Part 3: Performance analysis

Contacts

In 2021–22, 849[1] contacts were made to the Office, comprising:

• 524 complaints about ACT agencies, organisations or ACT Policing, and
• 325 program specific matters (for example, FOI review requests or Reportable Conduct notifications).

These are discussed in more detail in the sections below.

Complaints management

Complaints received

In 2021–22, as outlined in Table 1, the Office received a total of 524 complaints, comprising:

• 418 complaints related to ACT agencies and general public administration matters
• 88 complaints related to ACT Policing
• 10 complaints related to the ACT Reportable Conduct Scheme
• 5 complaints related to our work as Inspector of the ACT Integrity Commission
• 3 complaints related to the FOI Act.

Table 1: ACT complaints received during 2021–22, compared to the previous 2 financial years

	2019–20	2020–21	2021–22
Complaints received about ACT agencies	423	500	418
Complaints received about ACT Policing	70	103	88
Complaints received related to ACT Reportable Conduct Scheme	15	21	10
Complaints received about ACT Integrity Commission	1	4	5
Complaints received related to FOI Act	11	6	3
TOTAL complaints received	520	634	524

There was a 16 per cent[2] decrease in complaints received about ACT agencies, compared to the previous financial year, with 418 complaints received in 2021–22 and 500 complaints received in 2020–21.

Complaints received about ACT Policing decreased by 15 per cent, with 88 complaints received in
2021–22, compared to 103 complaints received in 2020–21.

Complaints about agencies

Table 2 outlines the number of complaints received by the Ombudsman that relate to ACT Directorates, ACT Policing, and other independent ACT agencies, and reports this number as a percentage of total complaints received.[3]

Table 2: ACT complaints received during 2021–22, by agency

Agency	Number	Percentage[4]
Community Services Directorate	140	28%
Chief Minister, Treasury and Economic Development Directorate	113	22%
ACT Policing	88	17%
Justice and Community Safety Directorate	67	13%
Independent Statutory Offices	26	5%
Transport Canberra and City Services Directorate	24	5%
Health Directorate	20	4%
Education Directorate	15	3%
Canberra Health Services	6	1%
Environment Planning and Sustainable Development Directorate	5	1%
Territory-owned corporations	1	<1%
Officers of the Legislative Assembly	1	<1%
Prescribed authorities	0	-
Total	506*	100%

*Does not include complaints related to the FOI Act, Inspector of the ACT Integrity Commission and Reportable Conduct Scheme.

The largest number of complaints received by the Ombudsman in 2021–22 related to the Community Services Directorate (CSD). Together, complaints about CSD and the Chief Minister, Treasury and Economic Development Directorate (CMTEDD) made up 50 per cent of all complaints about ACT agencies.

When reported by individual agency, as opposed to the Directorate, the largest number of complaints received were about:

• Housing ACT with 133
• Access Canberra with 74
• ACT Corrective Services with 65.

A detailed table of the number of complaints received about individual agencies is provided at Appendix 1.

How complaints were received

Figure 1 shows the most common method for contacting the Office in 2021–22 was via our online complaint form (41 per cent).[5]

Comparing the proportion of contacts, methods of contacting the Office were broadly consistent with the previous financial year. There was an increase in complainants’ use of our online complaint form (from 34 per cent in 2020–21, to 41 per cent in 2021–22) and complainants’ use of the telephone to contact us decreased slightly (from 41 per cent in 2020–21, to 37 per cent in 2021–22).

Figure 1: How ACT complaints were made during 2021–22, compared to the previous financial year[6]

Note: This data is dynamic and may be updated. For this reason, there may be minor differences when compared to previous published reports.

Complaints finalised

As outlined in Table 3, in 2021–22 the Office finalised a total of 426 complaints comprising:

• 335 complaints related to ACT Government agencies
• 70 ACT Policing matters
• 13 complaints related to the Reportable Conduct Scheme
• 6 complaints related to our work as Inspector of the ACT Integrity Commission
• 2 complaints related to the FOI Act.

Table 3: ACT complaints finalised during 2021–22, compared to the previous 2 financial years

	2019–20	2020–21	2021–22
ACT Government agencies	424	483	335
ACT Policing	70	107	70
ACT Reportable Conduct Scheme	16	21	13
ACT Integrity Commission	-	4	6
FOI Act	11	7	2
TOTAL complaints finalised	521	622	426

Every complaint is assessed to determine whether it can be resolved quickly, or a formal investigation is required. Often, positive outcomes can be achieved for complainants without the Office proceeding to a full formal investigation.

Outcomes achieved for formally investigated complaints

The table at Appendix 2 provides information about outcomes resulting from investigations finalised in 2021–22. More than one outcome can be achieved in a single complaint investigation.

The outcomes achieved in 2021–22 included:[7]

• better explanation by Ombudsman in 11 cases
• remedy provided by agency in 7 cases
• action expedited by agency in 4 cases
• apology issued in 2 cases.

During 2021–22, the Office finalised 36 formal investigations[8]. In most matters, the complainant’s concerns were resolved after we started our investigation and raised the matter with the relevant agency. In some cases, we were able to provide independent assurance to complainants that agencies had acted reasonably and lawfully and/or could give a better explanation of what had occurred.

COMPLAINT EXAMPLE – Education Directorate

A member of the public complained to the ACT Education Directorate (the agency) about the behaviour of an unidentified public servant. The complainant was unhappy with the response they received when they complained to the agency, remained dissatisfied with the agency’s handling of their complaint and made a formal complaint to the ACT Ombudsman.

The ACT Ombudsman investigated the complaint, using our formal powers under the Ombudsman Act 1989 to request information from the agency on how it dealt with the initial complaint.

After analysing the information received from the agency, our Office concluded the agency had acted appropriately and its decision making was proportionate to the circumstances. We were able to provide assurance to the complainant that the agency had acted appropriately during consideration of their complaint.

Performance against service standards

The Office has service standards that apply to complaints we receive about ACT agencies. Our service standard timeframes are:

• 55 per cent finalised in 7 days
• 85 per cent finalised in 40 days
• 90 per cent finalised in 90 days
• 99 per cent finalised in 12 months.

In 2021–22, 38 per cent of complaints finalised about ACT agencies were closed in 7 days, with 54 per cent of complaints finalised in 40 days and 99 per cent of ACT complaints were finalised in 12 months.

Our complaint handling functions faced significant challenges as a result of COVID-19, including managing employee wellbeing.

Since early 2020, a range of factors have impacted the Office’s capacity to handle complaints as quickly or effectively as we aim to. In particular, the 2020 response to COVID-19, including lockdowns across all states and territories, at one point resulted in 70 per cent of the Office’s overall staff in lockdown. With our staff and their families affected by illness, home schooling responsibilities, remote working and concerns about their welfare, we introduced a limited-service complaint handling model.

While this model demonstrated agility by the Office and a focus on employee welfare as it adjusted processes to enable services to continue, it also reduced our ability to investigate and manage complaints as efficiently as we otherwise would.

Reducing our phone hours and providing an email address as an alternative means to contact us resulted in increased timeframes as it reduced our ability to communicate with complainants and decreased the quality of information we were able to illicit from complainants.

In 2021–22, the Office implemented several changes to improve our service delivery, including contracting a surge team to boost our capacity to handle complaints and prioritising the efforts of new/surge staff on inbound contacts, while more experienced staff deal with older complaints.

Complaint trends and agency engagement

The sections below provide information on complaint trends about specific agencies during 2021–22 and our Office’s engagement activities.

Complaints made about FOI or Reportable Conduct matters are discussed separately in this report. Complaints about the ACT Integrity Commission are discussed in the ACT Inspector of the Integrity Commission Annual Report 2021–22.

In 2021–22, the Office continued our regular liaison with Directorates and agencies across the ACT as part of our oversight role, to monitor possible systemic issues and identify improvements in public administration. For example, we met regularly with the ACT Human Rights Commission, ACT Inspector of Correctional Services, Housing ACT, Access Canberra, ACTCS, and continued our regular engagement with ACT Policing.

Housing ACT

During 2021–22, the Office received 133 complaints about Housing ACT, a 2.5 per cent increase in complaints compared to 2020–21. The most common issues raised in complaints included:

• maintenance and repair issues
• issues about the administration of public housing waitlists
• anti-social behaviour and neighbourhood disputes
• debt and refund issues
• the Housing ACT Growing and Renewing program.

COMPLAINT EXAMPLE – Housing ACT

A social housing tenant with disabilities disagreed with a Housing ACT decision that required the tenant to pay for the costs of a broken household fixture.

Our Office investigated the tenant’s complaint and requested information from Housing ACT on the decision-making process that resulted in the complainant being liable to pay for repairing the damage.

Housing ACT explained that, while tenants are generally liable for the cost of this type of repair, it does depend on the specific circumstances.

As a result of our investigation, Housing ACT considered its decision-making process and concluded that discretion was incorrectly applied in this case. For this reason, Housing ACT committed to strengthening its staff training on reviewable decisions.

We meet regularly with Housing ACT and also attend the ‘Who’s new on the street’ forum, which brings together various community providers of housing and homelessness services, to build a greater understanding of the economic and social environment in which these services and Housing ACT operates.

In 2020, Housing ACT took part in our Complaints Assurance Program (CAP) which identified areas where improvements could be made to its complaint management system. These areas included ensuring it developed internal guidance to implement broader CSD initiatives related to complaint handling procedures.

Our engagement with Housing ACT in 2021–22 included monitoring its response to our CAP suggestions. Some of the suggestions were incorporated into a broader CSD review of overall complaint handling policies and procedures. Our Office participated in CSD’s consultation on its revised complaint handling policies and procedures. We will continue to monitor Housing ACTs progress in developing internal guidance to implement CSD’s initiatives, as they are finalised.

Access Canberra

The number of complaints received about Access Canberra slightly decreased this reporting period, from 79 in 2020–21 to 74 in 2021–22 (a decrease of 6 per cent).

Similar themes were evident in complaints about Access Canberra, compared to the previous financial year. Complaints covered a broad range of issues including:

• licencing and registration
• parking and traffic infringement notices
• building and property issues, approvals and allegations of not following policy or procedure
• working with vulnerable people registration practices
• investigating fair trading complaints.

COMPLAINT EXAMPLE – Access Canberra

A complainant was concerned that an infringement notice was not issued by a properly authorised officer.

We investigated these claims and determined that Access Canberra’s processes complied with the relevant legislation and the infringement notice was lawful.

Our Office engages with Access Canberra through regular meetings that include discussion of complaint trends.

ACT Corrective Services

In 2021–22, the Office received 65 complaints about ACTCS, 44 per cent less than in 2020–21.

All but one of the 65 complaints was about the Alexander Maconochie Centre (AMC). These complaints were made by detainees, their friends and families. Common AMC complaints related to:

• management of the AMC
• medical treatment
• segregation of detainees
• access to visitors, and
• parole processes.

Just over 10 per cent of all complaints received about the AMC in 2021–22 related to its management of COVID-19. The issues raised mainly related to allegations of staff not complying with COVID‑19 regulations and unnecessary isolation of detainees.

As part of our oversight role in relation to the AMC, the Office:

• continued to attend bimonthly meetings with ACTCS, the Official Visitors, the ACT Human Rights Commission, the ACT Inspector of Correctional Services, and the ACT Public Advocate
• presented information sessions about the Ombudsman’s role and jurisdiction during induction training for ACTCS Custodial Officer recruits
• as a member of the ACT NPM (together with the Inspector of Correctional Services and the ACT Human Rights Commission) participated in meetings to discuss the implementation of OPCAT
• developed arrangements for our investigation officers to have the option of using video conferencing to speak with detainees about their complaints.

Transport Canberra and City Services

In 2021–22, the number of complaints received about Transport Canberra and City Services (TCCS) decreased by 25 per cent. We received 24 complaints this financial year, compared to 32 complaints received in 2020–21.

Complaints about TCCS covered a range of issues including:

• property matters, such as damage caused by trees and works to neighbouring properties
• domestic animals, such as nuisance animals and issues with Domestic Animal Service staff
• transport and traffic issues, such as vehicle registration, cancellations and defect notices.

ACT Revenue Office

We received 18 complaints about the ACT Revenue Office (ACTRO) in 2021–22, an increase compared to 13 complaints received in 2020–21. The most common complaint issues in 2021–22 included:

• landholder duty
• late payment penalties
• matters relating to rental bonds.

Freedom of Information oversight

FOI contacts received

In 2021–22, the Office received 73 contacts related to our role as the independent oversight agency for FOI, compared to 113 contacts in 2020–21. This was a 35 per cent decrease compared to last financial year. As outlined in Figure 2, this included:

• 24 FOI related enquires
• 26 applications for Ombudsman review
• 8 notices under s 39 of the FOI Act (notices given to the ACT Ombudsman to advise that a decision on an access application was not made in time)
• 12 extension of time requests
• 3 FOI related complaints.

Figure 2: Contacts received under the FOI Act in 2021–22, compared to 2020–21

Finalised FOI reviews

As shown in Figure 3, the Office finalised 30 Ombudsman reviews in 2021–22.

The outcomes of these reviews were:

• the original decision was confirmed in 5 cases
• the original decision was varied in 7 cases
• the original decision was set aside in 6 cases
• additional time to decide was granted to the agency in 2 cases
• 5 matters were closed without review because they were invalid requests or there was no reasonable prospect of success
• 5 matters were withdrawn following informal resolution activities.

Figure 3: FOI review requests finalised in 2021–22, compared to 2020–21

Performance against service standards

The Office established service standards for our FOI review applications from 1 July 2019.[9]

In 2021–22, we did not meet our service standards:

• 23 per cent of FOI review matters finalised within 6 weeks (below the standard of 30 per cent)
• 47 per cent finalised in 12 weeks (below the standard of 60 per cent), and
• 70 per cent finalised in 6 months (below the standard of 95 per cent).

FOI review matters can generally be finalised within 6 weeks, where informal resolution is successful. Our ability to meet the 30 per cent service standard is expected to vary depending on the number of cases finalised through informal resolution processes.

Where a formal decision is required, matters are expected to take 12 weeks to finalise and complex matters can take longer. Timeframes may also be delayed where agencies are slow to provide copies of relevant documentation to enable a review to commence.

In 2021–22, the number of reviews resolved by informal resolution and withdrawal were consistent with 2020–21. However, far fewer were resolved by deciding there was insufficient information or there were no reasonable prospects of the original decision changing than in 2020–21. In 2021–22, where we may have previously decided not to conduct a review, we attempted to resolve more reviews informally. When informal resolution was unsuccessful this did contribute to the overall length of time taken to finalise our reviews and this accounts for some discrepancies between the service standards and real outcomes in 2021–22.

Published decisions

At 30 June 2022, the Office had published 85 FOI decisions on the ACT Ombudsman website, of which 18 were published during the reporting period.[10]

Publishing decisions contributes to the body of precedent for FOI law and provides agencies and applicants with guidance on the FOI Act, including the application of the public interest test and transparency in decision-making.

Open access monitoring strategy

In 2021–22, the Office faced a number of challenges related to COVID-19, resourcing and managing other competing priorities. As a result, we did not progress our open access monitoring strategy as planned in this reporting period. We continue to consult with stakeholders and provide assistance on areas for improved practice.

We anticipate progressing our open access monitoring strategy in 2022–23, with a focus on agency education.

Engagement activities

Throughout the 2021–22 financial year we engaged with stakeholders in a variety of ways, considering the changing circumstances resulting from COVID-19. We continue to communicate informally with agencies, providing advice and clarification on FOI matters. As part of our ongoing engagement with government stakeholders, we provided input on proposed amendments to the FOI Act.

To mark International Access to Information Day on 28 September 2021, we released a joint statement with Information Commissioners and Ombudsmen across Australia.[11] The joint statement detailed the new ‘Open by Design’ Principles. These principles are designed to encourage and authorise the proactive release of information by government agencies. This statement was accompanied by a consumer video to raise public awareness of information access rights.

The Office circulated a newsletter to ACT FOI practitioners in December 2021, providing updates on current events and trends and advising practitioners on dealing with access applications.

The ACT Ombudsman attended 2 meetings of the Association of Information Access Commissioners, in September 2021 and April 2022.

The Office hosted a virtual FOI practitioners’ forum in February 2022, with more than 30 Information Officers from agencies attending. The forum was an opportunity to reconnect with ACT agencies and involved discussion on the feedback from a survey on community attitudes towards FOI and FOI matters that had recently received media attention.

Reportable Conduct Scheme

Reportable Conduct – contacts received

The Office received 252 contacts relating to reportable conduct in 2021–22, a decrease on the 305 contacts received in 2020–21.

Figure 4 shows:

• 136 notifications from designated entities[12] about allegations of reportable conduct
• 106 enquiries, and
• 10 complaints.

Figure 4: Contacts received related to Reportable Conduct in 2021–22, compared to 2020–21

The number of overall contacts continues to decrease compared to previous years, as Figure 4 shows. Notification volumes decreased by 20 per cent, while enquiries decreased by 6 per cent. We consider the decrease in all contacts may reflect the impact of the lockdown in the ACT from August to October 2021 and the ongoing impact of COVID–19 and associated restrictions had on the community resuming ‘normal’ activity.

Of the 136 notifications this year, 47 were also reported to ACT Policing. This is an increase in not only the number, but also the proportion of matters reported to the police compared to the previous reporting period. This may indicate the reportable conduct allegations related to more serious matters, potentially of a criminal nature. We noted an increased complexity in the matters received during this reporting period, including the nature of the allegations, cross-jurisdictional issues and challenges for organisations progressing investigations.

Table 4 shows the number of notifications received in 2021–22, by sector.

In 2021–22, we continued to receive the largest number of notifications from government and non-government schools (43 reports), followed by the kinship and foster care sector (34 matters), and the education and care service providers (31 reports). While we received fewer notifications during this reporting period across our top 3 sectors, we have seen an increase in notifications from Health Service Providers and Residential Care Organisations.

Table 4: Notifications received in 2021–22 by sector and percentage of total notifications received

	Number	Percentage
Government and Non-Government Schools	43	32%
Kinship and Foster Care	34	25%
Education and Care Service Providers	31	23%
Residential Care Organisations	12	9%
ACT Directorates	7	5%
Health Service Providers	7	5%
Religious Organisation	1	1%
Non-designated entity (Out of Jurisdiction)	1	1%

Timeliness of notification reporting

Under s 17G(2) of the Ombudsman Act, a designated entity is required to notify the ACT Ombudsman’s Office within 30 days after becoming aware of a reportable allegation or reportable conviction of an employee.

In 2021–22, designated entities’ compliance with this obligation decreased from 77 per cent from the last reporting period to 69 per cent. We are alert to this issue and timeliness has been addressed with designated entities, with the most common explanation being the challenges presented by COVID-19 impacting staffing levels and the sharing of information between designated entities. We have been encouraging designated entities to contact us if they anticipate a delay.

It is important designated entities notify the Office within 30 days as the Office can add most value to a designated entity’s response when approaches are made early. Where we identify a designated entity is not making timely notifications, the Office may encourage the designated entity to review its processes and resourcing dedicated to handling allegations of child abuse or child related misconduct by employees.

We published Practice Guide No. 1[13] to assist designated entities with the process of notifying the Office about reportable allegations and convictions against employees.

Cases finalised

Under s 17J of the Ombudsman Act, designated entities must provide the Office with a written report of the results of its investigation, including actions taken.

The Office assesses the designated entity’s overall response, in consideration of a range of factors outlined in our Practice Guide No. 9,[14] to determine if the designated entity made sufficient inquiry and took appropriate action(s). The Office may seek further information to be satisfied of the response. We may also provide feedback to the designated entity for it to consider in terms of ongoing practice improvement.

The Office finalised 154 matters in 2021–22, a 21 per cent decrease in finalised cases compared to
2020–21 (196 matters). Table 5 also shows the allegation type[15] of all finalised matters reported to the Office in 2021–22. The most common allegations reported to the Office in 2021–22 were the same as in 2020–21 and 2019–20, namely ill-treatment (involving hostile use of force/physical contact) (148 allegations).

Table 5: Allegation type for matters finalised in 2021–22 and percentage of all allegations and convictions reported

	Number	Percentage
Ill-treatment – hostile use of force	148	36%
Ill-treatment – emotional abuse	85	21%
Neglect	56	14%
Misconduct of a sexual nature – crossing professional boundaries	55	13%
Misconduct of a sexual nature – Sexually explicit comments and other overtly sexual behaviour	23	6%
Ill-treatment – inappropriate restrictive intervention	14	3%
Offences against the Education and Care Service National Law	13	3%
Offences against a person	7	2%
Misconduct of a sexual nature – grooming behaviour	6	1%
Sexual offences where a child is a victim or is present	4	1%
Psychological harm	2	<1%
Other	1	<1%

Performance against service standards

Our focus in 2021–22 continued to be the management of immediate risks associated with incoming notifications and monitoring current reportable conduct investigations by designated entities.

Section 17G notifications

When the Office receives a new s 17G notification from a designated entity about an allegation of reportable conduct, we assess the initial response by the designated entity – including whether it has reported to other authorities – and its risk assessment and investigation plan. This allows the designated entity to consider our feedback during its investigation. We aim to assess notifications within 7 calendar days in 80 per cent of cases.

In 2021–22, 92 per cent of notifications were assessed within the required timeframe (being 7 calendar days).

Section 17J final reports

When we receive a final report from a designated entity following its investigation into reportable conduct allegations or convictions (s 17J report), we consider whether the allegation or conviction was properly investigated and appropriate action taken and whether we need further information from the designated entity. This gives the designated entity reasonable opportunity to act on our feedback or provide further information. We aim to complete this within 28 calendar days in 80 per cent of cases.

In 2021–22, 76 per cent were assessed within the required timeframe (being 28 calendar days).

We will continue to strive to meet these service standards – recognising the importance of providing timely consideration to designated entities on assessments.

Outcomes

After notifying the ACT Ombudsman of a reportable conduct allegation or conviction, and on conclusion of its investigation, a designated entity must provide the Ombudsman with the outcome of its inquiries and what action it takes as a result. Designated entities are required to report on whether an allegation has been sustained or not sustained.

Figure 5 and Table 6 show the outcomes for each allegation and conviction, and the actions taken by designated entities, as provided to us in reports finalised in 2021–22.[16]

Figure 5: Outcomes reported by designated entities—finalised investigations in 2021–22[17]

Table 6: Actions taken by designated entities—finalised in 2021–22 and percentage of all actions taken

	Number	Percentage
No action after the investigation process	173	42%
Training	51	12%
Termination	46	11%
Counselling	45	11%
Other forms of disciplinary action as per employer	44	11%
Letter of warning	19	5%
Performance monitoring or managing	19	5%
No information provided	10	2%
Transfer/demotion	6	1%
A formal apology	1	<1%

Investigations and complaints

The Ombudsman may, on their own initiative or in response to a complaint, choose to investigate any reportable conduct allegation or conviction against an employee of a designated entity considered under the Scheme. The Ombudsman may also investigate a designated entity’s response to a reportable conduct allegation or conviction.

In 2021–22, the Office received 10 complaints about designated entities’ handling of reportable conduct matters. All of these were handled by either contacting the relevant designated entity and facilitating pathways for complainants to access internal processes or information; or providing further information directly to the complainant.

Monitoring activities

Our ‘Practice Guide No. 9 – How the Ombudsman Assesses an Employer’s Response/Investigation’ provides information to designated entities about how the Office monitors practices and procedures for preventing reportable conduct and how designated entities deal with reportable allegations and convictions.

As outlined in Practice Guide No. 9, we consider the following aspects of a designated entity’s response:

• initial response
• planning
• information gathering
• employee response
• making a finding, and
• taking action.

We provide written feedback to designated entities on the s 17J final reports provided to the Office under the Ombudsman Act. Where we identify systemic feedback concerns, we raise these at liaison meetings. Designated entities are also invited to contact us for further discussion about feedback and we encourage designated entities to revisit previous feedback provided when handling new matters.

During 2021–22, our feedback continued to address:

• providing procedural fairness to those involved in an investigation
• allegations needing to be clearly defined, clarified and recorded correctly before an investigation is conducted
• the articulation and mitigation of risk, based on a broad assessment
• timely investigation plans
• understanding that reporting obligations under the Scheme may include allegations concerning an employee’s private life, where the conduct impacts on the employee’s behaviour in the workplace.

Through future practitioner forums, the development of an e-learning module, stakeholder liaison and our published information, we continue to focus on how we can better support designated entities to implement our feedback and facilitate improvement. We recognise that managing reporting obligations can be complex and time consuming.

Engagement activities

During the year we maintained regular engagement activities with designated entities, ensuring quarterly liaison with key stakeholders and more regular liaison with designated entities with high notification numbers. This engagement helped us provide timely feedback and support to designated entities to build their capacity to prevent, report and respond to allegations of reportable conduct. It also provided our Office with a greater understanding of the challenges designated entities face and how they may have been impacted by COVID–19.

Introducing virtual meetings as our usual platform has proved successful. It has allowed us to conduct regular facilitated feedback discussions with some designated entities to help them better understand their obligations under the Scheme and develop a better understanding of the support we can provide.

We maintained regular liaison with Access Canberra’s Working with Vulnerable People (WWVP) team, ACT Policing Sexual Assault and Child Abuse Team (SACAT), ACT Together Barnardos, the CSD, the Education Directorate, and the Public Advocate and Children and Young Person Commissioner.

We continue to attend meetings with the Bimberi oversight group (convened by CSD), the Children and Young People Oversight Agencies Group (convened by the Public Advocate and the Children and Young People Commissioner); and the ACT Government’s Redress Implementation Group (convened by the Justice and Community Safety Directorate).

In the next financial year, we plan to expand our stakeholder engagement to include religious organisations and the early education and care sector.

Practitioner Forums

We hosted two practitioner forums, one in August 2021 and the second in March 2022.

The August Practitioner forum was held in-person and included a presentation from ACT Policing’s SACAT to provide information to designated entities about its role and the information sharing provisions in relation to reportable conduct matters. We also facilitated a practice discussion on procedural fairness, which was supported by a case study presented by the Education Directorate.

The March Practitioner forum was held virtually and included two presentations. Access Canberra’s Working with Vulnerable People (WWVP) Scheme, with whom we regularly share information, provided information about its assessment process in relation to reportable conduct information and notifications.

The ACT Policing Family Violence Unit provided a presentation about family violence matters in the ACT, which was particularly relevant as we saw an increase in notifications from employers concerning private life matters as a result of family violence incidents. ACT Together Barnardos also provided a case study to inform best practice and lessons learned to enable shared learning for the designated entity practitioners at the forum.

We will continue to involve designated entities in upcoming forums, encouraging a ‘community of practice’ approach, with designated entities presenting case studies and sharing their investigation practices.

Online information

We have published 2 newsletters and conducted information sessions virtually when requested by designated entities. We have not had a running schedule for information sessions as in previous years due to uncertainty caused by COVID–19. We therefore reviewed and updated information on our website and are developing an e-learning module that we hope to make publicly available on our website before the end of 2022.

We also prepared a new information sheet ‘An Introduction to the Reportable Conduct Scheme for the ACT Community (including parents)’, which was drafted in consultation with designated entities. This information sheet is due to be published on our website early in 2022–23.

Community Engagement and Support

Community engagement is an essential part of our work. In 2021–22, the COVID–19 pandemic reduced opportunities to engage face-to-face with the community.

With the lifting of public health measures, in the latter part of the year we recommenced face-to-face engagement. In May 2022, we attended the Council on the Ageing (COTA) ACT 2022 Silver is Gold Expo held at Exhibition Park in Canberra. This provided an opportunity to explain the role of the ACT Ombudsman and to learn more about issues that may be of concern to attendees.

We look forward to increasing our face-to-face engagement in 2022–23.

Scrutiny

The Office made several appearances before, and submissions to, Legislative Assembly Committees between 1 July 2021 and 30 June 2022. These were:

• Standing Committee on Public Accounts
  • appearance before the Inquiry into the ACT Budget 2021–22 (in October 2021)
  • submission and appearance before the Inquiry into the Financial Management Amendment Bill 2021 (in February 2022)
  • appearance before the Inquiry into Annual and Financial Reports 2020–21 (in March 2022).
• Standing Committee on Justice and Community Safety:
  • as Inspector, appearance before the Inquiry into the ACT Budget 2021–22 (in October 2021)
  • submission to and appearance before the Inquiry into Community Corrections (in November 2021 and February 2022)
  • as Inspector, appearance before the Inquiry into Annual and Financial Reports 2020–21 (in February 2022)
  • submission to and appearance before the Inquiry into Petition 32-21 (No Rights Without Remedy) (in April 2022)
  • submission to the Inquiry into the Terrorism (Extraordinary Temporary Powers) Amendment Bill 2022 (in May 2022).

One Committee made a recommendation to the Office. In November 2021, the Standing Committee on Public Accounts in its Report 2—Appropriation Bill 2021–2022 and Appropriation (Office of the Legislative Assembly) Bill 2021–2022, recommendation 19 states:

The Committee recommends the ACT Ombudsman provide to the Standing Committee on Public Accounts a copy of the report evaluating the ACT Government’s progress against adopted recommendations from ACT Ombudsman’s inquiries once completed.

The Office agreed in principle, noting the work was still underway and subject to approval by the Ombudsman. We expect our report to be completed in the second half of 2022 (progress is discussed in more detail in Part 2).

Financial management reporting

In 2021–22, the ACT Government paid $2,855,704 (GST exclusive) to the Office to undertake its functions.

This funding was used on, and supported, functions provided by the Office to the ACT. Detailed financial statements for the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman, an Australian Public Service entity which currently performs the role of the ACT Ombudsman, are published in the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman’s Annual Report 2021–22.

In accordance with the Services Agreement between the Office of the Commonwealth Ombudsman and the ACT Government, the Office was provided with:

• $1,381,595 for ACT Ombudsman services, including complaint handling, and oversight in relation to ACT Policing
• $875,850 to perform functions under the Reportable Conduct Scheme
• $429,632 to implement and perform functions under the FOI Act[18]
• $63,358 to perform functions as the principal officer to support the ACT Judicial Council
• $105,269 to implement and perform functions as the Inspector of the ACT Integrity Commission.

Note: All figures above are exclusive of GST.

[1] This figure includes ACT complaints received, FOI requests, notifications, notices and complaints, and Reportable Conduct notifications, enquiries, and complaints.

[2] Percentages rounded to nearest whole number.

[3] This table does not include complaints related to the FOI Act, Inspector of the ACT Integrity Commission and Reportable Conduct Scheme, which are discussed separately in this report.

[4] Percentages may not add up to 100 due to rounding.

[5] Includes complaints received about ACT Policing and ACT agencies.

[6] Includes complaints received about ACT Policing and ACT agencies.

[7] Includes outcomes of investigations related to ACT Government agencies and ACT Policing.

[8] Includes investigations finalised related to ACT Government agencies and ACT Policing.

[9] For more information about Freedom of Information service standards, go to
www.ombudsman.act.gov.au/improving-the-act/freedom-of-information/foi-complaints-and-reviews,

[10] ACT Ombudsman, FOI Review decisions webpage, viewed 16 July 2021, www.ombudsman.act.gov.au/improving-the-act/freedom-of-information/foi-review-decisions

[11] ACT Ombudsman, Information Access Commissioners and Ombudsmen make recommendations to support Open by Design Principles webpage, viewed 14 June 2022, https://www.ombudsman.act.gov.au/home/home-news/Information-Access-Commissioners-and-Ombudsmen-make-recommendations-to-support-Open-by-Design-Principles.

[12] The term ‘designated entity’ is defined under s17EA of the Ombudsman Act 1989.

[13] ACT Ombudsman, ACT Ombudsman Practice Guide No.1 – How the ACT Ombudsman Responds to

Notifications and Reports, viewed 16 June 2022, www.ombudsman.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0035/80999/No.-1-How-the-ACT-Ombudsman-responds-to-notifications-and-reports.pdf

[14] ACT Ombudsman, ACT Ombudsman Practice Guide No.9 – How the Ombudsman Assesses an Employer’s Response/Investigation, viewed 16 June 2022, www.ombudsman.act.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0015/81006/No.-9-How-the-ACT-Ombudsman-assesses-an-employers-response_investigation.pdf

[15] A notification may contain multiple allegations.

[16] A notification may contain multiple allegations, each having a finding and action recorded. The total number of allegations is 414. 2 of the 414 were recorded as no information for the Outcomes.

[17] There were two allegations with no findings.

[18] Note: Due to an administrative oversight by the ACT Government (that was later corrected) the amount of funding to implement and perform functions under the FOI Act listed in the 2020–21 annual report was incorrect. The correct figure for funding received by the ACT Ombudsman in 2020–21 to implement and perform functions under the FOI Act is $839,000 (GST exclusive).