorough investigation and/or taken appropriate action in response to complaints, we do not consider them further by carrying an investigation beyond our initial enquiries.

The rise in the uphold rate at investigation reflects the impact of this approach because we focus greater resource on the cases where the public body hasn’t carried out a thorough investigation, implemented actions, or identified and acted on lessons learned.

Independent advice^*

Number of advice requests completed

Overall the number of advice requests fell by around 36%. This was anticipated given the fall in cases received in particular within the area of health, where the demand for advice is greatest. At points in the year there have been difficulties in sourcing timely clinical advice particularly for specialisms most impacted by COVID-19 but we have been successful in progressing all advice requests, with great thanks to the clinicians who act as advisers under at times very difficult circumstances.

^* Expert, independent advice SPSO takes to inform decisions.

Closed cases requiring multiple independent advice

The increase in the number of cases requiring two or more requests for advice is an indication of increasing multi-specialism of casework. In 2019-20, 75% of requests were for a single piece of advice whereas this fell to 63% in 2020-21.

Scottish Welfare Fund independent review service

Handling applications for reviews of local authority (council) decisions about the Scottish Welfare Fund (SWF) is a priority area of work for us. This is because it is subject to statutory timescales, but more importantly for us, it is access to justice for people in need; often very vulnerable and in difficult circumstances.

Our highly committed SWF team delivered a seamless service going into lockdown. Our leadership team ensured they had the equipment and access to IT systems to continue to deliver services as normally as possible.

Contacts

We record two types of contact: those we signpost to other organisations, and those relating directly to SWF review applications.

The SWF review team were contacted by 2,405 people during 2020-21; this represents a 29% increase from the previous year.

The overall 29% increase in contacts from the previous year was largely linked to 60% increase in the volume of signposting enquiries. We only started to record enquiries from councils towards the end of the previous year and so this change is also likely to have contributed to the overall increase.

5% increase from the previous year. 883 reviews were made in 2020-21, which is comparable to the previous year.

Signposting enquiries

• 806 contacts were contacting us in error instead of their council
• 155 applicants told us that they were unable to contact their council as they did not have a Freephone number
• 55 applicants reported different accessibility concerns such as the telephone lines being busy or it or it not being clear on the council’s website how to request a first tier review
• 90 council staff we spoke to who were seeking advice about applications.

Review applications received and handled

Grant review applications received in 2020-21 by quarter

Review applications received yearly comparison

Review applications handled yearly comparison

Review application outcomes

Uphold rates by grant – yearly comparison

Grant applications reviewed and closed - by quarter

Key points

As can be seen, although overall application numbers (excluding Self-Isolation Support Grants (SIS Grants)) rose by 5% on the previous year, the trend towards more Crisis Grants (CG) than Community Care Grants (CCG) continued. It is not clear why there was a 37% fall in CCGs, but we consider it likely to be the indirect result of lockdown.

We upheld approximately one in four CG applications reviewed, a small reduction on the 27% upheld in the previous year.

We noted that our ‘uphold rate’ fluctuated slightly throughout the year. For example, in quarter one, we upheld one in three CG applications compared to just over one in five in quarters three and four.

In quarter one, during the initial stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, there were more applications which we assessed had been made under exceptional circumstances.

In the later stages of the year, a higher proportion of applications were linked to ongoing or recurrent situations. In many cases, we therefore agreed with councils that the circumstances were not exceptional as defined in the statutory guidance.

We upheld more CCG reviews in quarter one than the rest of the year. In some cases, this was linked to councils not considering the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic when assessing the qualifying conditions or priority of certain items.

We upheld 29% of SIS Grants, which were introduced near the start of quarter three. A higher proportion were upheld in quarter three than in quarter four and this is likely to be linked to initial ambiguity surrounding the statutory guidance and eligibility criteria which were resolved in latter months.

Key performance indicators (KPIs)

The COVID-19 pandemic presented a number of unprecedented challenges for the SWF team during 2020-21. Despite these we achieved all of our KPIs. This reflects both the dedication and commitment of the SWF team, and the support from the leadership team and colleagues across the office. As an organisation we kept our focus on our values in the delivery of service.

Of particular note is that the SWF team met the crisis grant target in 100% of cases. This was more important than ever before given the vulnerability of many applicants to the SWF and their increased vulnerability due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Quarterly performance

Yearly comparison

National context: Initial applications to SWF in Scotland, Tier 1 reviews

Initial applications to the welfare fund received (all Scotland)

Taken from https://www.gov.scot/publications/scottish-welfare-fund-statistics-annual-update-2020-2021/

In comparison to the previous year:

• Crisis Grants – there was a 22% increase in applications, and a 21% increase in first tier reviews. SPSO also experienced a rise in applications for independent review of crisis grants, but the uplift was only 6% on the previous year, which is not so pronounced an increase as that seen at the local level.
• Community Care grants – this was a slightly different picture, with an 8% increase in applications, but a 24% fall in the number of first tier reviews sought to challenge councils’ decisions. Applications to SPSO also fell, with 37% fewer applications than in the previous year.

There were small increases in the proportions of decisions changed by councils at first tier review, and of applications that resulted in an award. This may have reduced review applications to us as fewer applicants are likely to have received a decision with which they were dissatisfied. The reason for the fall in CCG first tier reviews and review applications to us is unclear. One possible contributory factor was decision letters were not being issued by some local authorities (meaning applicants were unaware of their right to review). This is something we will continue to monitor. There was no comparative data for SIS Grants as it was only introduced during 2020-21

2020-21 SWF developments

Introduction of Self-Isolation Support Grants

In addition to lockdown and home-based working, the SWF team took on new work; applications for review of council decisions on SIS Grants. The successful expansion of our remit at short notice was a key achievement for the SWF team. While this created additional pressures, we were keen to play a role in supporting some of those who had been affected most severely by the pandemic. We are grateful to the Scottish Government for making additional resources available to us for this work.

SIS Grants were introduced on 12 October 2020. They provide a one off grant of £500 to assist those who needed to self-isolate. Only employed people on a low income who could not work from home, who had experienced a reduction in their income were eligible for the grant.

We received 141 review applications for SIS Grants between 12 October 2020 and 30 April 2021 and made 119 decisions

The scheme was introduced quickly, recognising the urgent need for support. This meant there was little time for anyone to prepare. This resulted in some early challenges in processing SIS Grant applications. For example:

• unintended anomalies concerning eligibility and verification of the parents of self-isolating children not being eligible, creating childcare issues, and
• difficulties confirming that applicants had formally been asked to self-isolate by the Test and Protect service or another official means.

We maintained a regular dialogue with the Scottish Government and other stakeholders, and changes have since been made to the guidance and eligibility criteria. We also signposted a number of applicants who were dissatisfied with the service that they had received, to make a complaint to the relevant organisation.

Our outreach and engagement activity was limited during 2020-21. This was linked to operational pressures and technological constraints as face-to-face meetings were not allowed. In 2021-22 we look forward to having greater engagement with stakeholders and on improving our impact.

Independent National Whistleblowing Officer

2020-21 was a busy and productive year for our new Independent National Whistleblowing Officer (INWO) team and service. The start of the year saw us setting up and recruiting a new INWO team during lockdown. At that time the implementation date of the INWO role and the National Whistleblowing Standards (the Standards) was still unconfirmed. When the date was delayed from 27 July 2020 to 1 April 2021 we were given an ideal opportunity to develop training materials, our support for implementation and establish our own investigation procedures, ahead of the intended timescales.

Supporting boards with implementation of the Standards

During 2020-21 we engaged with NHS boards and other stakeholders through a wide range of events, sharing our expectations of the implementation of the Standards, and answering questions. This included meetings with chief executives, board chairs, non-executive Whistleblowing Champions, NHS HR directors and chief officers of Health and Social Care Partnerships. In addition, we engaged directly with several boards, and provided responses to wide-ranging enquiries, which we saw increase as implementation approached.

Stakeholder engagement

Over the year we met with regulators who receive whistleblowing concerns that may overlap with the INWO’s jurisdiction. This included Healthcare Improvement Scotland’s Raising Concerns team and the Care Inspectorate. We also engaged directly with the key NHS professional regulatory bodies (General Medical Council, Nursing and Midwifery Council, General Dental Council) and kept them up to date with our progress and plans. We developed a regular newsletter from the INWO team, to share our latest news and additions to our website. In due course this will include information about our investigations and findings.

Website

Our INWO website was launched to help organisations and whistleblowers. It includes documents to support organisations with internal communications and implementation, guidance to help staff to raise concerns, and it sets out the expectations and requirements under the Standards on managers right up to board level.

Advice line

In November 2020 we took on a Freephone 0800 line, providing information and advice to organisations, potential whistleblowers and members of the public interested in hearing more about the INWO role and service. This enabled us to engage early with people thinking of raising concerns. We were able to give them detailed, accurate information about their options, and how the implementation of the Standards might impact on their situation. It also gave NHS boards and other providers a single point of contact with the INWO team for resolution to any queries they had relating to implementation of the Standards.

Online training on the Standards

A core element of our support for implementation was the development of a comprehensive suite of training modules for NHS Scotland staff. This was achieved with help and support from NHS Education for Scotland (NES) who host it on their e-learning portal, Turas Learn. This gives access to training for all NHS service providers, and allows staff to provide evidence of completion.

The modules consist of 14 presentations across two whistleblowing learning programmes; one for managers and the other for staff needing an overview of the procedure. The programme for managers is more in depth, reflecting their additional responsibilities under the Standards.

We successfully launched the training on Turas Learn, on 6 January 2021. By the end of 2020-21 we recorded around 1,800 users accessing the training.

Far fewer managers than staff accessed the training during the first three months up to the end March 2021 (roughly a 1:4 ratio). While we recognise that there will be proportionally fewer managers in an organisation, this may still be a cause for concern. This is because managers will have a key role in embedding and implementing the handling of concerns under the Standards.

As an organisation that values learning, we ask learners to complete an anonymous feedback survey at the end of each of our presentations. Learners rate their knowledge before and after doing the presentation, to measure “knowledge shift” and whether it met their learning needs: It was gratifying to see that all respondents felt that their knowledge was adequate, good or excellent after the presentation:

• 47% number of respondents that stated they had very poor or poor knowledge of the subject area before training (only 11% stated their knowledge was good or excellent)
• 86% number of respondents that stated after training their knowledge was good or excellent (no one felt their knowledge was still poor)
• 98% number of respondents that felt the presentation had met their learning needs

INWO team internal procedure for complaints handling

We developed a comprehensive suite of guidance documents to prepare for our new powers on 1 April 2021. The guidance steers INWO complaints reviewers through the handling of complaints, from receipt through to outcome and recommendations. While some of the principles and approaches are similar in approach to how the SPSO handle public service complaints, there are differences which need careful management. These include:

• need for strict confidentiality
• increased likelihood of having significant patient safety issues to address
• increased likelihood of engagement with regulators during investigations
• need for reduced timescales for investigations
• need to embed trust and confidence in the NHS to speak up through the new Standards
• complex interaction between whistleblowing and Human Resources
• powers to consider treatment of staff and culture of the working environment in relation to raising concerns
• ensuring protection of whistleblowers (and other involved) is integral to our approach

To support confidentiality and protect those involved, the SPSO’s case management system limits access to INWO cases to only the INWO team and a limited number of other key staff, and we have implemented INWO specific procedures for engaging with our professional advisers, during investigations.

Model Complaints Handling Procedure

With the Model Complaints Handling Procedure (MCHP) now fully adopted across Scottish public bodies under SPSO’s jurisdiction, much of our focus is on monitoring compliance and supporting improvement. We monitor in various ways, for example through conducting compliance assessments of organisations’ complaints handling procedures, following up issues identified from the complaints made to SPSO, acting on what we learn from complaints, and working directly with organisations to share and support good practice in complaints handling.

Advice to public bodies

Advice and guidance provided by SPSO for authorities includes:

• sharing tools and guidance for effective complaints handling
• reviewing and providing feedback about draft complaints handling procedures
• contributing to complaints handling network events for key sectors
• clarification on how to apply the MCHP to real-life (non-case specific) situations
• delivering presentations and workshops on good complaints handling

Requests for advice or support 2020-21

Types of advice requests

Overall, the total number of requests is consistent with last year. This shows that we were able to maintain our level of support in this area throughout the COVID-19 pandemic. There is a slight shift in the nature of requests we received. There:

• was an increase in general enquiries. This relates to requests for information around MCHP implementation e.g. reporting requirements and the key performance indicators for complaints handling, as well as enquiries about adopting the procedure in different contexts.
• were less requests for tools and guidance. This could be due to increased familiarity with our website and the resources available online; it may also be because of the impact of COVID-19 and the focus on providing essential services across the public sector.

Advice requests by sector

The main changes from last year in where requests came from were:

• an increase in the volume of contacts received from the local authority sector when compared to the previous year (back to the levels of 2018-19)
• around half the amount of contacts received from the health sector compared with the previous year
• almost 40% more contacts received from the Scottish Government and Devolved Administration sector

We see the increase in contacts in the Local Authority and the Scottish Government and Devolved Administration sectors being linked to MCHP implementation and enquiries received around this. The decrease in contacts from the Health sector may be due to the impact of COVID-19 on this sector.

Supporting the complaint handling community

In addition to our support work with organisations under jurisdiction, we also met virtually with a variety of organisations looking to find out more about the MCHP and Scotland’s approach to complaints handling. We are always pleased to share what we have learned from the introduction of the MCHP over the years and share some of the good practice that we see across the sectors. This year we provided information about the history and the work of the Complaints Standards Authority to standardise and simplify complaints handling across public services in Scotland to other Ombudsman offices around the UK and to consultants conducting research on behalf of a UK wide non-ministerial government department about best practice in complaints handling at local level.

Supporting MCHP implementation

In January 2020, we published revised MCHPs for all sectors (except the NHS) to be adapted and adopted during the year with a final implementation date of 1 April 2021. Our focus in 2020-21 has been on supporting organisations with implementing the MCHP relevant for their sector and during the course of the year we provided 15 information sessions on key changes to the MCHP with individual organisations and sector-wide groups and many of the 75 meetings we attended as part of our external stakeholder engagement activities involved detailed discussions about implementation. During the year we also developed and published a video presentation and other resources highlighting the key aspects and changes that were introduced to the MCHP as part of the review.

Learning from complaints

Premature complaints by sector

SPSO uphold rates by sector

Overview of SPSO recommendations

We work continuously with our stakeholders to promote learning and drive improvements to ensure that complainants have their rights respected, and to avoid a future repeat of the problem for others. Integral to this is the making of recommendations resulting from investigations.

We are most likely to ask for a specific action to be taken in relation to individual remedies. With complaint handling, and learning and improvement we take a slightly different approach and focus on the outcomes we require and the evidence that they have been achieved. This, we believe, promotes more sustainable and embedded learning and improvement.

Recommendations made in 2020-21

Although the absolute number of recommendations issued was lower in 2020-21, the relative proportions of types of recommendations remained in line with the profile of the SPSO’s workload in previous years.

Just over a third of recommendations relate to changing something for an individual, and nearly two thirds are asking organisations to make changes to their systems, processes, policies or practices, which will in turn improve their service for their service users.

Recommendations in 2020-21 – by sector

We give feedback to organisations if during the course of an investigation we identify either a matter of concern that in itself is not the subject of the complaint, but is related to the general matter under investigation, or to good practice. Such feedback ranges from comments on the organisation’s complaint handling or interaction with SPSO, to alerting the public body to key points within our decision, like comments by an adviser.

Feedback to organisations – 2020-21 by sector

Feedback

In many cases, we will also issue feedback to organisations. This ranges from positive feedback on examples of good practice or good service, to feedback about issues where we have identified potential learning.

In 2020-21, some examples of feedback issued to organisations about how they might learn from the complaints we considered includes:

• making suggestions to a university about enhancements they could make to their complaints process to make it more accessible to people who may need additional support
• noting to several health boards the importance of confirming the complaint which is being investigated at the outset, to avoid any possibility of misunderstanding further down the line
• guidance for organisations about engaging in post-decision correspondence with complainants
• general guidance about adhering to elements of the MCHP, including keeping complainants informed, signposting correctly, and recording outcomes for learning and improvement.

We noted on several cases that organisations had responded promptly to our requests for information, and supplied information in a clear and organised format, but also had cause to note instances of poor interaction with SPSO on a number of occasions, most notably failings in providing SPSO with the necessary information to conduct our investigations. We have had multiple instances of organisations failing to supply all requested information, or supplying large volumes of potentially relevant documentation (which they had available at the time we initially asked for information) at a very late stage of the process. In a handful of cases, this was supplied after a provisional decision had been reached by SPSO. This causes further delay to all parties, in particular to the member of the public bringing the complaint. While the provision of information was understandable to a point during lockdown, we will monitor this as it is unacceptable in the longer term.

Examples of feedback

• Recognition of good service I consider the Investigating Officer to have carried out a high standard and thorough investigation. Council, kinship care
• Highlighting compassionate care It was good practice that nursing staff took steps to try to support Mr A's family emotionally in what was a very difficult time for them, such as arranging to have Mr A and his wife in the same ward and giving the family access to a shower. Health Board, complaint upheld, but recognising good practice too
• Impact on vulnerable complainants The board originally provided selected case notes in response to my enquiry. It was not until the fuller case notes were requested that it became apparent how long A had been in the system awaiting a diagnosis and treatment. Given the complaint concerned CAMHS treatment, it was unfortunate that a number of requests had to be made before the full CAMHS case notes were forthcoming. Health board, child and adolescent mental health services
• Triggering Support & Intervention policy I had significant difficulty obtaining timely and full responses to my enquiries in this case. Whilst some of the delays appeared to have been a result of COVID-19 and are understandable, I do not consider that this explains all of the delays and the conflicting explanations that were given for these delays. Ultimately, action under our Support and Intervention Policy was taken. Council, anti-social behaviour
• Promoting an accessible service It has also been noted that while it was stated letter is your preferred means of communication, it was not explained why this was the case. Your complaint handling procedure makes reference to complainants providing their email address, therefore it would be my understanding that correspondence by email is an option. In any case, I would like to suggest that you review this policy, ensuring that your communication is accessible to all. GP practice

Compliance with recommendations

We set a deadline for implementation of recommendations and follow them all up until we are satisfied that they have been implemented.

Timescales for compliance with SPSO recommendations (recommendations signed off as completed in 2020-21)

2020-21 performance in this area remained broadly in line with previous years, though with the notable exception of the Joint Health and Social Care sector, where several organisations exceeded recommendation timescales by over three months past the deadline set.

This year, 51% of recommendations were closed within the target set, which is almost exactly in line with previous years; 52% in both 2019-20 and 2018-19.

88% of recommendations closed in 2020-21 were closed within three months of the target date. In spite of operational challenges presented by the pandemic, this level of recommendation compliance is only marginally lower than the previous two years, 92% in 2019-20 and 94% in 2018-19.

In 2020-21, 78% of recommendations were implemented within the target or within 1 month of target, compared to 84% in 2019-2020.

There were extensions granted to organisations in specific circumstances where they could evidence that they needed a longer timeframe to fulfil recommendations within the particular constraints at the time, but the fact that compliance with SPSO recommendations remained high during this year is a fact worth noting.

2020-21 recommendation compliance by recommendation type

Support and Intervention Policy

2020-21 was the second year of the Support and Intervention Policy (S&IP) in operation.

The policy formalises the mechanisms we already used to offer support to organisations and take intervention when required. It helps us to focus our resources on public bodies who require support in order to help them improve their practice or address poor performance, or where intervention action is more appropriate to ensure the public body takes specific action to improve performance in relation to complaints handling, handling of SWF reviews or engagement with SPSO. This in turn benefits complainants who (notwithstanding the challenges of lockdown) get faster local resolution. It also promotes system-wide improvement as good local investigations mean SPSO in turn do not always need to investigate a case. It also informs public bodies of what they can expect from us.

Following a review of the S&IP, the policy has been revised from April 2021 onwards. There has been an additional layer of escalation added, which is in line with our general approach to resolve issues at the earliest possible opportunity.

There are now six levels of intervention, level one being the most informal, and level six being the application of legal powers. There is more information about this on our website.

Activity under the S&IP might be as straightforward as further contact from one of our Complaints Reviewers chasing up overdue information or, in situations of continued non-compliance or repeated difficulties, the Ombudsman may ultimately decide to issue a report to Parliament drawing their attention to the problem. By logging and monitoring these additional and further contacts, we can build a better overall picture of how organisations are responding to complaints as well as identifying problems in their interactions with us.

Support and Intervention actions (management level)

We are pleased to report that our interventions have been successful and resulted in positive outcomes, without the need to apply formal powers. We see the S&IP as an opportunity to engage constructively with public bodies to drive better outcomes for complainants.

Sharing learning from complaint outcomes

In 2020-21, we shared our findings and learning with organisations and the wider public through:

• summaries of all our decisions are published on our website
• a monthly e-newsletter which signposts to our decision summaries and highlights trends and learning
• working with a variety of stakeholders such as Healthcare Improvement Scotland (HIS), sharing anonymised data to inform a wider view of public service delivery across Scotland
• publication of SWF case studies on our website.

Stakeholder engagement

Through our Improvement, Standards and Engagement (ISE) team, we engage with a range of stakeholders and organisations to provide support and advice, drive improvements in standards of complaints handling and contribute to public sector improvement.

Meetings

COVID-19 pandemic restrictions meant the team did not attend any meetings in person during 2020-21. Instead, we embraced technology along with many others, and attended virtual meetings and events. ISE participated in 75 virtual meetings. This compares to 85 meetings in 2019-20 and 76 in 2018-19.

Engagements included:

• complaints handlers’ network groups
• Standards & Improvement network meetings with UK & Ireland Ombudsman offices and independent review bodies
• meetings with organisations across all sectors to provide support with MCHP implementation ahead of the 1 April 2021 deadline
• sharing our experience with other Ombudsman offices and regulatory bodies around the UK of standardising and simplifying complaints handling procedures
• general complaints handling support across all sectors e.g. dealing with challenging behaviour, recording and reporting complaints, etc

We focused on preparation for implementation of the revised MCHP, and delivered a number of information sessions upon request to complaints handling, performance management as well as senior management staff to raise awareness of the key changes to the revised MCHP. During the course of the year, we presented to:

• delegates representing 42 registered social landlords at a webinar hosted by the Scottish Federation of Housing Associations
• senior managers representing eight housing associations at a session hosted by one of the UK housing sector’s largest membership organisations
• delegates from 22 colleges at a workshop arranged by the college complaints handlers’ advisory group
• six individual housing associations and
• a local authority with attendees from across different service areas.

Our outreach and engagement activity in relation to SWF was limited during 2020-21, due to the operational pressures during COVID-19. In 2021-22 we look forward to having more of a focus on engagement with stakeholders and on improving our impact.

Training

We developed, piloted and implemented online training during 2020-21. COVID-19 presented us with a timely opportunity to refresh and relaunch our courses including online Complaints Investigation Skills (CIS). We piloted in quarter three, and it was available to book in quarter four. This course consists of three modules and we deliver it to small groups of up to 15 people to make it as interactive as possible. The course is available in house for staff from a single organisation or as an “open” course that people from different organisations can attend.

In quarter four we delivered 33 modules, i.e. 11 complete CIS courses. The course has proved to be very popular and feedback has been extremely positive.

We also:

• launched a narrated video presentation summarising the main points in the revised MCHP which is available on our website. This provides an accessible overview of the MCHP, for anyone to view
• developed training for the INWO service
• set up an Ombudsman service training network, focusing on sharing and developing best practice in delivery of complaints handling training. The group met six times in 2020-21 and includes members from the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman, the Northern Ireland Public Services Ombudsman, the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales, Housing Ombudsman Service, the Office of the Independent Adjudicator and the Irish Ombudsman.

In 2021-22, our training unit will focus on increasing our range of online courses, including the introduction of an online Good Complaints Handling course aimed at frontline staff dealing with complaints at stage 1 of the MCHP.

Parliamentary engagement

In 2020-21 we continued to share the learnings from our investigations and complaint handling monitoring through our responses to inquiries and consultations undertaken by the Scottish Parliament, Scottish Government and others.

We responded to a number of consultations, including the Scottish Government’s review of mental health and the review of adult social care in Scotland, a consultation on the revised National Guidance for Child Protection in Scotland, and the Equalities and Human Rights Committee’s bill on the incorporation of the United Nation’s Convention on the Right of the Child. Details about further contributions are available on our website.

Due to COVID-19 restrictions, this year we did not attend an accountability hearing before the Local Government and Communities Committee but we provided a written update on some of our work in February 2021.

Customer service

We are committed to providing high-quality services that meet or exceed our customer service standards . The Standards set out our service delivery commitments and what can be expected from us. We review feedback we receive continually; this includes information from user satisfaction survey responses, customer service complaints, compliments and unsolicited feedback.

Customer satisfaction

• Thank you so much. You have no idea how much pressure this has taken off me, I'm so grateful for your help. SWF applicant
• I appreciate that you took the trouble to investigate my complaint so long after the event. I found you to be caring, considerate and very professional, that was a comfort after my initial experiences. Complainant
• The incredible amount you put into my case is very much appreciated. Thank you so much again. SWF applicant
• We really appreciate your time and effort that’s been put into this investigation. I’d like to thank you for everything you have done to investigate this for us. It has meant the world to us not only the hard word put into every part of this but the dignity & respect you have showed us along the way. Complainant
• Thank you for the information. I have read and understood your provisional decision notice and have nothing to add. I would like to say thank you for taking time to assess my case as at last I feel someone has listened to me so thank you. Complainant

Results from our annual customer satisfaction surveys are available on our website.

However, not all feedback is positive, and we aim to learn from it and make improvements.

• You [could] do so much more for people having trouble receiving a final response from the organisations they are complaining about.

In response to this comment and to increasing contact from complainants who were having trouble receiving a response from the organisation they were complaining to, the Ombudsman wrote to all bodies under her jurisdiction during 2020-21 to remind them of their responsibilities under the MCHP to keep complainants informed when they could not meet their timeframe for handling complaints.

• It took 7-8 months to hear from SPSO after receiving my complaint. There was no update until the SPSO complaint reviewer got in touch.

In order to address this and similar concerns, we made changes to our communications in 2020-21 to explain timescales and delays more clearly. At the outset, we now advise complainants how long we expect it to take before their complaint is allocated to a complaints reviewer.

Customer service complaints

We hold ourselves to the same high standards as we hold public bodies. Our customer service complaints (CSC) process is the same as the MCHP, except instead of signposting to the Ombudsman, we have a contract in place with an independent customer complaints reviewer (ICCR) to whom we signpost complainants. The ICCR makes decisions about SPSO’s complaints handling independently.

We identify and record complaints about our service, and are committed to learning from them to put things right or drive improvement where needed.

Customer service complaints – total (all stages)

Quarterly breakdown 2020-21

Customer service complaints – 2020-21 breakdown

Where a difference exists in the number of cases received in the year and the number of cases closed in the year (as is the case in 2018-19 and 2019-20), this is due to cases being received in the previous year, but closed in the following year.

This year we held awareness sessions with our staff to raise the profile of our service standards and to encourage all expressions of dissatisfaction about the way we provide our service, to be recorded as service complaints. We also empowered our staff to handle and work to resolve these complaints as close to the point of service delivery as possible. In taking these steps, we anticipated that the number of service complaints we recorded this year would increase. We consider this to be a positive outcome in response to increasing awareness, demonstrating that we value complaints and holding ourselves to high customer service standards.

Delays in handling public service complaints, not keeping complainants updated and clarity of communication were the commonest drivers of complaints.

Customer service complaints outcomes during the year 2020-21

Numbers do not total the closed figures as withdrawn complaints are not included in the uphold rate calculation.

Timescales

We aim to respond to complaints in line with the timescales set out in the MCHP. The timescales to close complaints are:

• 5 working days at stage 1
• 20 working days at stage 2
• 20 working days for ‘escalated’ complaints

Performance against the timescales in 2020-21

Independent Customer Complaints Reviewer

Where a customer remains unhappy with either the decision we make on their CSC or the way we handled it, they can ask the Independent Customer Complaints Reviewer (ICCR) to review our handling of the complaint and the decision(s) we made.

During the year, 19 (same as in 2019-20) service complaints were sent to the ICCR, all which were independently reviewed with final decisions issued. The ICCR did not uphold any complaints at first hand this reporting year. Each of ICCR’s decisions resonated with the customer service decisions taken by SPSO on the customer service complaints escalated to her office that ICCR independently determined were also the correct decisions. Four customers had multiple customer service complaints of between two and three separate complaints raised to ICCR.

Of the 19 matters referred to ICCR there was no evidence of a service failure or maladministration by SPSO, or a failure by SPSO to effectively handle a service complaint against its customer service standards.

The ICCR also handled four subject access requests, one request for documentation from a Member of Scottish Parliament during the year and one complaint about an abusive SPSO customer to the ICCR’s company.

The ICCR’s annual report can be read on our website.

In March 2021, the ICCR conducted a random review of customer service complaint files during the year. The review consisted of eight files (four stage 1 decisions and four stage 2 decisions) not previously examined by ICCR and selected from an aggregate complaint reference listing. The ICCR concurred with all SPSO decisions taken, but made a number of recommendations for improvements regarding setting realistic time expectations, clearly addressing customers’ data security concerns and reviewing SPSO process for allocating cases from officers who are on leave.

The review also recognised that SPSO customer service complaints have been impacted throughout the pandemic which has caused pressures on the SPSO system and its resources with staff having to balance their own personal circumstances, new methods of work pressures and increased displaced aggression from customers as evidenced on the files randomly reviewed.

Managing the organisation: openness and transparency

Freedom of information and environmental information requests

Freedom of information and environmental information

Quarterly breakdown

We have seen a reduction in Freedom of Information (FOI) request numbers this year.

From the information available on the Scottish Information Commissioner’s (SIC) statistics database, in comparison to the 93 other public bodies in the same sector as the SPSO (others e.g. non-departmental public bodies) that submitted data we received:

• the fifth highest number of FOI requests
• the eleventh highest number of Environmental Information Requests (EIR).

Outcomes

We carried out two FOI reviews, where we upheld our original decision in one, and determined we had failed to respond to the original request within timescale in the other. A further FOI request for review was withdrawn. There were no EIR reviews.

We were notified of one request for a decision from the SIC relating to dissatisfaction with our handling of a request for information. The SIC was satisfied that we did not hold the requested information.

• 95% of FOI requests and 100% of FOI review requests were responded to within the statutory timescale.
• 100% of EIR requests were responded to within the statutory timescale.

Publication scheme

The SPSO has adopted the SIC’s Model Publication Scheme, and we publish a guide to the information that we make available on our website.

Data protection

We assess our compliance with data protection law, and continually work on ensuring we achieve best practice. All of our staff continue to receive regular data protection training.

Internal Audit of Data Management was undertaken in 2020-21, achieving the highest audit grade of ‘strong’, 17 areas of good practice and no recommendations of medium and low level.

Our data protection officer (DPO), who is independent of the SPSO was assured, and provided us with assurance, that during the period covered by this report the SPSO has provided them with sufficient information and opportunity to carry out their role fully.

Subject Access Requests

Subject Access Requests (SARs)

Quarterly breakdown

We continue to see high request numbers (with a notable reduction in quarter 4). From the information available on the SIC’s statistics database, in comparison to the 89 other public bodies in the same sector as the SPSO (others e.g. non-departmental public bodies) that submitted data, we received the second highest number of SARs.

Outcomes

• Five SAR reviews:
  • Four we wholly/partially upheld our original decisions
  • One we determined that we had failed to respond to the original request within timescale
• One decision from the UK Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) about delay. The ICO determined that there was more work for SPSO to do to address any outstanding issues with the requestor. However, by the time we received notification of the appeal and decision from the ICO, the matter had been resolved and all information provided.
• 68% of SARs were responded to within the statutory timescale. Our ability to meet targets was impacted by availability and resourcing challenges during the pandemic.

Data security

We reported two personal data security breaches to the ICO.

1. paperwork being returned to an old address that had been incorrectly used from within the paperwork itself. The paperwork was subsequently returned to us undelivered.
2. the theft of a file from an adviser’s car.

The ICO decided no further action on their part was necessary for either, nevertheless we continue to remind staff about following data security guidelines and we highlighted data security to our independent advisers. We also updated security guidance, and are reviewing internal mail handling processes.

We have clear guidelines governing how we handle personal data, and established breach detection, investigation and internal reporting procedures are in place. Our Information Governance handbook is available on our website.

Managing the organisation: our team

Our objective is to be acknowledged for having well trained, properly supported people, who have the tools they need to deliver our services. We strive to have the capacity, financial, human and infrastructure, to implement and deliver our statutory functions.

In 2020-21 we:

• Maintained Living Wage Employer accreditation
• Reviewed our organisation structure to meet the increased requirements of an extended jurisdiction
• Encouraged and supported our colleagues to learn and develop their skills and leadership through a structured learning and development programme
• Continued to invest in the resilience and flexibility of our digital services
• Continued preparation for the INWO function with the development of new roles and recruitment for the team
• Supported colleagues to work flexibly so they can balance their working lives with their other responsibilities
• Continued to deliver a broad range of activities to support staff to achieve a balance of work and life and positive health and wellbeing
• Maintained our Investors in People gold status.

Our people

Our workforce was an average of 71 FTE for 2020-21. We have been growing with each new jurisdiction added to the Ombudsman’s statutory responsibility.

A focus in the past year was on our recruitment drive to prepare for Scotland’s new INWO function. We continue to monitor our approach to recruitment so that it follows good practice across all diversity and equality strands.

On 31 March 2021, the ratio of females to males in the organisation is 76:24 percent (not including seconded and temporary staff). Two of the three members of our leadership team and 82% of our management team are female.

COVID-19 management

Throughout the year, the priority of the SPSO has been the health, safety and wellbeing of our people and the public. In order to follow Scottish Government guidance, we have closed our Bridgeside House offices to visitors and all but key worker staff from 23 March 2020. Our key workers are a very small team of volunteers that attend on a limited basis to carry out the key work to enable the rest of the team to work as normal from home. This included processing mail, complaint allocations and supplying office equipment and technology to our home workers.

Since we closed our offices, we have worked hard to keep people connected and supported with a focus on health and wellbeing and this included:

• temporarily relaxing HR policy to allow more flexibility in working arrangements
• delivering a range of sessions on health and wellbeing, resilience
• increasing the frequency of organisation-wide meetings
• setting up virtual coffee mornings to improve social connections through work
• communities of practice adapting to virtual meetings to enable knowledge-sharing and social connections
• adopting online collaborative tools and resources to enable virtual communication and working

We have also safeguarded the connectivity and security of our digital network, embracing this new way of working and we continue to adapt to the new ways of working and carrying out our responsibilities.

Training and development

We continued to meet the people development needs of the organisation through a range of activities. Learning and development activities were delivered around key areas including:

• mandatory training (e.g. Health and Safety, GDPR, Cyber security)
• specific subject matter learning events (e.g. investigation skills, vulnerability, wellbeing, and sessions with the Coalition for Racial Equality and Rights and the Child Poverty Action Group)
• COVID-19 related wellbeing support to staff (e.g. Thrive, the Science of Kindness, Working under pressure and Building your Resilience at Work)
• COVID-19 impacts on the public sector (e.g. Reflections and updates during the pandemic from NHS professionals) in response to the development needs identified as part of individual personal development plans and as learning opportunities (e.g. Challenging Calls and Promoting Positive Behaviour, Spotlight on HR Topics for Managers, Microsoft Excel, Civil Service Pension Scheme-specific training).

Investors in People accreditation

SPSO achieved Investors in People (IIP) accreditation recognition in 2011 and has maintained a gold accreditation status since February 2017. Accreditation status is reviewed on a three-year basis, with a formal activity undertaken on an annual basis. SPSO’s formal reaccreditation took place in March 2020.

Findings indicate that there is a stringent but supportive recruitment process and once people are recruited to the organisation they are clear about their roles and responsibilities; they receive a strong foundation and support through the induction process through to employment policies, procedures, performance management process and structured learning and development that supports individual and organisational needs.

People have a clear and consistent understanding of the SPSO vision, values, aims and objectives, developed through the involvement of all in the business planning activities and the introduction of Communities of Practice groups providing people with an additional opportunity to make a positive contribution to the SPSO aims, objectives and long-term sustainability.

People recognised the effectiveness of change management with the success of the office move being cited as a key example of this.

Recommendations for ongoing improvement included aligning our values, behaviours and management capabilities, and additional measurement of the impact of learning and development and people management practices on organisational objectives and performance indicators.

Staff survey

The SPSO conducts an annual staff survey and the summary reports are published on our website.

2020-21 highlights:

• 88% response rate
• 80% of questions scored above 70% positive with 24% scoring above 90% positive
• scores improved in 55 out of 88 questions compared to the last survey
• the most improved scores were under the theme of leadership (improved by 30% on average)
• health and wellbeing was the highest scoring theme (85% on average).

Each year the staff survey results, along with our IIP assessment findings, are combined to create an annual action plan to ensure we maintain our focus on commitment to building a people-centred organisation.

Communities of Practice and working together

A number of staff-led, cross-team working groups continued over the last year to promote and support interaction, cooperation and knowledge sharing across the organisation. The groups established include Communities of Practice, Health and Wellbeing, Internal Communications, Charities and Climate Change groups.

As a result of feedback on wellbeing and lockdown working over the last year, we launched three project work streams to review our learning and to recommend improvements. These working groups are focusing on future working arrangements, casework intelligence and communications.

Community, social and human rights

Many of our staff are involved in community and social rights engagement activities outside of work, including, for instance, volunteering for:

• the Children’s Panel
• the Law Society of Scotland’s Regulatory committee
• Fresh Start, a charity helping previously homeless people who have been offered a tenancy assistance to move into their new home
• Membership of the Administrative Justice Council

We also developed a policy to support staff to undertake volunteer work in response to COVID-19.

In 2020-21 we observed mental health awareness week with a series of informative communications, including sharing resources and advice for wellbeing during the pandemic. We also held a wellbeing sessions with speakers who talked about working under pressure and the science of kindness and we held a virtual coffee morning.

We also observed the Scotland’s climate change week on 14 to 20 September 2020, with a personal carbon footprint challenge, environmental pledges and webinars such as Love Food Hate Waste, Looking After the Climate by Looking After Your Energy Bills, Reduce Your Waste, Sustainable Transport, Love Your Clothes.

Managing the organisation: governance

Governance and risk

As Accountable Officer, the Ombudsman has responsibility for maintaining a sound system of governance and internal control that supports the achievement of organisational policies, aims, and objectives, whilst safeguarding public funds and the organisation’s assets for which she is responsible. The Scheme of Control outlines the arrangements in place to assure good governance practices are followed. This is published in our finance handbook.

The Ombudsman is supported by the Advisory Audit Board (AAB), which provides advice about risk, assurance, audit quality and governance. The AAB receives internal and external audit reports and the annual accounts. Our external auditors are appointed by Audit Scotland.

Risk is managed actively through a risk management policy that sets out the approach to risk management for the delivery of strategic aims. The most significant strategic risk to the organisation remained the adequacy of resources to provide a quality service that delivers our statutory functions, in particular our complaint handling and SWF review services, within an acceptable timescale. The majority of the SPSO’s workload is demand-led. Consequently, the number and complexity of complaints, enquiries, and SWF review applications received is outside our control and fluctuates. The leadership team monitor this closely and focus carefully on financial and workforce planning.

The most significant areas of risk were, and increasingly are, capacity to carry our statutory functions and the impact of COVID-19 on performance and service delivery.

Further details on the SPSO governance arrangements can be read in our full accountability report.

Quality Assurance

Led by the SPSO’s value of learning and improvement, the SPSO operates a Quality Assurance (QA) programme specifically designed to meet our commitment to improve quality and consistency. The QA programme is a mix of risk-based and standardised assessments carried out independently of the case handling teams.

In 2020-21, the QA programme covered:

• a general assessment of casework
• a general assessment of SWF decisions
• a general assessment of the professional advice received
• a risk-based assessment of the provisional decision process.

To embed the learning we identified through the QA process, the findings of the QA (including the identification and highlighting of good practice) were discussed in a learning and reflective way with the individuals involved and shared with managers. The findings, including any recommendations for improvement (such as training or guidance changes), were also reported to the SPSO leadership team to inform wider learning and improvement, and fed back through the relevant internal performance meetings.

In 2020-21, we amended one decision as a result of QA. This gave the Leadership Team a high degree of confidence in the quality of decision making, especially when considered with outcomes of complaint reviews.

Complaint reviews

In line with SPSO’s values to work fairly, be people-centred and to learn and improve, we operate a review process whereby the complainant or public body can ask for a review of a complaint decision (not closed by public report where the process is slightly different). Reviews are a valuable source of learning, and are considered personally by the Ombudsman, with support from Executive Case Officers, who had no part in the original investigation or decision.

In 2020-21, we received 199 requests for review. This represents 6% of all decisions made this year. The Ombudsman responded to 184 of these.

2020-21 quarterly breakdown

In quarter one, we received lower numbers of review requests than usual. This reflects the drop in numbers we saw across the office at the beginning of the pandemic, as our office, public bodies and complainants became used to this new way of life.

Review outcomes

This year, we decided to capture more information about the outcomes of decision reviews, in order to have better understanding of the reasons we revise decisions. In doing so, we distinguished between cases:

• re-opened for further investigation
• where the outcome was changed (either from an ‘uphold’ to a ‘not uphold’ or where the decision not to investigate was overturned)
• where the outcome remained but explanations, recommendations or feedback were added or amended

Reasons for revised decisions

Of the 12 cases re-opened for further investigation, five of these were cases which had originally been closed in the early stages. Three of these five was because new information was received at the review stage. This indicates both that we are willing to listen and act, and that we can have a high degree of confidence in early-stage decision making.

Of the seven cases re-opened for further investigation following an investigation decision, six of these were re-opened on the basis of factually inaccurate information being relied upon in the original decision, or a mistake being made in the original decision. It is important to note that, whilst the cases were re-opened for further investigation, this does not necessarily indicate that the final decision will be different. It simply shows that further consideration is required.

Of the four cases in which the outcome was changed, three of these were due to new information being provided.

Overall, there were only nine cases in which the outcome was changed or further investigation was required due to a mistake being made or factual inaccuracy relied upon in the original decision. This represents 0.3% of all complaints determined by the office.

Performance against KPIs

In 2019, we piloted timescales in which we aim to respond to review requests. These were realistic and achievable, but challenging. Despite lockdown, and knowing that we were unlikely to have the capacity to meet them, we decided nevertheless to implement them fully to enable us to assess the impact of COVID-19 and other staffing changes. Taking a person-centred approach, we focused capacity on the older cases, as the figures demonstrate. Meeting the 90 day target in 97% of cases was a great achievement given the challenges of the last year.

Bridgeside House accommodation

Our move to Bridgeside House accommodation in December 2018 enabled a co-location arrangement with the Scottish Human Rights Commission (SHRC) and the Children and Young People Commissioner Scotland (CYPCS). This colocation provided the opportunity to share common services such as facilities, health, safety and security management, postal services, and shared areas such as the boardroom and training facilities.

Home-based working

Bridgeside House was closed on 23 March 2020 to most staff. The Building Coordinator continued as the Display Screen Equipment (DSE) Assessor, supporting staff with home-working advice and guidance, self-assessments, sourcing equipment, and completing virtual online home-working assessments. Over 475 items of equipment has been supplied to support remote working.

Environmental and sustainable development

The Climate Change (Duties of Public Bodies: Reporting Requirements) (Scotland) Amendment Order 2020 places a statutory duty on all public sector bodies in Scotland to report their carbon emissions.

We continue to reduce our level of carbon emissions year-on-year. We have reduced our carbon footprint by 29% against our 2015-16 baseline.

Under the Bridgeside House shared accommodation arrangement, SPSO have responsibility for reporting on the waste and energy carbon emissions for all three organisations. We also report the emissions from business travel for SPSO. Bridgeside House carbon emissions equate to less than 0.004 (tCO2e) per sq ft.

• The COVID-19 lockdown has enabled the SPSO to reduce business travel, electricity and waste emissions from Bridgeside House. We aim to maintain as this as far as possible and continue to explore alternative working arrangements practices put in place during lockdown.
• This year we are reporting an increase in carbon emissions figures from gas. This is due to 2020-21 being the first year in Bridgeside House that the SPSO had been able to access accurate meter readings for gas, rather than using estimated figures calculated from average business use. This will provide a useful baseline to report against in future years.
• In 2020-21, the SPSO completed Resource Efficient Scotland’s Climate Change Assessment Tool through workshops involving representatives from all teams. This generated an action plan which the SPSO will implement in the coming years to further reduce emissions and embed awareness of climate change within the organisation with the aim to be NET ZERO by 2030.

Further details of carbon emission reductions are in our Climate Change Duties Reports on our website.

Biodiversity

The Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 places a statutory duty on all public sector bodies in Scotland to further the conservation of biodiversity and the Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2011) by introducing a requirement for all public bodies to make a report publicly available on their compliance with biodiversity duty. Biodiversity duty reports are required every three years. We report on biodiversity annually.

SPSO does not own or manage land and therefore has limited opportunity to carry out activities for biodiversity. We support biodiversity through:

• reducing our carbon footprint
• minimising waste and reducing waste to landfill through recycling
• reducing the total kilometres we travel on business and choosing more sustainable travel options
• raising awareness of biodiversity and sustainability issues
• using local suppliers where possible

Further details are in our Environment, Sustainability and Biodiversity report on our website.

Information and communications technology and cyber security

Digital technologies are an important tool underpinning our service. We manage these closely to protect the personal data and sensitive information we hold and use, and to ensure our systems are robust and resilient. Continued cyber-attacks on organisations have highlighted the importance of, and reliance on, digital systems. Digital technology offers transformational opportunities, but also increases dependence on digital services for the delivery of our work.

The importance of cyber resilience has never been greater, and in 2020-21, we continued implementing the Cyber Resilience Public Sector Action Plan, renewing Cyber Essentials accreditation in December 2020. SPSO utilise SCOTS Connect to host our network services to provide a safe and secure digital environment. SCOTS is the name for the Scottish Government’s range of managed IT services and products that hold Cyber Essentials Plus accreditation. Our emails are sent over the secure Public Services Network (PSN) and all traffic is scanned for inappropriate or harmful content, which protects our systems, people and data.

As lockdown led to SPSO staff being required to work from home, we accelerated a number of IT projects to improve ICT infrastructure. These had all been planned but were brought forward and implemented ahead of the planned time, to ensure we continued to provide our service in an efficient and secure IT environment. These adaptions included:

• purchased and issued an additional 47 secure laptops
• prior to the new laptops arriving, we worked with our casework management system (CMS) provider to develop a secure VPN so casework staff could access the CMS securely from a non-SPSO device
• provided staff with facilities to divert their work telephone number to a personal device allowing them to take calls outside the office
• installed a secure electronic file-sharing platform to enable files to be shared safely and securely with external partners
• introduced video conferencing platforms including WebEx and Microsoft Teams to allow staff to meet remotely in a secure environment.

Accessible service

We are committed to ensuring that all members of the public have access to all of the Ombudsman's services and that we can assist them to find support in using our service if required. We continually develop our policies and build upon legislation in place to ensure that our service is accessible to a broad range of people and communities.

Recognising the challenges that the pandemic has had on our service users, their families and their businesses, accessibility has been at the forefront of our minds during 2020-21. We have made substantial progress in developing our accessibility, approach and understanding to respond to service users’ needs.

Vulnerability guidance

We established Vulnerability Guidance in early 2020 and this has been embedded in all areas of our service delivery, and published to support the MCHP. We are committed to ensuring equal opportunity to access our services and recognise our duties under the Equality Act 2010, to promote equality of opportunity for all. In addition to considerations of equality and diversity matters, we are mindful of a complainant’s vulnerabilities. We recognise that types and levels of vulnerability can vary from person to person and may be influenced by situational circumstances linked to a complaint. We continue to develop and expand our knowledge on vulnerability. This commitment is also recognised in our customer service standards, in particular our commitment to communicate effectively with the people who use our service.

Actions we have taken in respect of vulnerability includes:

• prioritising cases so they do not sit unallocated
• prioritising complaints within caseloads
• identifying and signposting to sources of support
• contacting organisations that are being complained about if a complainant is struggling to access or complete their complaints procedure
• changing how we communicate with someone, for example how we contact them and how often
• we developed guidance for staff to manage discussions preventing suicide and self-harm. This was in response to increased conversations with vulnerable service users who were particularly affected by the unprecedented circumstances of 2020-21. This guidance has been endorsed as good practice by the Samaritans and has proved effective in handling very sensitive conversations
• we developed a comprehensive list of organisations that we can signpost complainants to for support.

Developing our knowledge and understanding

We held meetings and arranged staff training and awareness sessions to help us continually develop our understanding and knowledge. These were with:

• Patient Advice and Support Service (PASS)
• Scottish Independent Advocacy Alliance (SIAA)
• Equality Advice and Support Service (EASS)
• Equality and Human Rights Commission or Scottish Human Rights Commission (EHRC. SHRC)
• Coalition for Race Equality and Rights (CRER)
• Deaf Scotland

The presentation from SIAA resulted in us developing a website page detailing the benefits of advocacy with a list of advocacy services.

IDEA Community of Practice

Our Inclusion Diversity Equality and Accessibility (IDEA) staff community of practice resumed meetings at the end of 2020. Pressures of home-working impacted on the group meeting as often as they normally would; however, they now have a plan to meet on a monthly basis during 2021-22.

Inclusion Scotland internships

We were delighted to host two work placements from Inclusion Scotland – ‘We Can Work’ scheme, which provides disabled people with valuable paid work experience to help develop their careers, by offering increased flexibility and support in the workplace. One intern was employed in our Assessment and Guidance team in an administrative role. The other, in our Communications team, conducted a research project reviewing the entire communications journey that a complainant would go through when accessing the SPSO complaints handling service, and made recommendations on how to improve our communications according to best practice principles. The ‘We Can Work’ scheme offered our interns valuable and practical work experience and was an excellent opportunity for all our staff to learn from the lived experiences of two disabled colleagues.

Equalities

We ask for information to help us understand our service user profile. 2020-21 data showed that, for the first time in some years, there had been changes to those coming to the SPSO.

Key information:

• users remain broadly representative of the population in terms of ethnicity (consistent with previous years)
• there were marginally more women than men (that proportion varies slightly every year)
• our users remain older than across the country’s population because few children or young people access us directly
• a significant proportion of those who access our services were in the 40—60 years age range, reflecting that people complain about services they have received themselves, and on behalf of those for whom they have caring responsibilities
• we have a high proportion of users reporting they have a disability that affects them long-term. This has been routinely around 40% for users as a whole and often significantly higher for welfare fund applicants. This year saw the first (albeit slight) fall to 37%. We undertook some additional analysis which suggested the reasons are different for SWF applicants and complainants.

There was a significant increase in the numbers of SWF applicants who said they did not have a disability. The increase was around 90% and, while there was also an increase in disabled applicants of 12%, it was the increase in non-disabled applicants which explained the population change. Even with that significant increase, the proportion of disabled to non-disabled applicants remained high with 50% of all applicants telling us they were disabled.

• there was a smaller but still notable increase in the percentage of SWF applicants who said they were between 40 to 50 compared to younger groups. We think the most likely explanations for these changes amongst welfare fund applicants were the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on groups not previously in crisis and the reduction in community care grant applications being processed by local authorities in the early months of the pandemic. Community Care Grants are often of particular benefit to disabled people needing support to stay in their communities.
• some of that change will reflected the overall drop in complaint numbers but, even taking that into account, we noted there was a steeper decrease in disabled users compared to non-disabled.
• 34% of all complainants with a disability is high but the drop from 40% last year was significant. We think this is likely related to the pandemic, for example: the higher risk for disabled people during the pandemic leading to people accessing services less often, feeling more dependent on the services they were using, reluctant to change and being less confident about complaining. We are also aware that advocacy services were under significant pressure and that support can make a real difference in confidence to complain. This is something we will continue monitor carefully.

Equality rights

While we cannot determine whether or not an individual’s rights under equalities legislation have been formally breached, we can, and do, comment on public bodies’ consideration of such rights if we find failures while investigating complaints. Two examples of this work, which we publicly reported on in 2020-21, demonstrated the need for public organisations to proactively offer adjustments and ensure that they implement adjustments properly when they agree these are needed:

• Decision Report 201900616 | SPSO
• Decision Report 201900614 | SPSO

Financial position

Our finance processes and procedures are published on our website.

Sources of funding

Total funding approved by the SPCB was £6,079K. This was separated between SPSO’s budget of £5,504K, and the Bridgeside House Shared Accommodation budget of £576K, which is managed by the SPSO on behalf of CYPCS, SHRC and SPSO. Only £5,971K of the approved budget was accessed from the SPCB, and £6K of income was generated from providing online training courses in quarter four.

Expenditure

Total expenditure was £5,882K. This included:

Review of financial performance

We are required to produce annual accounts detailing the resources acquired, held or disposed of during the financial year and the way in which they were used. The Scottish Public Services Ombudsman has been appointed as Accountable Officer and is responsible for the preparation of these accounts. For information about how we managed our finances, please see our full financial statements.

We operate a prompt payment policy in line with the Scottish Public Finance Manual and our values of being fair and acting with integrity. We track our payment performance against the 10 and 30 calendar-day targets.

Payments slowed at the beginning of 2020-21 due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic lockdown. This was due to the reduced access to colleagues involved in the finance approval and payment process, and the move to full electronic financial processing. Good financial governance, including appropriate controls and separation of duties were maintained.

Resources required for 2021-22

The 2021-22 budget was approved by the Scottish Parliament with revenue resources totalling £6,191K.

Looking forward

We go into 2021-22 with a clear strategic direction and an ambitious business plan. We also go into the year recognising that that the priorities within our business plan will change because of the uncertainty surrounding the progress of the COVID-19 pandemic and lockdown easing.

We will need to balance:

Ongoing commitments

• supporting staff wellbeing
• improving accessibility of our services
• delivering statutory functions as usual
• business development drawing on what we learn from business as usual across all functions
• implementing and delivering new functions

with

COVID-19

• recovering from the enduring impact of COVID-19
• business development based on learning from COVID-19

The maintaining the balance, requires us to recognise and manage the interrelationship and risks. If we do not have the resources to recover from the enduring impact of COVID-19 and capitalise on learning, then the delivery of business as usual and business development to achieve greater impact and maintain performance, particularly in complaint handling, will be impacted negatively.

Ongoing commitments

We will:

• finally see the implementation of INWO after many months of work by SPSO and stakeholders across the NHS. As part of that we will develop our approach in light of learning, and support whistleblowers and the NHS through our INWO function which went live in line with our plans and expectations. The resourcing of this function will be reviewed over time to ensure it meets workloads
• build on the very positive staff survey results available on our website.
• maintain our excellent performance in delivery of the SWF review service. We acknowledge with thanks the additional resource we were given to enable us to maintain performance in light of rising caseloads and the new Self-Isolation Support Grant
• deliver our public service complaints service, endeavouring to meet our customer service standards and performance targets, while achieving good outcomes for complainants and driving public service improvement
• maintain and develop how we manage, motivate and support the team, building on the wellbeing and training resources we developed during lockdown
• drive more efficient ways of working, learning from quality assurance, internal audit, customer service complaints and feedback
• continue to provide support and advice to members of the public and public bodies alike though advice lines and training
• maintain stakeholder engagement particularly in relation to access to justice and accessible services
• continue to look for opportunities to develop shared services

COVID-19

• We are working collaboratively across the office to drive improvement and efficiency, based on learning from COVID-19. Integral to this approach are the three working groups, casework intelligence, future ways of working and communication. We are involving everyone in this through surveys and consultation. For example: the majority of staff have expressed a preference to be part office and part home based, adoption of Teams is opening up new ways of working and communicating, and reflecting on how we have developed our approach to data during COVID-19.
• The most significant issue for us, and the area of greatest risk, is the enduring impact of COVID-19, in particular the combined impact of reduced capacity over the last year, and a surge in public service complaint volumes over recent months.
• We have reached a point of crisis where we consider that without additional resource to deliver a recovery programme, we will see increased delays and dissatisfaction with our complaint investigation services. Importantly, it will undermine delivery of our strategy, particularly in relation to accessibility, access to justice and capacity.

We are committed to being part of Scotland’s integration of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) into the delivery of public services. We see this as being an integral and critical part of a wider focus on taking the rights based approach underpinning our own strategic aims.