Performance reporting and self-assessment

‘Organisations should produce an annual complaints performance and service improvement report for scrutiny and challenge’ (Paragraph 8.1 of the Complaint Handling Code)

The annual complaints performance and service improvement report provides organisations with an opportunity to publicly show that they are learning from complaints. This demonstrates to the public that the organisation is open to fair challenge and improving services as a result.

The Complaint Handling Code recommends organisations carry out a self-assessment against the Code. Whilst there is no legal obligation to carry out a self-assessment, this process can be helpful in demonstrating that an organisation is following the Code. If this is not the case, it provides an opportunity for organisations to highlight what work is being done to address this. If there are barriers to being able to address any issues, the annual report provides a way of highlighting this and seeking potential solutions such as the allocation of more resource. This supports the effective scrutiny of complaint handling.

The self-assessment is also a useful tool in ensuring that any significant changes within an organisation take account of complaint handling. It can help officers managing complaints processes to highlight potential risks with those responsible for change projects and helps improve the visibility of complaints processes and demonstrate their wider value.

Key performance indicators

We have produced a set of key performance indicators to support organisations to track performance in complaint handling. If these are applied consistently in line with the accompanying notes below, then organisations should be able to compare performance with other similar organisations as well as their own performance over time.

Indicator One: Number of complaints received.

1. Number of complaints received
2. % complaints received excluded from complaints process (broken down by reason)

Indicator Two: Timeliness

1. % accepted complaints responded to within 15 working days at stage 1
2. % accepted complaints responded to within 25 working days at stage 2

Indicator Three: Outcomes

1. % accepted complaints at stage 1 which were:
   1. upheld
   2. partially upheld
   3. not upheld; and
   4. resolved
2. % accepted complaints at stage 2 which were:
   1. upheld
   2. partially upheld
   3. not upheld; and
   4. resolved

Indicator Four: Learning from complaints & remedies

1. % accepted complaints where remedy provided
2. Summary of service improvements made as a result of learning from complaints by service area.

Notes on KPIs

• The above measures allow organisations to benchmark performance over time to help identify trends as well as benchmarking performance against similar organisations. Over time this will help establish expected performance levels.

• Organisations should consider reporting on both rolling 12-month data as well as individual quarterly performance to identify both long- and short-term trends in performance. The above template may be used for producing two separate reports. Previous reporting period data may be provided in brackets alongside data for this period.

• Excluded complaints are reported separately and should not be included in analysis of timeliness, outcomes and learning from complaints and remedies. Percentages should be calculated based on accepted complaints rather than complaints received.

• Timescales run from date of receipt of complaint to the date a decision was issued because all organisations should be able to capture this in casework management systems. Acknowledgement dates may not be captured by all systems.

• It is for each organisation to decide how to determine the date of receipt depending on their systems. This should be within one working day of receipt of the complaint. Some systems may automatically log complaints, even if received outside working hours whilst others may log complaints manually. A difference of one working day will make minimal difference to overall average timescales.

• Timescales are measured against minimum response times in the Code so organisations can get an understanding of what proportion of complaints are responded to within extended timescales or late. It is not expected that organisations respond to 100% of complaints within the minimum timescales at stage 1 and stage 2. 

• Complaint outcomes are classified as follows:
  • Upheld: The organisation has accepted it was at fault in all or most areas raised by the complainant or it only identified a small number of errors or technical faults but these had a significant adverse impact on the complainant or the wider public.
  • Partially upheld: The organisation found it acted without fault in most areas raised by the complainant. However, it identified a small number of errors or technical faults and these had very little impact on the complainant or the wider public.
  • Not upheld: The organisation found it acted without fault in all areas raised by the complainant.
  • Resolved: The organisation was able to agree action it should take with the complainant to resolve the complaint and did not have to investigate further to decide whether it acted with fault.

• “Remedy provided” includes an apology and any action to put things right including a financial remedy. This should only be recorded where complaint is “upheld” or “partially upheld” so “resolved” complaints. This helps organisations to better understand the impact of fault on individuals in their area.

• A summary of service improvements should demonstrate to members and public that the organisation is learning from complaints. However, it may not be necessary to report every service improvement as some may be minor. Organisations should consider reporting all service improvements through scrutiny mechanisms for individual directorates and services alongside complaints data for that specific directorate or service as this information may be more relevant to wider issues being discussed.

• KPIs relating to the Code should be shared alongside performance data for statutory complaints about adult social care, children’s services and public health where appropriate. 

• Where KPIs are shared with senior leaders and elected officials, they should include a summary of upheld decisions against the organisation from the Ombudsman and details of what action is being taken as a result.

Equality monitoring data

Organisations should collect data on the protected characteristics of people who complain. This should be collected at the point the person first raises a complaint but should not be made available except for statistical analysis. By analysing data collected, organisations can assess whether complaint systems are equitable and fair and whether they disproportionately affect different groups.

Feedback from complainants and officers

Organisations should seek feedback from complainants about their experiences of raising a complaint with the organisation. This may be done by requesting feedback after sending a complaint response or selecting a random sample of former complainants and asking for feedback at regular intervals (e.g. quarterly).

Complainants views of the complaint process will often be heavily influenced by the outcome of their complaint. Organisations are more likely to receive negative feedback where a complaint has not been upheld or the complainant has not had the outcome they were hoping for.

To overcome this organisations may want to ask closed questions on how the complainant experienced the complaint process. These could be accompanied by free text comment boxes to capture specific feedback. For example:

• How easy was it to make your complaint? (Easy/ Fairly Easy/ Somewhat Difficult/ Difficult).
• Did you feel the complaint handler understood what your complaint was about? (Yes/No)
• Did we provide you with regular updates about the progress of your complaint? (Yes/ No)
• Was the complaint handler courteous when dealing with your complaint? (Yes/ No)
• Was our decision easy to understand? (Easy/ Fairly Easy/ Somewhat Difficult/ Difficult)
• Reflecting on your experience, would you raise a complaint with us again? (Yes/ Maybe/ No)

Organisations should also seek feedback from staff about their experiences of being complained about. This may be done through existing staff engagement processes. However, organisations may also wish to provide staff with ways of providing direct feedback through their line managers following specific complaints.

Feedback from complainants and staff should form part of regular reporting to senior leaders and Members. This provides important data on how complainants and staff experience the complaints process and gives organisations and opportunity to reflect on their practices.