Report -P.A.C.1-2025 Handling and Learning from Customer Feedback and Complaints - 14 March 2025

Handling and Learning from Customer Feedback and Complaints

Public Accounts Committee

14 March 2025 P.A.C.1/2025

Contents

1. Chair's Foreword ...................................................................................................... 5
2. Executive Summary ................................................................................................. 7
3. Findings and Recommendations .......................................................................... 10

1. Findings ............................................................................................................... 10
2. Recommendations ............................................................................................... 13

4. Introduction ............................................................................................................ 15

1. Background and Context ..................................................................................... 15
2. Key issues ........................................................................................................... 16
3. Work Undertaken by the Committee .................................................................... 16
4. Declaration of Potential Conflicts of Interest ........................................................ 16

5. Customer Feedback Policy .................................................................................... 17

1. Overview of the Customer Feedback Policy ........................................................ 17
2. Implementation of the Customer Feedback Policy ............................................... 19
3. Evaluation and Monitoring of the Customer Feedback Policy .............................. 21
4. Training and Development ................................................................................... 22
5. Complaints Data .................................................................................................. 23
6. Complaints unable to be resolved, withdrawn or not upheld ................................ 25
7. Complaints from suppliers and contractors .......................................................... 28

6. Previous Comptroller and Auditor General and PAC recommendations ........... 30

1. Progress made from previous recommendations ................................................. 30
2. Recommendation One ......................................................................................... 30
3. Recommendation Three ...................................................................................... 33
4. Recommendation Seven ..................................................................................... 35
5. Recommendations Eight and Nine....................................................................... 36
6. Recommendation Eleven ..................................................................................... 37
7. Infrastructure and Environment ............................................................................ 38
8. Areas for prioritisation .......................................................................................... 41

7. Public Engagement ................................................................................................ 44

1. Survey Findings ................................................................................................... 44
2. User Friendliness of Customer Feedback Processes........................................... 45
3. Trust and Confidence in Customer Feedback Processes .................................... 46
4. Implementation of Learning from Customer Feedback Processes ....................... 50

8. Conclusion .............................................................................................................. 53

9. Appendix One ......................................................................................................... 55

1. Terms of Reference ............................................................................................. 55
2. PAC Membership ................................................................................................ 55

3. Public Hearings ................................................................................................... 57
4. Review Costs....................................................................................................... 57

1. Chair's Foreword

3 years ago, almost exactly, in March 2022 the PAC published the "Performance Management" report which partly focused on how our Government processed feedback and complaints.

I remember it very well, I was also chair of the PAC then. It gives me great pleasure to be able to follow up on work I did at the previous term.

In 2022 it was noted that two major Departments (Health and Education) had implemented their own mechanisms to capture customer'  experience  and  deal  with  complaints.  Different mechanisms in different Departments can become confusing for customers and can create data that can't be easily compared against other departments. It is very important for someone to be able to see all feedback including complaints in one place, so common themes can be identified and addressed.

This follow up review has found that all departments will feed back information centrally and this will first be reported at the end of quarter one 2025.

The PAC found that there have been considerable steps taken by the Government of Jersey to  implement  the  Customer  Feedback  Policy,  and  there  is  annual  increase  in  public engagement including compliments and comments and not only complaints. This information also  outlines  all  channels  where  members  of  the  public  have  submitted feedback  and complaints, including face to face, telephone, email and other avenues.

The PAC does, however, have some concerns and matters that require addressing by Government, mainly to further enhance the steps already taken.

There has been a change in terminology used for complaints found to be unable to be resolved', with the new terminology being outcome not achievable'. The PAC was unable to find evidence of these definitions within the online version of the policy as well as the definition for a not upheld' complaints. There appears to have been a 42% increase in complaints that are classified as not upheld' between 2023 and 2024.

The PAC would welcome an update to the policy to include the definitions of these two areas.

The review found that there has been an overall increase in complaints received by the Infrastructure  and  Environment  Department  in  relation  to  Planning  (74%  increase)  and Regulation (100% increase) activities undertaken by the Department between 2023 and 2024. In 2024, 70% of the total feedback received for planning related to complaints, which is a significant increase on the 39% in 2023.

We have recommended a review is undertaken to establish why there has been such a large increase in complaints in this area.

When  examining  the  post-complaint/feedback  data  collected  by  Government  it  was concerning to find that approx 50% of the customers who completed the survey are not satisfied with how their complaints have been handled. The review also found that not all lessons learned' are reported by Government on the website.

We have recommended improvements in this area and better reporting of lessons learned and changes as a result on the Government website.

The team within Employment, Social Security and Housing (formerly Customer and Local Services) are coordinating/leading the work in this area and are to be commended for the work done to date. I believe there is a will and now a structure within Government to learn from complaints and feedback and we would encourage the public to submit their feedback, views and complaints as this will for changes.

I welcome an acknowledgement from the Government that it has to continue work to build public trust in its systems in order to encourage more people to come forward with feedback.

In its 2022 Performance Management report the PAC was concerned that Ministers are able to disregard the findings of the States of Jersey Complaints Board or fail or refuse to implement its findings. The PAC found in its current review that a central record of complaints board findings and recommendations part is not kept.

 We have recommended that this is recorded centrally and the extent to which they have been implemented reported on.

We have also recommended that the Government examines ways in which it can enhance signposting for customers who are making a complaint about services provided by Arm's Length Bodies or the parishes. We will shortly be launching a review in relation to Arm's Length Bodies, Grants and Subsidies and shall examine this further as part of that review.

It is clear that more work is required to build up public trust in complaints processes, and whilst this report has mainly examined internal processes for complaints resolution, it would be worth considering the merits of independent and external complaints resolution, which was raised with us by the public during review's engagement.

As part of this review, we met with the Public Services Ombudsperson from Northern Ireland and noted that all public services fall under this remit, rather than individual bodies for individual services complaints like we have in Jersey already. Consideration should be given to whether this would represent better value for money for Jersey and taxpayers having one public body dealing with complaints.

Finally, the Government has presented a survey on Monday 10th March to ask for views on the proposed public ombudsmen and I would encourage the public to engage with this survey and make their views known.

I would like thank members of the public for their engagement with the review process and Officers for their work in producing this report. I commend this report to the States Assembly.

Deputy Inna Gardiner

Chair,

Public Accounts Committee

2. Executive Summary

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) launched this review to conduct follow up on the implementation of recommendations arising from two Comptroller and Auditor General (C&AG) reports namely Handling and Learning from Complaints (2020) and Handling and Learning from Complaints Follow up (2023). It also followed up on recommendations that had been made by the PAC during the last Assembly within its "Performance Management" report (2022).

Implementation of the Customer Feedback Policy

The PAC found that there have been considerable steps taken by the Government of Jersey to implement the Customer Feedback Policy, including emphasis on monitoring, analysis and evaluating the feedback which has been received. The systems and processes in place appear to be operating as intended and providing the relevant data to the Government. Training is provided to staff, although the PAC has not seen evidence of the take up of this at this stage.

The Government of Jersey has collected data across the past three years which clearly outlines the feedback received and the category it relates to (i.e. Complaints, Compliments, Comments, Suggestions). There appears to be a general trend of increased feedback across all channels provided by Government which points to an overall trend of Government having a richer source of information to draw from in relation to customer feedback. However, the total volume of feedback received by Government is still low in relation to the overall number of engagements that Islanders have with Government

The Government of Jersey has updated the definition of unable to resolve' complaints to outcome not achievable' to better reflect the reasons why a complaint may not be resolved, however, it does not appear that this definition is included within the online version of the Customer Feedback Policy. There has been a 42% increase in complaints that are classified as not upheld' between 2023 and 2024. The PAC has recommended that the online version of the Customer Feedback Policy is updated to include these definitions of outcome not achievable' and not upheld' along with the steps that Government takes when concluding a complaint falls under each of these categories. This should be completed during the next scheduled review of the policy.

Feedback from suppliers and contractors to Government can be captured within the various feedback channels, however, the PAC has found that there is not as strong a focus on ensuring this data is inputted into the Customer Feedback Management System. The Government of Jersey has committed to reviewing current practices to ensure supplier and contractor feedback is recorded and managed in the most appropriate way. The PAC welcomes this commitment and would recommend that this review is undertaken with the outcomes of this review reported to it by the end of 2025. Furthermore, all feedback received directly from suppliers/contractors within alternative feedback channels by Commercial Services should be inputted to the Customer Feedback Management System as a matter of course.

Implementation of C&AG recommendations

The PAC found that the processes within Health and Care Jersey now align with the overall Government processes within the Customer Feedback Policy which was not the case previously. The Customer Feedback Policy has also been implemented within schools and the data previously collected and addressed by the schools is now also being reported and monitored centrally.

There is an acknowledgment from Government that it has to continue work to build public trust in its systems in order to encourage more people to come forward with feedback. It is the view of the PAC that rejecting recommendation three of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report is a missed opportunity to build on the already positive work that is being undertaken in this area. The PAC has recommended that the Government revisit its response to recommendation three of the Comptroller and Auditor General's 2023 report Handling and Learning from Complaints' and ensure that efforts to identify and support those customers that are under-represented in providing feedback or who state that they find providing feedback difficult, are set out in one place in a cross-departmental action plan with priorities and timeframes. This would assist in the ongoing improvements being made in this area and assist in building trust in Government systems. This should be completed by the end of quarter four 2025.

The Government of Jersey publishes an annual summary of Customer Feedback data on its website. Currently the information for 2022 and 2023 is available. Whilst the annual summary of customer feedback data is available on the Government website, it is only accessible through the page titled give us your feedback'. It is the view of the PAC that more can be done to make this specific information accessible to members of the public. The PAC has recommended that the Government of Jersey creates a specific page on the Government website dedicated to customer feedback data to assist in enhancing transparency for members of the public.

The PAC notes that there was a significant spike in complaints received by the Infrastructure and Environment Department during 2023 as a result of the decant of sports facilities from Fort Regent and the opening of the new gym at Springfield. However, the PAC is concerned that there has also been a percentage increase in complaints received by the Department for Infrastructure and Environment in relation to regulation (100% increase) and planning (74% increase) between 2023 and 2024. Overall, in 2024, 70% of the feedback received by the department in relation to planning related to complaints. This compares to 39% of the total feedback in 2023.The PAC has recommended that there should be a review to understand the reasons why there has been such a substantial increase in complaints between 2023 and 2024 in relation to planning and regulation activities.

Areas for prioritisation

There is a prevailing view within the Government of Jersey that it wishes to receive more feedback in order to continuously develop and improve services to Islanders. This is welcomed by the PAC, and it would reiterate this point that increased feedback will provide more opportunities for learning and development by Government. Noting that all Government departments are now included within the Quality Assurance Framework reporting and evaluation (including Health and Care Jersey from Q1 2025 and schools from September 2024) this will increase the ability for Government to ensure the policy is being implemented consistently across all departments. There is, however, a need to ensure that learning from the Quality Assurance Framework is being fully implemented. The PAC has recommended an evaluation of the Quality Assurance Framework during 2025 to ensure that the Customer Feedback Policy is being applied consistently across all departments. This review should also examine how Government is ensuring learning from the Quality Assurance Framework is being implemented across services.

The Customer Feedback Policy encourages reporting on the Customer Feedback Management System which in turn provides the information to the relevant department This does not extend, however, to Arm's Length Bodies or the parishes. There are small pockets of signposting available (e.g. the Love Jersey App), however, more work is required to identify how Government effectively sign posts customers to services being conducted on its behalf or by other authorities. The PAC has recommended that Government examines ways in which it can enhance signposting for customers who are making a complaint about services provided by Arm's Length Bodies or the parishes.

The Government of Jersey does not keep a central record of recommendations that have been made by the States of Jersey Complaints Board and has not established a process to monitor whether those recommendations have been implemented or not. The Assistant Minister for Sustainable Economic Development is currently examining the processes in place for the independent resolution of complaints. The PAC would urge this review to consider the type of system that the Government would like to see for the independent management of complaints in  order  to  ensure  value for money. In the  meantime, the  PAC recommends that  any recommendations of the States of Jersey Complaints Panel are recorded centrally and reported on the extent to which these have been actioned and implemented across the relevant services.

Public Engagement

As part of the review, the PAC undertook a short survey to gauge public views on the current customer feedback and complaints process. The headline findings from the survey were:

• 44% of respondents said they knew how to lodge feedback or make a complaint to the Government of Jersey.

• 46% of respondents said that they did not know how to lodge feedback or make a complaint to the Government of Jersey.

• 45.5% of respondents did not find the process user friendly

• 43% of respondents did not have trust and confidence in the customer feedback process with a further

• 44% felt they were not kept informed of the progress of their complaint,

The findings of the Government's post complaint surveys conducted in 2024 found that 52% of respondents were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied that their complaint was dealt with in a timely manner. Furthermore, 49% of respondents were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the overall handling of their complaint (not the outcome). These findings, when considered against the findings of the PAC's survey, would suggest that further work is required in order to improve the trust and confidence, and improvements are required to the process for gathering feedback from the post complaints survey.

The Government of Jersey has provided evidence of improvements that have been made to services as a result of the feedback received. Information is available on the Government website on improvements made from feedback; however, these appear to be only related to changes within Revenue Jersey. The PAC was not able to find further evidence of all improvements made being reported in the same place. It has recommended that, by the end of 2025, the Government publish as a matter of course on its website all learning actions arising from customer feedback, including complaints. This will increase transparency and assist in building trust and confidence in the systems.

3. Findings and Recommendations

1. Findings

FINDING 1

There have been considerable steps taken by the Government of Jersey to implement the Customer Feedback Policy, including emphasis on monitoring and evaluating the feedback which has been received. The systems and processes in place appear to be operating as intended and providing the relevant data to the Government.

FINDING 2

There  are  numerous  processes  in  place  throughout  the  Government  departments  and Executive Leadership Team to monitor the information being provided through the Customer Feedback Policy. These processes include customer surveys, analysis by departmental feedback managers and quarterly reporting through the Executive Leadership Team.

FINDING 3

The Government of Jersey has implemented mandatory training for all new starters in respect of the Customer Feedback Policy. There are also numerous other training initiatives which have been rolled out, some to all employees and other more bespoke packages for specific departments. The PAC has not, however, had sight of the take up for this training so cannot comment on the reach or impact of the training.

FINDING 4

The Government of Jersey has collected data across the past three years which clearly outlines the feedback received and the category it relates to (i.e. Complaints, Compliments, Comments, Suggestions).

FINDING 5

From the Customer Feedback data examined by the PAC between 2022 and 2024 there appears to be a general trend of increased feedback across all channels including the online form, email, in person, by telephone, social media and letter or feedback card. This points to an overall trend of government having a richer source of information to draw from in relation to customer feedback. However, the total volume of feedback received by Government is still low in relation to the overall number of engagements that Islanders have with Government.

FINDING 6

The Government of Jersey updated the definition of unable to resolve' complaints to outcome not achievable' in order to better reflect the reasons why a complaint may not be resolved. This is in order to highlight that a complaint may have been taken forward, but the customers desired outcome is not achievable or possible. It does not appear that this definition is included within the online version of the Customer Feedback Policy.

FINDING 7

There appears to be a 42% increase in complaints that are classified as not upheld' between 2023 and 2024. This definition is applied to complaints that have been investigated, and no merit has been found in the complaint, or the department is not able to validate the customer's' experience. It does not appear that this definition is included within the online version of the Customer Feedback Policy.

FINDING 8

Feedback from suppliers and contractors to Government is able to be captured within the various feedback channels, however, the PAC has found that there is not as strong a focus on ensuring this data is inputted into the Customer Feedback Management System. It is intended for the Government of Jersey to review the current practices in 2025 to ensure contractor feedback is recorded and managed in the most appropriate way.

FINDING 9

The Government of Jersey has implemented recommendation one of the Comptroller and Auditor General's 2023 report Handling and Learning from Complaints' and the processes within Health and Care Jersey now align with the overall Government processes within the Customer Feedback Policy.

FINDING 10

The Government of Jersey rejected recommendation three of the Comptroller and Auditor General's 2023 report Handling and Learning from Complaints' on the basis that it was already being implemented as business as usual by departments through the various methods of communication available to customers who wished to give feedback.

FINDING 11

There are numerous cluster' groups which have been established to gather feedback from various demographics on the Island, including equality, diversity, learning disability and a children's cluster. There is, however, an acknowledgment from Government that it has to continue work to build public trust in its systems in order to encourage more people to come forward with feedback. It is the view of the PAC that rejecting recommendation three of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report is a missed opportunity to build on the already positive work that is being undertaken in this area.

FINDING 12

Health and Care Jersey data in relation to feedback and complaints is now provided to Employment, Social Security and Housing for inclusion in the overall quarterly reporting of feedback information across Government. This will first be reported during quarter one 2025.  

FINDING 13

The Customer Feedback Policy has been implemented within schools and the data previously collected and addressed by the schools is now also being reported and monitored centrally. This has been implemented at the start of the academic year in September 2024.

FINDING 14

The Government of Jersey publishes an annual summary of Customer Feedback data on its website. Currently the information for 2022 and 2023 is available.

FINDING 15

Whilst the annual summary of customer feedback data is available on the Government website, it is only accessible through the page titled give us your feedback'. It is the view of the PAC that more can be done to make this specific information accessible to members of the public.

FINDING 16

There was a significant spike in complaints received by the Infrastructure and Environment Department during 2023 as a result of the decant of sports facilities from Fort Regent and the opening of the new gym at Springfield.

FINDING 17

There  has  been  a  percentage  increase  in  complaints  received  by  the  Department  for Infrastructure in relation to regulation (100% increase) and planning (74% increase) between 2023 and 2024. Overall, in 2024, 70% of the feedback received by the department in relation to planning related to complaints. This compares to 39% of the total feedback in 2023.

FINDING 18

There is a prevailing view within the Government of Jersey that it wishes to receive more feedback in order to continuously develop and improve services to Islanders. This is welcomed by the PAC, and it would reiterate this point that increased feedback will provide more opportunities for learning and development by Government.

FINDING 19

Noting that all Government departments are now included within the Quality Assurance Framework reporting and evaluation (including Health and Care Jersey from Q1 2025 and schools from September 2024) this will increase the ability for Government to ensure the policy is being implemented consistently across all departments. There is, however, a need to ensure that learning from the Quality Assurance Framework is being fully implemented.

FINDING 20

The  Customer  Feedback  Policy  encourages  reporting  on  the  Customer  Feedback Management System which in turn provides the information to the relevant department This does not extend, however, to Arm's Length Bodies or the parishes. There are small pockets of signposting available (e.g. the Love Jersey App), however, more work is required to identify how Government effectively sign posts customers to services being conducted on its behalf or by other authorities.

FINDING 21

The Government of Jersey does not keep a central record of recommendations that have been made by the States of Jersey Complaints Board and has not established a process to monitor whether those recommendations have been implemented or not.

FINDING 22

The Assistant Minister for Sustainable Economic Development is currently examining the processes in place for the independent resolution of complaints. The PAC would urge this review  to  consider  the  type  of  system  that  the  Government  would  like  to  see  for  the independent management of complaints in order to ensure value for money.

FINDING 23

In response to question one of the PAC's survey, 44% of respondents said they knew how to lodge feedback or make a complaint to the Government of Jersey. 46% of respondents said that they did not know how to lodge feedback or make a complaint to the Government of Jersey. A further 10% stated that they were not sure how to lodge feedback or make a complaint to the Government of Jersey. It is interesting to note that the responses to Yes' and No' are broadly equal, indicating a mixed understanding of how to submit feedback or a complaint across the respondents to the survey.

FINDING 24

In response to question two of the PAC's survey it found that 45.5% of respondents did not find the process user friendly. Furthermore, 8% of respondents were not sure whether the process was clear and user friendly or not. 20% of the respondents stated they found the process to be clear and user friendly.

FINDING 25

In response to question three of the PAC's survey it found that 43% of respondents did not have trust and confidence in the customer feedback process with a further 24% stating they were not sure. Only 10% of respondents answered yes to this question.

FINDING 26

In response to question four of the PAC's survey it found that 44% felt they were not kept informed of the progress of their complaint, with a further 24% of respondents saying they were not sure. 10% of respondents said they had been kept informed.

FINDING 27

The findings of the Government's post complaint surveys conducted in 2024 found that 52% of respondents were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied that their complaint was dealt with in a timely manner. Furthermore, 49% of respondents were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the overall handling of their complaint (not the outcome). These findings, when considered against the findings of the PAC's survey, would suggest that further work is required in order to improve the trust and confidence.

FINDING 28

The Government of Jersey has provided evidence of improvements that have been made to services as a result of the feedback received. Information is available on the Government website on improvements made from feedback; however, these appear to be only related to changes within Revenue Jersey. The PAC was not able to find further evidence of all improvements made being reported in the same place.

2. Recommendations

RECOMMENDATION 1

The online version of the Customer Feedback Policy should be updated to include the definitions and of outcome not achievable' and not upheld' when referring to the outcomes of complaints. This should also include clear criteria's/thresholds for how complaints will be determined to fall into each of these categories. The steps that are taken by Government when concluding a complaint falling under each of these categories should also be included in the online version of the policy for transparency. This should be completed during Quarter Three of 2025.

RECOMMENDATION 2

The Government of Jersey has committed to reviewing current practices to ensure supplier and contractor feedback is recorded and managed in the most appropriate way. The PAC welcomes this commitment and would recommend that this review is undertaken with the outcomes of this review reported to the PAC by the end of 2025.

RECOMMENDATION 3

All feedback received directly from suppliers/contractors within alternative feedback channels by Commercial Services should be inputted to the Customer Feedback Management System as a matter of course. This should be fully implemented by the end of Quarter 4 2025.

RECOMMENDATION 4

The Government of Jersey should revisit its response to recommendation three of the Comptroller and Auditor General's 2023 report Handling and Learning from Complaints' and ensure that efforts to identify and support those customers that are under-represented in providing feedback or who state that they find providing feedback difficult, are set out in one place in a cross-departmental action plan with priorities and timeframes. This would assist in the ongoing improvements being made in this area and assist in building trust in Government systems. This should be completed by the end of quarter four 2025.

RECOMMENDATION 5

The  Government  of  Jersey  should  create  a  specific  page  on  the Government  website dedicated to customer feedback data. This would enhance transparency in relation to the volumes and characteristics of feedback the Government receives and increase accessibility for members of the public. This should be completed by the end of quarter three 2025.

RECOMMENDATION 6

The Chief Officer for Infrastructure and Environment should undertake a review to understand the reasons why there has been such a substantial increase in complaints between 2023 and 2024 in relation to planning and regulation activities undertaken by the department. The findings and actions identified from this review should be reported by the end of 2025.

RECOMMENDATION 7

The Government of Jersey should conduct an evaluation of the Quality Assurance Framework during 2025 as a result of the addition of data from Health and Care Jersey and schools in order to ensure that the Customer Feedback Policy is being applied consistently across all departments. This review should also examine how Government is ensuring learning from the Quality Assurance Framework is being implemented across services.

RECOMMENDATION 8

The Government of Jersey should examine ways in which it can enhance signposting for customers who are making a complaint about services provided by Arm's Length Bodies or the parishes. This should be completed by the end of 2025 with the outcomes of the examination reported to the PAC.

RECOMMENDATION 9

The Government of Jersey should ensure that any recommendations of the States of Jersey Complaints Panel are recorded centrally and report on the extent to which these have been actioned and implemented across the relevant services. This should be taken forward as soon as possible so that any future recommendations are able to be recorded immediately.

RECOMMENDATION 10

The Government of Jersey should, by the end of 2025, publish as a matter of course on its website all learning actions arising from customer feedback, including complaints. This will increase transparency and assist in building trust and confidence in the systems.

4. Introduction

1. Background and Context

1. Customer Feedback is a term used by the Government of Jersey to cover the manner in which Islanders can provide comments, compliments or make complaints about their experience with the various services they access. The way an organisation handles complaints is important. There are significant benefits to handling complaints well including providing valuable information about weaknesses in programmes of work, policies and service delivery and stimulating improvement. This also extends to reassuring the public that the organisation is committed to resolving problems; and enhancing accountability and transparency around their resolution.
2. In July 2020 the Comptroller & Auditor General (C&AG) published a report Handling and Learning from Complaints' which reviewed the development and implementation of the Government-wide Customer Feedback Policy introduced in 2019. In summary this review found that the Government had taken important steps and invested in a sound approach, but that more work was required to secure consistent handling of and learning from complaints. The C&AG made 19 recommendations for improvement, all of which were accepted by the Government of Jersey.
3. Later in 2020 the C&AG published Management Information in Education – Follow Up (August 2020). In this review C&AG found that the Children, Young People, Education and Skills Department (CYPES) did not keep a central record of complaints that were dealt with by schools. This meant that there was no evidence-based alert for CYPES that something may be causing concern either within a school or across a number of schools. The C&AG recommended that a mechanism be established to share information between schools and CYPES on the number, type and outcomes of complaints.
4. In March 2022 the PAC published its Performance Management Review. In this review PAC found that a more co-ordinated approach to customer feedback and complaints handling across Departments had been implemented. However, it noted that two major Departments (Health and Education) had implemented their own mechanisms to capture customer' experience and deal with complaints. The PAC made 2 recommendations relating to complaints in its report, that was presented to the States Assembly in March 2022 which the Government accepted.
5. In October 2023, the C&AG published a report titled "Handling and Learning from Complaints - Follow Up", assessing progress on the 19 recommendations from the C&AG's July 2020 report and one from the August 2020 report on Management Information in Education. The C&AG highlighted the Government's significant efforts to update the Customer Feedback Policy since 2020, though inconsistencies in its adoption across departments persisted. Additionally, while processes for monitoring compliance had been developed, they were not yet fully effective.
6. Improvements in the quality of customer feedback information and its analysis had been noted but focus remains on complaint handling mechanics rather than on learning from complaints. No comprehensive action plan exists to ensure easy customer feedback on public services. The C&AG highlighted that the data from the most recent Quality Assurance Framework audit (covering the period from January to August 2023 and excluding HCS data) shows that: only 39% of complaints were recorded as having been acknowledged within the Service Level Agreement (SLA) target time (2 working days); closure of complaints was an average of 32 days over the SLA; and only 7.5% of complaints included an improvement action.

7. Despite expanded Key Performance Indicators (KPIs), public information remains undeveloped, and more transparency is needed. The review concluded that 14 of the 20 relevant recommendations have been implemented, five partially implemented, and one not implemented.

2. Key issues

8. The PAC's review has sought to address the following key issues in relation to how the Government of Jersey handles, and learns from complaints:

• To understand and assess the current complaints process and systems in relation to the Government of Jersey and how this has been implemented and embedded across the various departments. It also seeks to establish how the Government of Jersey evaluates the information it receives and monitors the effectiveness of the Customer Feedback Policy. Furthermore, the review seeks to understand how the Government of Jersey is implementing the learning received from complaints in order to improve processes.

• To establish the progress that has been made in implementing the recommendations of the C&AG (and the PAC itself) in relation to handling and learning from customer feedback and complaints.

• To understand and evaluate to what extent all customers of public services are equally enabled, encouraged and supported to provide feedback, including complaints. This also extends to identifying whether the processes that are in place are user friendly and create trust and promote transparency.

3. Work Undertaken by the Committee

8. In order to inform this review, the PAC undertook a call for evidence to gather views from members of the public about the current processes for submitting feedback or a complaint. As a limited number of submissions were received, the PAC agreed to produce a short survey and promote this on the States Assembly social media channels to gather views on the processes. The PAC also held a stand at Grande Marche to discuss the survey and the review face to face with members of the public. A total of 79 responses were received to the survey. This helped the PAC assess views in relation to the user friendliness of the process, public trust in the process and whether respondents knew how to raise feedback or a complaint.
9. The PAC wrote to the Chief Executive Officer in order to gather information in relation to the implementation of the Customer Feedback Policy and received written correspondence in reply. It also undertook three public hearings, one with the Interim Chief Officer for Employment, Social Security and Housing (ESSH, formerly Customer and Local Services) to discuss the overall management of the Customer Feedback Policy and a further two with the Chief Officer for Infrastructure and Environment (I&E) and senior officials from Health Care Jersey (HCJ, formerly Health and Community Services) to discuss specific matters relating to those departments. Additional correspondence was also requested in follow up to all three hearings.

4. Declaration of Potential Conflicts of Interest

10. There were no conflicts of interest declared by Members of the PAC in relation to this review.

5.  Customer Feedback Policy  

1. Overview of the Customer Feedback Policy  

11. The  Government  of  Jersey's  Customer  Feedback  Policy is accessible through the gov.je website and sets  out the purpose and scope of the policy. The policy  purpose is set out as follows:  

The purpose of this policy is to:

• Document the position of the organisation in relation to the management of customer feedback

• Make is easy for customers to provide feedback

• Support a simple and consistent approach to complaint handling as part of the One Gov initiative

• Ensure  that  complaints  are  dealt  with  in  a fair,  unbiased,  timely  and confidential manner

• Enable the organisation to use the insight received to understand the needs of our customers and improve service, satisfaction and performance  [1]

12. The scope of the policy relates to the standard of service provided by Government services, how services and processes are administered, the advice given by services, behaviour of staff, any action or lack of action by staff affecting a customer or group of customers of the department and feedback on policy or law. It should be noted that the policy does not cover the following matters:

13. The Policy goes on to explain the three levels of handling a complaint and the expected timescales for the complaint to be handled, as follows:

3

14. The policy also states that in some cases (particularly complex ones that require a specialist level of investigation at stages two and three) resolution of the complaint may take longer than the timescale stated in the policy. In these cases, it is expected that customers must be kept informed of any extended timescales and progress throughout. [3]Furthermore, it is stated that complainants will be informed of any internal or external review options available to them as an alternative means to resolving a complaint. In the event that a complainant wishes to withdraw a complaint, this can be done so at any time and a written record of any oral conversations will be made. [4]

2. Implementation of the Customer Feedback Policy

15. As per the Terms of Reference for the review, the PAC wished to understand how the Customer Feedback Policy has been implemented to date. In correspondence with the Chief Executive of the Government of Jersey (Chief Executive), the PAC requested an update on how Government had ensured the implementation of the policy across all departments. It was provided with the following information:

ELT [Executive Leadership Team] Quarterly reporting is in place which aligns to overall performance against the Customer Feedback Policy. A Quality Assurance framework is also in place which measures policy adherence based on complaints received.

Mandatory online training is given to all new starters which informs colleagues about the customer feedback policy and their role in ensuring feedback is logged and acted upon.

The Customer Experience team deliver training sessions across GOJ to refresh colleagues on the customer feedback policy.

There is an annual review of the policy which is consulted on with all departments in GoJ and also approved at the cross GOJ Customer Experience Board. [5]

16. During a public hearing with the Interim Chief Officer for Employment, Social Security and Housing (ESSH, formerly Customer and Local Services) the PAC questioned how the system was currently performing:

Acting Chief Officer, Customer and Local Services:  

I think they are performing well. Our system, from a customer perspective we have different ways that customers can give us feedback. The key thing is that we will take feedback in any form. A very popular route is the online form, where we get feedback from customers that that is a simple, easy to use form and it is popular to use. They can also give feedback face to face, telephone, in person, in those different routes. Behind the scenes in terms of how we administer that feedback, we have a system that we call the customer feedback management system. That is automatically linked with the online form and that is where government colleagues will log feedback that is received, whether it be a complaint, a compliment, a suggestion, a comment. I believe that system is fit for purpose. It is performing well. It is a system that has been built in-house by our digital services colleagues. They have recently undertaken a review of that service and that more independent review has concluded that it is fit for purpose. We do obviously have a regular programme of enhancing the system, and so there has been some recent updates which have helped from a usability perspective for colleagues and that sort of thing. So from a system perspective I think everything is in a good place. From a process perspective, we do have an annual review of our customer feedback policy and we also have a cross- government Customer Experience Board. We have a group of departmental feedback managers across all departments and they work well as a network of colleagues from different areas. There is both individual meetings and group monthly meetings and in that group they will talk about things like system functionality, any ideas for improvements on processes, what is working well,

what could be improved on, and that is a useful group to also give us that assurance that we would be knowing how things are going. [6]

17. The PAC was interested to understand the role that ESSH play in relation to customer feedback management and complaints across Government. During the public hearing with the Chief Officer for ESSH, the following key points were summarised in relation to the role of ESSH:

• Centre of Excellence: The department is considered a centre of excellence within the government.

• Customer Feedback Manager: There is a dedicated manager to support colleagues in handling complaints effectively.

• Support  Role:  The  department  supports  other  government  colleagues  in managing complaints but does not handle cross-government feedback.

• Departmental  Responsibility:  Individual  departments  are  responsible  for managing and responding to their own feedback. The department provides support when needed. [7]

18. Building on the information provided, the PAC further questioned the work that was undertaken  by  ESSH  in  relation  to  supporting  other  departments.  The  Head  of Customer Experience provided the following information during a public hearing:

Head of Customer Experience, Customer and Local Services:

For all departments. So our quality assurance process, other departments do the quality assurance checks on their feedback and what we do is provide support and advice in terms of how best practice looks, what good complaint handling looks like, what is going well, and then what areas for improvement there may be. That is what Sophie was referring to before, that monthly meeting that we have with the departmental feedback managers as we called them, because  they  are  representatives  from  each  department,  and  also  the Customer Experience Board is where those conversations take place in terms of what is going well and what could be done better. So that is where the conversations take place. [8]

19. Overall, the PAC has noted that there have been considerable steps taken in order to implement the policy with a number of areas of support available for departments through  ESSH.  There  is  also  considerable  emphasis  placed  on  monitoring  the feedback  received  through  the  Customer  Feedback  system  which  is  to  be commended. The PAC has also noted that the system appears to be operating well following the reports and recommendations of the C&AG.

FINDING 1

There have been considerable steps taken by the Government of Jersey to implement the Customer Feedback Policy, including emphasis on monitoring and evaluating the feedback which has been received. The systems and processes in place appear to be operating as intended and providing the relevant data to the Government.

3. Evaluation and Monitoring of the Customer Feedback Policy

20. The PAC was interested to understand how the Government of Jersey evaluated and monitored the success or otherwise of the Customer Feedback Policy. It was informed that the Government of Jersey has both qualitative and quantitative processes and metrics in place for evaluating the quality and effectiveness of customer feedback and complaints.[9] Further information was provided in relation to the measures that are in place in order to monitor this:

Measures include:

• Customer satisfaction of complaint handling and outcome (A survey is sent to every complainant when a complaint is closed on the Government feedback system).

• How we performed in respect of the following, measured monthly as part of departmental feedback manager quality assurance review:

• Quality of communication
• Policy adherence
• Process adherence
• Complaints closed within agreed timeframes[10]

21. Customer Surveys and Quality Assurance is an ongoing process within departments. Results are reviewed monthly within departments, and at the cross Government of Jersey Feedback Managers group. The ELT have quarterly reporting of this evaluation. This was further highlighted by the Interim Chief Officer for ESSH during a public hearing:

From a process perspective, we do have an annual review of our customer feedback policy and we also have a cross-government Customer Experience Board.  We  have  a  group  of  departmental  feedback  managers  across  all departments and they work well as a network of colleagues from different areas. There is both individual meetings and group monthly meetings and in that group they will talk about things like system functionality, any ideas for improvements on processes, what is working well, what could be improved on, and that is a useful group to also give us that assurance that we would be knowing how things are going.[11]

22. Noting the processes in place to evaluate and monitor the policy, the PAC also requested further information on any improvements that had been identified as a result of these processes. The following information was provided:

• Improved communication with complainants during the process of their complaint, including better agreement with customers on expectations and timeframes from the outset.

• Improved method of early resolution e.g. telephone calls and meetings can be more effective than only responding in writing.

• Timeliness of complaint response has improved as a result of reporting and renewed focus in this area.

• Increase number of feedback including complaints directly logged/recorded by colleagues.[12]

23. It is noted that there have been numerous improvements in the monitoring of the complaints process and feedback policy.

FINDING 2

There  are  numerous  processes  in  place  throughout  the  Government  departments  and Executive Leadership Team to monitor the information being provided through the Customer Feedback Policy. These processes include customer surveys, analysis by departmental feedback managers and quarterly reporting through the Executive Leadership Team.

4. Training and Development

24. The PAC requested information from Government about the training and development opportunities that exist for employees to understand the customer feedback policy. The Government of Jersey provided the following response about the options available and noted that there is a programme of training and development initiatives available to colleagues handling customer feedback and complaints:

• Mandatory online training for all new starters explaining the policy, how to log and handle feedback received.

• Customer service skills which includes, developing tools and techniques for managing  expectations  and  challenging  situations,  and  developing communication skills that will support colleagues delivering news customers might not want to hear.

• Early resolution to complaints for front line colleagues.

• Complex Complaints handling training which focusses on colleagues who respond to complex complaints that are not resolved at first point of contact in terms of how to investigate and resolve complaints.[13]

25. The PAC was also informed that the Customer Experience Team have delivered the following lite bite' training to a range of GOJ colleagues:

• The Value of Customer Feedback

• Understanding the Customer Feedback Policy

• The Customer Feedback Management System

• The Customer Experience Dashboard

• ACE+ (Accessible, Consistent, Easy, Think Ahead)[14]

26. In addition, the PAC was informed that the Customer Experience team support any adhoc training requests from Government of Jersey departments with the following having been delivered in 2024:

• The Customer Experience Dashboard for Infrastructure & Environment

• The  Value  of  Customer  Feedback  and  Understanding  Customer  Experience Training - 2 sessions for Planning Officers and 1 session for Building control

• Introducing the Customer Feedback Management System to schools and follow up training in schools

• In person school visits for bespoke training and demonstrations

• The Customer Feedback Management System for Treasury & Exchequer [15]

27. The PAC notes that the training and development programmes previously outlined are in order to support staff to ensure that complaints are managed in a consistent and effective  manner.  Furthermore,  each  government  department  has  a  Department Feedback manager who has responsibility for ensuring department compliance with the customer feedback policy, cascading relevant internal training and learning, and implementing any lessons learned from quality assurance undertaken. [16]A complaints handling manual provides colleagues with guidance on how complaints should be dealt with.[17]

FINDING 3

The Government of Jersey has implemented mandatory training for all new starters in respect of the Customer Feedback Policy. There are also numerous other training initiatives which have been rolled out, some to all employees and other more bespoke packages for specific departments. The PAC has not, however, had sight of the take up for this training so cannot comment on the reach or impact of the training.

5. Complaints Data

28. In order to understand the volume of feedback received by the Government of Jersey, it requested data from the last three years that had been collected by Government in respect of complaints, compliments, comments and suggestions.

2024 data

19

2023 data

20

2022 data

21

FINDING 4

The Government of Jersey has collected data across the past three years which clearly outlines the feedback received and the category it relates to (i.e. Complaints, Compliments, Comments, Suggestions).

FINDING 5

From the Customer Feedback data examined by the PAC between 2022 and 2024 there appears to be a general trend of increased feedback across all channels including the online form, email, in person, by telephone, social media and letter or feedback card. This points to an overall trend of government having a richer source of information to draw from in relation to customer feedback. However, the total volume of feedback received by Government is still low in relation to the overall number of engagements that Islanders have with Government

6. Complaints unable to be resolved, withdrawn or not upheld

29. Complaints classified as unable to resolve' have the following definition within the Customer Feedback Management System:  

This is a scenario where we have attempted to resolve with the customer however, we are not being able to move further through the process. [18]

30. During 2024, on review of the categories for complaint closures was undertaken by the Government in consultation with the Department Feedback Managers. As a result of this  review  the  wording  has  changed  from  unable  to  resolve'  to  outcome  not achievable'. The new definition is:

This refers to a situation where we have not taken a complaint forward because it is not possible for us to achieve what the customer wants us to do as a result of their complaint (e.g. where their desired outcome is unreasonable), where we have insufficient information to take any action and the customer remained anonymous,  or  where the  complaint  was  submitted  beyond the  specified timeframe for lodging complaints.[19]

31. The following data was provided by the Government in relation to the number of complaints that fell within this category in 2023. It should be noted that this table does not contain complaints within Health and Care Jersey (HCJ) as the department did not collect this data within its own systems (Datix): [20]

32. The PAC was informed that, following changes initiated from C&AG recommendations, HCJ data in relation to the outcome not achievable' category started to be recorded from April 2024. As such, the PAC requested an update to the table above for 2024 in order to examine if this contributed further to the numbers. The following table was provided for 2024, including HCJ data:[21]

33. Following  the  public  hearing  with  the  Interim  Chief  Officer  for  ESSH,  the  PAC requested further details of the criteria that was used by Government to determine that a complaint had been updated to outcome not achievable'. The Interim Chief Officer provided the following response:

Complaints classified as unable to resolve' had the following definition (until 13 November 2024):

This is a scenario where we have attempted to resolve with the customer however, we are not being able to move further through the process. This refers to a situation where we have not taken a complaint forward because it is not possible for us to achieve what the customer wants us to do as a result of their complaint (e.g. where their desired outcome is unreasonable), where we have insufficient  information  to  take  any  action  and  the  customer  remained anonymous,  or  where the  complaint  was  submitted  beyond the  specified timeframe for lodging complaints.[22]

Outcome not achievable' refers to a situation where we have not taken a complaint  forward  because  it  is  not  possible  for  us  to  achieve  what  the customer wants us to do as a result of their complaint (e.g. where their desired outcome is unreasonable), where we have insufficient information to take any action and the customer remained anonymous, or where the complaint was submitted beyond the specified timeframe for lodging complaints.[23]

34. There was a total of 123 complaints in 2023 and 92 complaints in 2024 that were categorised as unable to resolve/outcome not achievable. This was set out in the following  information  from  the  Chief  Officer  for  ESSH  including  the  number  of complaints that were not upheld during those years:[24]

Complaints classified as not upheld' have the following definition: Where we investigated and found that the complaint does not have merit. We are not able to validate the customer's experience'.[25]

35. The PAC notes that there has been a 42% increase (70) in complaints not being upheld between 2023 and 2024. Noting the overall trend of increased feedback since 2022, the PAC is surprised to see the increase in complaints not being upheld.
36. The definitions of outcome not achievable' and not upheld' do not appear to be included in online version of the customer feedback policy. This should be updated by the Government of Jersey to include the definitions of the above as well as the steps and processes that would be expected by a customer should these apply to their complaint.
37. In terms of complaints that were withdrawn in 2023 and 2024, the PAC was provided with the following data by the Government of Jersey:

There was a total of 5 complaints in 2023 and 2 complaints in 2024 recorded as withdrawn by customers in the Customer Feedback Management System (CFMS). This information is not recorded by HCJ on Datix system.[26]

FINDING 6

The Government of Jersey updated the definition of unable to resolve' complaints to outcome not achievable' in order to better reflect the reasons why a complaint may not be resolved. This is in order to highlight that a complaint may have been taken forward, but the customers desired outcome is not achievable or possible. It does not appear that this definition is included within the online version of the Customer Feedback Policy.

FINDING 7

There appears to be a 42% increase in complaints that are classified as not upheld' between 2023 and 2024. This definition is applied to complaints that have been investigated, and no merit has been found in the complaint, or the department is not able to validate the customer's' experience. It does not appear that this definition is included within the online version of the Customer Feedback Policy.

RECOMMENDATION 1

The online version of the Customer Feedback Policy should be updated to include the definitions and of outcome not achievable' and not upheld' when referring to the outcomes of complaints. This should also include clear criteria's/thresholds for how complaints will be determined to fall into each of these categories. The steps that are taken by Government when concluding a complaint falling under each of these categories should also be included in the online version of the policy for transparency. This should be completed during Quarter Three of 2025.

7. Complaints from suppliers and contractors

38. One area the PAC was interested in gathering information on was any complaints processes that were/are in place for suppliers and contractors engaging with the Government of Jersey. Specifically, the PAC wished to know whether any processes existed within HCJ to gather feedback from the numerous suppliers/commissioned services that engage with that department.
39. The PAC was informed that Commercial Services collects data on complaints and feedback from commercial suppliers through a number of channels. This includes commercial suppliers providing goods and services to HCS. Any feedback is reviewed and addressed by the team and feedback is also used to identify themes and opportunities to improve the service.[27] Furthermore, the following details were given on the ways in which suppliers can provide feedback:

Commercial Services enquiry channels:  In 2023, Commercial Services implemented an enquiry management system to more effectively deal with customer enquiries (including supplier ones). The two main channels are commercialservices@connect.gov.je and suppliers@connect.gov.je. Examples include requesting assistance with the Ariba portal, supplier onboarding, contract management, and supplier master data management (updating bank details etc.). Support or help is provided directly to suppliers.

The CFMS (Customer Feedback Management System): The central government feedback system allows any customer, including suppliers, to log complaints, compliments, comments and suggestions. Supplier related feedback is forwarded to Commercial Services for review and to respond as required.

The Government of Jersey customer rating survey: A link to the rating survey is included in relevant staff email signatures and in automated email notifications from the above Commercial Services enquiry channels.

Online forms 5* rating system:  Commercial Services online forms, for example, the Supplier Onboarding Request form, automatically present users with the option of completing a feedback rating after submitting a form. For example, feedback on the Supplier Onboarding Request form has been used to design the new onboarding process which is due to be launched in 2025.[28]

40. In addition, the PAC was informed that HCJ directly engages with commissioned services providers in Jersey and discusses feedback during their quarterly service review sessions.[29] The feedback is recorded by the provider in their quarterly service report given to HCS. Issues are discussed and addressed individually. The HCJ commissioning team also provide individual points of contact for each provider.[30]
41. The PAC also requested information from ESSH about whether overall information from suppliers and contractors (not just those working with HCJ) was recorded. Whilst the same avenues were highlighted by the Chief Officer for ESSH as outlined by the Chief Officer for HCJ, it was recognised that there may not be as strong a focus on recording  organisation/supplier  feedback  on  the  CFMS  (Customer  Feedback Management System) due to the information being captured in alternative channels.[31]

42. It was also noted by the Chief Officer for ESSH that current practices will be reviewed in 2025 to ensure supplier and contractor feedback is recorded and managed in the most appropriate way.[32] Commercial Services are also intending to survey suppliers during 2025.[33]

FINDING 8

Feedback from suppliers and contractors to Government is able to be captured within the various feedback channels, however, the PAC has found that there is not as strong a focus on ensuring this data is inputted into the Customer Feedback Management System. It is intended for the Government of Jersey to review the current practices in 2025 to ensure contractor feedback is recorded and managed in the most appropriate way.

RECOMMENDATION 2

The Government of Jersey has committed to reviewing current practices to ensure supplier and contractor feedback is recorded and managed in the most appropriate way. The PAC welcomes this commitment and would recommend that this review is undertaken with the outcomes of this review reported to the PAC by the end of 2025.

RECOMMENDATION 3

All feedback received directly from suppliers/contractors within alternative feedback channels by Commercial Services should be inputted to the Customer Feedback Management System as a matter of course. This should be fully implemented by the end of Quarter 4 2025.

6.  Previous Comptroller and Auditor General and PAC recommendations

1. Progress made from previous recommendations

43. The PAC noted at the outset of its review that all of the recommendations from the 2020 C&AG report have all been implemented by the Government of Jersey. [34]In relation to the follow up C&AG report from 2023, it was noted in correspondence from the Chief Executive Officer in October 2024 that all but one recommendation had been implemented in full. [35]The PAC has identified specific recommendations from its follow up that it will address below:

2. Recommendation One

44. The one outstanding recommendation highlighted by the Chief Executive Officer within his October 2024 correspondence was as follows: [36]

45. The PAC noted that the recommendation was initially intended to be implemented by the end of June 2024, however, it was advised by the Chief Executive that this had not been achieved within his October 2024 correspondence.[37] Instead it was noted that the recommendation was due to be implemented in full by December 2024. The PAC questioned why there had been a delay in implementing the recommendation during a public  hearing  with  the  Interim  Chief  Nurse  and  Director  of  Improvement  and Innovation, HCS and was provided with the following information:

Interim Chief Nurse, Health and Community Services:  

It was not implemented in June 2024 because we had some gaps in the patient experience team. So, we did not have a manager within that team to drive it forward. It has, however, been completed and it has been approved by the H.C.S. (Health and Community Services) E.L.T. (Executive Leadership Team) and is implemented now.[38]

46. The PAC questioned further what improvements had been made as a result of the implementation of this recommendation now that a manager within the team had been appointed to drive it forward.  

Interim Chief Nurse, Health and Community Services:

So, the recommendation was really to set out who manages the complaints at what point in the process, so at stage 1, stage 2 and stage 3, because previous to this there had been some discrepancies where the correct person was not managing the complaint at that particular point in the process. So, at stage 1 it maybe had gone too high up within the organisation, where it should have been within the ward or department where the complaint had originated from to be investigated. This has now been resolved. So, stage 1 is investigated within the department with oversight from the care group.[39]

47. It was also noted during the hearing that the management of complaints within HCJ aligns with the overall Customer Feedback Policy in terms of intended response times. [40] Furthermore, the process for managing complaints was summarised as follows:

Stage 1:

• Complaint is logged in the Datix system.
• Feedback officer contacts the complainant to confirm receipt and logging of the complaint.
• Complaint is assigned to the appropriate care group (e.g., medical ward).
• Lead nurse, ward manager, clinicians, and staff investigate the complaint.
• Response may include a face-to-face meeting with the complainant for better communication.

Stage 2:

• If the complainant is not satisfied with the Stage 1 response, the complaint is reviewed by the chiefs of service.
• Further investigation is conducted.
• Another meeting with the complainant may be arranged to address additional concerns.

Stage 3:

• If the complainant is still not satisfied, the complaint is escalated to the medical director and chief nurse.
• A meeting is scheduled to discuss the complaint in detail.
• Further investigation may be required, and additional meetings may be offered.
• A formal letter can be provided if requested by the complainant.[41]

48. It is noted that the system through which HCS collects feedback (Datix) is different to the overall Customer Feedback Management System (CFMS) that is used across Government. [42]This is for valid reasons, however, as Datix is a recognised system across health organisations for collecting and monitoring feedback and complaints in a health environment.[43]

The one area of government where there is a slight difference is within the Health Department, who do run with a Datex service. So absolutely customers can still use the online form and that feedback gets passed on straight away to Health, but Health do for good, valid clinical reasons use a system that is well known across very similar health systems.[44]

49. In connection with this, the PAC has discussed key finding 24 of the Performance Management Report (PAC 2/2022), namely:

 "There are different arrangements for capturing complaints and feedback in two major Departments. Health and Community Services operates a separate process within the hospital in order to give patients a choice on how they provide feedback and Children, Young People, Education and Skills are due to introduce a separate mechanism in schools due to incompatibility with the Government's corporate policy."[45]

50. It should be noted that the actions taken in response to the C&AG recommendation align with this finding of the PAC and appear to have addressed the underlying concerns about the information collected by specific departments being in a different format.

FINDING 9

The Government of Jersey has implemented recommendation one of the Comptroller and Auditor General's 2023 report Handling and Learning from Complaints' and the processes within Health and Care Jersey now align with the overall Government processes within the Customer Feedback Policy.

3. Recommendation Three

51. Recommendation three of the C&AG report focussed on the need to develop an overarching action plan to deliver on the stated duty to ensure all customers can easily provide feedback on services delivered by Government. The recommendation was rejected by Government on the basis that this is already part of business as usual with a number of processes in places to ensure this.

52. Whilst the rationale for rejecting this recommendation is noted by the PAC, and it agrees there are a number of processes in place to allow customers to lodge feedback, it would raise a question around how Government is meeting its stated objective, especially in relation to hard-to-reach groups. The PAC questioned how Government ensured this during a public hearing with the Chief Officer for ESSH:

Deputy R.S. Kovacs :  

How does the Government make sure the feedback and complaints system is easy enough to use for everyone? What support is available for people who find it hard to make complaints in the usual way?

Acting Chief Officer, Customer and Local Services:  

So, I suppose that is what for us is really important, that we continually promote and make clear that complaints can be received in any format. It does not have to be via the online form. So, we encourage people to come in and talk to us, phone us. We have been doing ... aside from obviously the child friendly, we have done some work with looking at how can other seldom heard voices, as it were, how easy is it for them to know. Sometimes it is that almost trying to build the trust that we appreciate that feedback. Sometimes it is that we want to ... it is not even about how easy or difficult a form is to fill in. It is trying to get past that point of not being scared to tell us that something was not as good as it could have been. That is where I think a lot of the underpinning work that we need to do is not necessarily about the complaint system per se but is building that trust in government as an entity.[46]

53. This was further expanded on by the Head of Customer Experience:

Head of Customer Experience, Customer and Local Services:  

Yes. So obviously importantly it is just making sure we are continuously improving and acting on feedback. As we all know, changing demographics, new communities on Island. I am part of several cluster groups like equality, diversity, learning disability and children's cluster. My background is about accessibility  and  inclusivity  as  well  in  terms  of my  expertise.  So  we  are constantly seeking feedback so via those cluster groups making sure people are aware of how to raise feedback but equally listening to if there has been any challenges.[47]

54. Whilst the PAC notes that work is being undertaken by Government to identify these hard-to-reach groups and address feedback from the cluster groups, it would suggest that, in rejecting recommendation three, it may have missed an opportunity to build on the already existing good work and practice. The PAC would, therefore, recommend that further consideration is given to developing an action plan in order to formally document the ways in which Government ensures the process is easy to access for all customers (especially hard to reach groups).

FINDING 10

The Government of Jersey rejected recommendation three of the Comptroller and Auditor General's 2023 report Handling and Learning from Complaints' on the basis that it was already being implemented as business as usual by departments through the various methods of communication available to customers who wished to give feedback.

FINDING 11

There are numerous cluster' groups which have been established to gather feedback from various demographics on the Island, including equality, diversity, learning disability and a children's cluster. There is, however, an acknowledgment from Government that it has to continue work to build public trust in its systems in order to encourage more people to come forward with feedback. It is the view of the PAC that rejecting recommendation three of the Comptroller and Auditor General's report is a missed opportunity to build on the already positive work that is being undertaken in this area.

RECOMMENDATION 4

The Government of Jersey should revisit its response to recommendation three of the Comptroller and Auditor General's 2023 report Handling and Learning from Complaints' and ensure that efforts to identify and support those customers that are under-represented in providing feedback or who state that they find providing feedback difficult, are set out in one place in a cross-departmental action plan with priorities and timeframes. This would assist in the ongoing improvements being made in this area and assist in building trust in Government systems. This should be completed by the end of quarter four 2025.

4. Recommendation Seven

55. Recommendation seven of the C&AG report set out the following steps that the Government of Jersey should take in order to ensure quality assurance processes for complaints management across the various departments aligned:[48]

56. The PAC followed up on the implementation of this recommendation during the public hearing with the Chief Nurse and Director of Improvement and Innovation (HCJ) to understand if it was fully implemented and how this had been achieved.

Interim Chief Nurse, Health and Community Services:

Okay. So we did meet the deadline of 1st April. We have a senior nurse who sits within the patient experience team, and that is part of her role is to provide that quality assurance, so to look at all of the complaint responses that go out to the complainant as well as looking at the initial complaint and matching those both up to see if the investigation that has been undertaken and the response that has been provided meets the criteria of whether it has been upheld, partially upheld or not upheld. That data is reported on a quarterly basis through to our C.L.S. We report that through to C.L.S.[49]

57. It is noted now that HCJ provides data to ESSH (formerly CLS) for inclusion in the overall  quality  assurance  framework  reporting. This  has  commenced  in  time  for reporting during quarter one of 2025. [50]This was further confirmed by the Chief Officer for HCJ in written correspondence following the public hearing:  

In 2024, HCS faced challenges to retrieve data collected via the Datix System in time for inclusion in the central government report.

However, the KPIs required for central reporting can now be extracted and presented  by  HCS  within  the  required  timeframe  each  month.  This improvement will be reflected in reports starting from Q1 2025.

HCS will conduct monthly reporting and collaborate with the Employment, Social Security and Housing department to ensure consistent presentation of HCS-related information in future reports.[51]

FINDING 12

Health and Care Jersey data in relation to feedback and complaints is now provided to Employment, Social Security and Housing for inclusion in the overall quarterly reporting of feedback information across Government. This will first be reported during quarter one 2025.  

5. Recommendations Eight and Nine

58. The PAC noted that two recommendations within the C&AG's 2023 report related directly to Children, Young People, Education and Skills (CYPES). These followed on from recommendation one of the report, which Government had identified related to both HCJ and CYPES. The recommendations and responses from Government were as follows:

59. The PAC notes that these recommendations were both accepted, and the processes were implemented for schools in time for the start of the academic year September 2024. [52]The PAC has yet to see full evidence of how this process is working in practice and will be looking further at this once it has had time to be fully embedded within the school environment.

FINDING 13

The Customer Feedback Policy has been implemented within schools and the data previously collected and addressed by the schools is now also being reported and monitored centrally. This has been implemented at the start of the academic year in September 2024.

6. Recommendation Eleven

60. In following up the implementation of recommendations within the 2023 report, the PAC also looked at recommendation 11 and the associated Government response which was as follows:

61. It is noted that Customer Feedback data is available on the gov.je website and this is presented in a summary table similar to the one provided to the PAC and referenced within section 5.5 of this report. The PAC undertook an exercise to search on the Government website for complaints' and feedback' to find this information. Whilst the section give us your feedback' which the data is situated in does show up immediately when using the search function, it is not entirely clear that the data would be found within this section. In terms of accessibility, the PAC would suggest that a specific page on the website should be created to provide this information (with a link also situated within the give us your feedback page). This would in turn assist members of the public when searching for specific data on the website.

FINDING 14

The Government of Jersey publishes an annual summary of Customer Feedback data on its website. Currently the information for 2022 and 2023 is available.

FINDING 15

Whilst the annual summary of customer feedback data is available on the Government website, it is only accessible through the page titled give us your feedback'. It is the view of the PAC that more can be done to make this specific information accessible to members of the public.

RECOMMENDATION 5

The  Government  of  Jersey  should  create  a  specific  page  on  the Government  website dedicated to customer feedback data. This would enhance transparency in relation to the volumes and characteristics of feedback the Government receives and increase accessibility for members of the public. This should be completed by the end of quarter three 2025.

7. Infrastructure and Environment

62. The PAC noted from the Customer Feedback Summary for 2023 that Infrastructure and Environment (I&E) were the department with the second most complaints after HCJ. As such, the PAC agreed to hold a public hearing as part of the review with the Chief Officer in order to identify the impact of the complaints volume on the department and ascertain the reasons for the high number of complaints.
63. The Chief Officer noted that the work of the department necessitated significant contact with members of the public in relation to a number of functions, not all of which are ones that they would choose to interact with. [53]Despite the number of complaints received by the department, the Chief Officer explained that the department had sufficient resources in order to manage the volume.[54]
64. The PAC questioned why the department had received a large volume of complaints during 2023 and it was explained that this spike in complaints related mainly to the decant of sports facilities from Fort Regent and the opening of the new gym at Springfield. [55]This was further explained by the Business Change Manager for I&E during the public hearing:

Business Change Manager:

There were a number of reasons. One, customers were using our feedback channels to vent their frustrations following the public consultation that had closed at that point because they felt that their concerns were not being addressed or they were not being heard. So they were raising issues around the differences in space provision at the new gym at Springfield compared to Fort Regent. They were complaining about the lack of sauna, for example, but we could not make provisions for that at Springfield due to limitations with space there. They were complaining and providing feedback with regard to the showering facilities. Of course, there was much more space at Fort Regent compared to Springfield. The size of classes, gym classes, of course, we had to reduce the size to meet the space provision in Springfield and we had much bigger rooms at Fort Regent. So, it was frustrating for us because we knew we could not do anything with that feedback.[56]

65. The PAC also questioned the Chief Officer for I&E further on the interactions that the department had with members of the public around regulation and the types of complaints that they received. The following explanation was given:

Chief Officer, Infrastructure and Environment:

Yes. So, we have a lot of customer interaction because ... that people are not applying for things, but they are complaining about things that are occurring in the environment. So that is where most of our enforcement cases are. Most of our complaints around service are those people who are applying for things, and they feel either they have not had the decision that they wanted, they may have not had the decision in a timely enough fashion, not quick enough, or they may feel it has been a bit officious. So, they tend to be in those sorts of areas, really.[57]

66. Following the hearing with I&E, the PAC wrote to the Chief Officer in order to gather further data on the level of complaints that the department received in relation to regulation activities, planning and the Statutory Nuisance Law to understand the volume in these areas. It was confirmed by the Chief Officer that the department had received six pieces of feedback related to enforcement activities that they carried out during 2023 and 2024 (1 complaint in 2023 and 5 complaints in 2024)[58]
67. The following tables were also provided by the Chief Officer in relation to specific activities of the department across the last two years:[59]

68. The PAC conducted analysis of the figures above and in relation to regulation activities it is noted that there has been a 100% increase in complaints recorded between 2023 and 2024. Furthermore, there has been an increase of 38% in relation to feedback received for regulation activities between these years. In respect of planning feedback, there has been a 74% increase of complaints recorded between 2023 and 2024. Interestingly there has been a 16% decrease in feedback submitted in relation to planning between 2023 and 2024, however, of the total amount of feedback received in 2024 in respect of planning, 70% of that feedback was logged as complaints. This compares to 2023 where the number of complaints received was 39% of the total feedback received.

FINDING 16

There was a significant spike in complaints received by the Infrastructure and Environment Department during 2023 as a result of the decant of sports facilities from Fort Regent and the opening of the new gym at Springfield.

FINDING 17

There  has  been  a  percentage  increase  in  complaints  received  by  the  Department  for Infrastructure in relation to regulation (100% increase) and planning (74% increase) between 2023 and 2024. Overall, in 2024, 70% of the feedback received by the department in relation to planning related to complaints. This compares to 39% of the total feedback in 2023.

RECOMMENDATION 6

The Chief Officer for Infrastructure and Environment should undertake a review to understand the reasons why there has been such a substantial increase in complaints between 2023 and 2024 in relation to planning and regulation activities undertaken by the department. The findings and actions identified from this review should be reported by the end of 2025.

8. Areas for prioritisation

68. Overall, the PAC is pleased to note that significant work has been undertaken by Government in order to improve the manner in which it manages feedback, including complaints. The whole purpose of the complaints process is to learn from and improve services for the public and utilise best practice in order to improve. It is clear that Government understand the importance of this and that complaints are not something to be feared, but an opportunity to learn from them and ultimately improve.
69. The PAC would reiterate that Government have come a very long way since the C&AG report from 2020 and 2023, and ultimately this is to be commended. There is evidence to show that Government is walking the walk' through the appointment of departmental feedback managers, and there are pockets of good practice across Government. A positive development that the PAC has heard during the course of its review is the Customer Experience Board and Health Board having a section within its meetings where it listens to a customer/patients story. This is a positive development which is to be welcomed.
70. The PAC questioned the Chief Officer for ESSH on how Government is ensuring that it is recording all information in relation to feedback and complaints on the CFMS, noting that this is an area that could be continuously improved on:

Interim Chief Officer, Customer and Local Services:

That is what our big focus and promotion is on. Almost trying to even log those complaints that you have perhaps handled straight away is to help us get that big picture. So I do think that has been a big focus and this year for the first time the C.E.O. (Chief Executive Officer) has put into Chief Officer objectives some  different  elements  around  complaints  handling.  But  one  of  those measures is around the volume of complaints logged by colleagues and that is almost to try and ... it is to get away from a sense that a high complaint number is a bad thing. We really want to get to a point that we welcome feedback.[60]

71. It is noted that there is a commitment from Government to continuously improve in this area and the PAC is pleased to note this. Furthermore, the PAC is pleased to note that Government has expressed a view that it wishes to receive more feedback so it can continue to improve on its services.

FINDING 18

There is a prevailing view within the Government of Jersey that it wishes to receive more feedback in order to continuously develop and improve services to Islanders. This is welcomed by the PAC, and it would reiterate this point that increased feedback will provide more opportunities for learning and development by Government.

72. The Quality Assurance Framework is also a positive development in respect of the policy, and the PAC has seen evidence that this is being implemented effectively in practice. It would, however, reiterate its previous point that data in relation to HCJ has only just been included in the overall Government framework and this will need to be monitored to ensure it is being effectively reported. Ultimately, the PAC would urge Government to continue this course of action and ensure that the policy is consistently applied across Government departments.

73. The CFMS is a good system in terms of prompting Government to respond to complaints and is a clever system in that regard. However, the PAC would suggest that further work is needed in conjunction with the Quality Assurance Framework to pull out and report on all the elements of learning that have been identified through the system. This is, however, a positive position to be in given the strength of data available within this area.

FINDING 19

Noting that all Government departments are now included within the Quality Assurance Framework reporting and evaluation (including Health and Care Jersey from Q1 2025 and schools from September 2024) this will increase the ability for Government to ensure the policy is being implemented consistently across all departments. There is, however, a need to ensure that learning from the Quality Assurance Framework is being fully implemented.

RECOMMENDATION 7

The Government of Jersey should conduct an evaluation of the Quality Assurance Framework during 2025 as a result of the addition of data from Health and Care Jersey and schools in order to ensure that the Customer Feedback Policy is being applied consistently across all departments. This review should also examine how Government is ensuring learning from the Quality Assurance Framework is being implemented across services.

74. The strength of the Customer Feedback Policy, as seen by the PAC, is that it encourages reporting on the Customer Feedback Management System which in turn provides the information to the relevant department. This is, however, only limited to departments within Government and there is no available signposting within the information available for complainants who may wish to raise something relating to an arm's length body or Parish matter (and who may not realise that this is place for the feedback to be provided rather than Government). There are pockets of work across Government which do address these issues (the Love Jersey App which has been developed by I&E for example for members of the public to raise issues which can be signposted to the relevant authority to manage),[61] however, from a public perspective, the Government may wish to examine how best it can assist members of the public by signposting to other organisations where a complaint may be better directed.

FINDING 20

The  Customer  Feedback  Policy  encourages  reporting  on  the  Customer  Feedback Management System which in turn provides the information to the relevant department This does not extend, however, to Arm's Length Bodies or the parishes. There are small pockets of signposting available (e.g. the Love Jersey App), however, more work is required to identify how Government effectively sign posts customers to services being conducted on its behalf or by other authorities.

RECOMMENDATION 8

The Government of Jersey should examine ways in which it can enhance signposting for customers who are making a complaint about services provided by Arm's Length Bodies or the parishes. This should be completed by the end of 2025 with the outcomes of the examination reported to the PAC.

75. One final area for consideration is in relation to the recording and management of complaints that have been taken to the States Complaints Board. The PAC has found that the Government does not document the findings and recommendations of the Board and therefore there is no official way of tracking these recommendations and suggested improvements. In response to written questions to the Chief Executive, this was confirmed as follows:

Can you please provide a summary of how government has responded to the Complaints Board recommendations that have been made over the past 5 years?

There is no central record of how government has responded to the Complaints Board recommendations and therefore we cannot answer this question.[62]

76. There is work being undertaken at present by the Assistant Minister for Sustainable Economic  Development  to  examine  the  processes  in  place  for  the  independent resolution of complaints. Whilst it is not the remit of the PAC to comment on the merits or otherwise of policy, it would encourage Government, as part of this work, to consider what type of system it would like to see to manage complaints independently to ensure value for money and increase public trust.

FINDING 21

The Government of Jersey does not keep a central record of recommendations that have been made by the States of Jersey Complaints Board and has not established a process to monitor whether those recommendations have been implemented or not.

FINDING 22

The Assistant Minister for Sustainable Economic Development is currently examining the processes in place for the independent resolution of complaints. The PAC would urge this review  to  consider  the  type  of  system  that  the  Government  would  like  to  see  for  the independent management of complaints in order to ensure value for money.

RECOMMENDATION 9

The Government of Jersey should ensure that any recommendations of the States of Jersey Complaints Panel are recorded centrally and report on the extent to which these have been actioned and implemented across the relevant services. This should be taken forward as soon as possible so that any future recommendations are able to be recorded immediately.

7.  Public Engagement

1. Survey Findings

77. In order to gather views from the public in relation to the Customer Feedback Process, the PAC undertook a short survey via the States Assembly Social Media Channels and stand at Grand Marche. The PAC wanted to gather information from the public as to whether they understood how to lodge feedback or a complaint to the Government of Jersey as well as whether they felt the process was user-friendly and they had trust and confidence in the process. It was also interested  in understanding whether respondents who had submitted a complaint or feedback were kept informed of progress at all stages of the process. In total, 79 responses were received to the survey. During the review, the PAC also received submissions from members of the public  recounting  their  experience  of  complaints  processes.  These  were acknowledged by the PAC and the individuals were sign posted to the relevant service where required.  
78. In response to question one of the PAC's survey, 44.30% responded to say they did know how to lodge feedback or make a complaint to the Government of Jersey. 45.57% responded that they did not know how to lodge feedback or make a complaint to the Government of Jersey. A further 10.13% stated that they were not sure how to lodge feedback or make a complaint to the Government of Jersey. It is interesting to note that the responses to Yes' and No' are broadly equal, indicating a mixed understanding of how to submit feedback or a complaint across the respondents to the survey.

FINDING 23

In response to question one of the PAC's survey, 44% of respondents said they knew how to lodge feedback or make a complaint to the Government of Jersey. 46% of respondents said that they did not know how to lodge feedback or make a complaint to the Government of Jersey. A further 10% stated that they were not sure how to lodge feedback or make a complaint to the Government of Jersey. It is interesting to note that the responses to Yes' and No' are broadly equal, indicating a mixed understanding of how to submit feedback or a complaint across the respondents to the survey.

2. User Friendliness of Customer Feedback Processes

79. The PAC was particularly interested to follow up on the submissions received and survey results in relation to whether members of the public found the customer feedback process user friendly. The survey results found that 45.5% respondents did not find the process user friendly. Furthermore, 8% of respondents were not sure whether the process was clear and user friendly or not: 20.25% of the respondents stated they found the process to be clear and user friendly.

80. In a response from the CEO (please note this was received prior to the survey results being known to the PAC), the following information was provided in response to a question about the measures that were in place to make the systems user-friendly for members of the public:

Members of the public have a range of methods by which feedback can be provided online, telephone, in person. Feedback received in closer to home events and cluster group meetings have informed changes made to the policy and systems used for feedback.[63]

An example of this is the recent child friendly policy which was designed and has been launched to ensure that providing feedback is more user friendly for this group of islanders.[64]

81. Whilst the various formats for submitting feedback are noted and welcomed by the PAC, and data is collected to highlight the various ways in which this can be provided (please see section 5.5 of this report), it would appear that the majority of feedback is either submitted via the online form or via email. [65]There is, however, a trend between 2022 and 2024 showing an increase of the public submitting feedback through these channels. This does highlight to the PAC that there is a continuing trend of people accessing these formats to submit their feedback. The Government should, however, continue to highlight the various ways in which members of the public can submit feedback.

FINDING 24

In response to question two of the PAC's survey it found that 45.5% of respondents did not find the process user friendly. Furthermore, 8% of respondents were not sure whether the process was clear and user friendly or not. 20% of the respondents stated they found the process to be clear and user friendly.

3. Trust and Confidence in Customer Feedback Processes

82. Question three of the PAC's survey focused on whether respondents had trust and confidence in the customer feedback process if they had ever submitted feedback or a complaint to it. The results found that 43% of respondents did not have trust and confidence in the process with a further 24% stating they were not sure. Only 10% of respondents answered yes to this question.

FINDING 25

In response to question three of the PAC's survey it found that 43% of respondents did not have trust and confidence in the customer feedback process with a further 24% stating they were not sure. Only 10% of respondents answered yes to this question.

83. Question  four  of  the  PAC's  survey  focused  on  whether  respondents  were  kept informed of the progress of their complaint at all stages of the process. 44.30% felt they were not kept informed, with a further 24.05% of responses saying they were not sure. 10.13% respondents said they had been kept informed.

FINDING 26

In response to question four of the PAC's survey it found that 44% felt they were not kept informed of the progress of their complaint, with a further 24% of respondents saying they were not sure. 10% of respondents said they had been kept informed.

84. The PAC was provided with information from the CEO in relation to the post complaint survey which is sent to any person making a complaint in order to provide data relating to their experience of the process. This survey also provides Government with an indicator as to whether the individual submitting the complaint has trust and confidence in the system. The following data was provided to the PAC for 2024:

The  post  complaint  survey  includes  questions  which  indicates  trust  and confidence in the complaints system. This year to date, 435 surveys have been sent with 99 responses.

The findings to the survey include:

• 61% of complainants who replied to the survey find the process of contacting us about their complaint very easy or easy, 14% find it neither easy or difficult and 25% find it very difficult or difficult.

• 42% of complainants who replied to the survey were satisfied that their complaint was dealt with in a timely manner, 6% were neither satisfied or dissatisfied and 52% were very dissatisfied or dissatisfied.

• 41% of complainants who replied to the survey were satisfied with the overall  handling  of  their  complaint,  10%  were  neither  satisfied  or dissatisfied and 49% were very dissatisfied or dissatisfied.[66]

85. The PAC note that the response rate to the survey in 2024 was relatively low compared to the overall number of surveys sent out to individuals who had submitted (99 out of 435). The findings do highlight that 52% of respondents were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied that their complaint was dealt with in a timely manner. [67]Furthermore, 49% of respondents were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the overall handling of their complaint.[68] These findings, when considered against the findings of the PAC's survey would suggest that further work is required in order to improve the trust and confidence of the public in relation to the customer feedback process. However, it should be noted, that the reasons for why individuals may feel dissatisfied with the process are not recorded. Recording reasons for dissatisfaction would provide Government with additional data in order to analyse themes to better improve processes.
86. The PAC was informed of some of the other measures that are used to collect customer satisfactions during a public hearing with the Interim Chief Officer for ESSH. The following information was provided:

We have other measures such as customer satisfaction measures which are just as important to us from a learning perspective. That, for example, is at the end of every phone call, if you phone the Tax Office or phone Customer and Local Services, Customs, these places, you get a short survey at the end saying: "How satisfied were you with the service you received today?" That is also a really important daily touch point of how we are doing, and we are doing really well on that perspective. We are exceeding our targets. Government overall this year is at about 87 per cent satisfaction, and I think that ... it is different because also there can be things there that we pick up that might just be small things that we can catch them almost before they get to the point of being logged as a complaint.[69]

87. It is positive to note that the overall satisfaction recorded after general interactions with Government services was recorded at 87% in 2024. [70] This data relates to daily interactions rather than when a complaint has been raised. As noted previously in this report, the more data that Government has in relation to customer satisfaction then the more it is able to identify areas or trends where improvements may be required.
88. One theme that the PAC noted from comments provided during the survey responses collected at Grande Marche and submissions, was that there did appear to be a view that an independent complaints resolution service (or Ombudsperson) would be welcomed in Jersey. As part of information gathering during the review, members of the PAC met with the Chair (who is also the Northern Ireland Ombudsperson) and Chief Executive of the Ombudsman Association in order to understand the models that were in place within Northern Ireland.
89. It is noted that the Public Services Ombudsman in Northern Ireland oversees all public services in Northern Ireland and the PAC would suggest that this model is something Jersey could examine as part of its work to identify an appropriate complaints resolution function.

FINDING 27

The findings of the Government's post complaint surveys conducted in 2024 found that 52% of respondents were either dissatisfied or very dissatisfied that their complaint was dealt with in a timely manner. Furthermore, 49% of respondents were dissatisfied or very dissatisfied with the overall handling of their complaint (not the outcome). These findings, when considered against the findings of the PAC's survey, would suggest that further work is required in order to improve the trust and confidence.

4. Implementation of Learning from Customer Feedback Processes

90. The Customer Feedback Management System has the facility to log improvements and learning from feedback/complaints. The individual departments are responsible for  tracking  their  learning  and  improvement  actions  arising  from  the feedback/complaints received.[71]
91. The PAC was informed that Departmental Feedback Manager monthly meetings have a specific focus on learning from customer stories which inform best practise across government  departments.  These  learnings  are  reported  and  discussed  at  the Customer Experience Board and Quarterly ELT reports. [72]Furthermore, the PAC was provided  with  information  in  relation  to  how  the  findings  of  these  meetings  are implemented in practice through the You said, we did' campaign on social media:

To help ensure that that learning from feedback is implemented and to close the feedback cycle we have a You said we did' campaign on social media with monthly examples on what changes are made from feedback provided. An example of this is

You said... the Les Quennevais sports centre hall is too noisy at 7am when the doors are opened during classes. We did....we've moved the fans into the spinning studio so the doors can be kept closed[73]

92. The PAC was informed in a letter from the CEO that feedback received regularly leads to continuous improvements across many services. Although in some cases this might be considered small tweaks, it was noted as important as the positive impact can be felt across a number of future customers of a service.[74]
93. Some examples of continuous improvements were highlighted in the social media campaign and via the gov.je website where examples of improvements within Revenue Jersey were provided

79

[75]80

81

94. Further examples of these improvements from feedback can be found on this page on the gov.je website: What we do with your feedback (you said, we did)
95. The CEO also provided the PAC with some additional examples of how themes identified from complaints have led to improvements across Government services:

The themes from complaints have highlighted and led to improvements to –

• better online information and digital offering (for example improved Student Finance HE2 form)

• improving  communication  (written  and  verbal)  for  a  right  first  time' approach

• improvement and maintenance of premises and facilities

• increased customer service training delivered to promote a more consistent and positive customer experience[76]

96. Further  examples  of  improvements  to  services  arising  from  the  C&AG recommendations were provided by the Chief Officer for ESSH:

• GOJ  now  has  a  child  friendly  complaints  process  ensuring  children  know  their feedback is welcomed and how to give it.

• The development of a training and development programme has supported creating a standardised approach across Government in how we handle, resolve and answer complaints.

• The implementation of the quality assurance framework and KPIs has supported the journey and improvement to complaint handling.

• The development and introduction of Departmental Feedback Manager network which includes roles and responsibilities across GoJ for colleagues handling complaints.

• There is a complaint handling manual to support colleagues with consistent handling of complaints across GoJ.[77]

FINDING 28

The Government of Jersey has provided evidence of improvements that have been made to services as a result of the feedback received. Information is available on the Government website on improvements made from feedback; however, these appear to be only related to changes within Revenue Jersey. The PAC was not able to find further evidence of all improvements made being reported in the same place.

RECOMMENDATION 10

The Government of Jersey should, by the end of 2025, publish as a matter of course on its website all learning actions arising from customer feedback, including complaints. This will increase transparency and assist in building trust and confidence in the systems.

8. Conclusion

In conclusion to this report, the PAC is pleased to note that there have been significant steps taken by the Government of Jersey to improve the handling and learning from complaints and customer feedback. There have been numerous positive developments, and the PAC is pleased to note the ongoing commitment from Government to improve in this area. The PAC has made recommendations in order to build on the existing good work as follows:

• The Government of Jersey has updated the definition it uses for complaints that are deemed unable to be resolved to outcome not achievable'. The definitions, however, are not able to be located on the online version of the Customer Feedback Policy. It has recommended that the online version of the policy is updated to include this definition as well as the definition of a complaint not being upheld'. This update should also include the steps that will be taken by Government when a complaint falls into one of these categories.  

• The Government has committed to reviewing current practices to ensure supplier and contractor feedback is recorded and managed in the most appropriate way. The PAC welcomes this commitment and would recommend that this review is undertaken with the outcomes of this review reported to it by the end of 2025. Furthermore, the PAC has recommended that any feedback received by suppliers/contractors through alternative channels is entered onto the Customer Feedback Management System as a matter of course.  

• The response to recommendation three of the Comptroller and Auditor General's 2023 report Handling and Learning from Complaints' was rejected by Government; however, it is the view of the PAC that this represents a missed opportunity for Government to build on the already existing good work communicating the policy to members of the public. The PAC has recommended that the Government revisits this response and ensure that efforts to identify and support those customers that are under-represented in providing feedback or who state that they find providing feedback difficult, are set out in one place in a cross-departmental action plan with priorities and timeframes. Furthermore, the Government of Jersey should create a specific page on the Government website dedicated to presenting annual customer feedback data volumes and characteristics. This would assist in the ongoing improvements being made in this area and assist in building trust in Government systems. This should be completed by the end of quarter four 2025.  

• There was a significant spike in complaints received by the Infrastructure and Environment Department during 2023 as a result of the decant of sports facilities from Fort Regent and the opening of the new gym at Springfield and there has also been a percentage increase in complaints received by the Department for Infrastructure and Environment in relation to regulation (100% increase) and planning (74% increase) between 2023 and 2024. The PAC has recommended that there should be a review to understand the reasons why there has been such a substantial increase in complaints between 2023 and 2024 in relation to planning and regulation activities.

• All Government of Jersey departments (including HCJ and schools) are now reporting into the Quality Assurance Framework which is examined by the Executive Leadership Team on a quarterly basis. This has implemented recommendation one of the C&AG's 2023 report. It is, however, noted that due to the recent inclusion of HCJ and schools, the framework will require further monitoring and evaluation to ensure its effectiveness. The PAC has recommended this review is conducted during 2025.  

• The PAC has recommended that the Government examines ways in which it can enhance signposting for customers who are making a complaint about services provided by Arm's Length Bodies or the parishes. This should be completed by the end of 2025 with the outcomes of the examination reported to the PAC.  

• It was found by the PAC that Government does not keep a record of recommendations made by the States of Jersey Complaints Board. It has recommended that any recommendations of the States of Jersey Complaints Panel are recorded centrally and that Government reports on the extent to which these have been actioned and implemented across the relevant services. This should be taken forward as soon as possible so that any future recommendations are able to be recorded immediately.  

• There is limited information available on the Government website about the improvements that have been made as a result of customer feedback, despite the PAC being presented with substantial examples in writing. It has recommended that by the end of 2025 the Government of Jersey should make available all learning actions arising from feedback on the Government website as a matter of course. This will increase transparency and assist in building trust and confidence in the systems.  

The PAC would like to place on record its thanks to Officers for providing information for its review and also all Members of the public who took the time to complete the short survey. Overall, this is a positive report which highlights the significant work that has been undertaken in this area and the PAC would like to emphasise this and the continued commitment from Government to improving how it handles and learns from complaints.

9. Appendix One

1. Terms of Reference

The Committee's Terms of Reference for the Review were as follows:

1. To identify and assess the overall implementation of Government of Jersey Policies in relation to handling and learning from customer feedback/complaints in respect of (but not limited to):
   1. The Government-wide Customer Feedback Policy.
   2. The measuring and evaluation of customer feedback/complaints processes.
   3. How customer feedback/complaints are managed by Government departments (including CYPES, HCS).
   4. How  customer  feedback/complaints  are  managed  by  non-Government department bodies including (but not limited to) the Police Complaints Authority and States of Jersey Complaints Panel.
   5. The Customer Feedback Management System.
   6. The use and effectiveness of the introduced single online reporting system.
   7. Training  and  staff  development  in  respect  of  handling  customer feedback/complaints.
2. To assess whether the systems are user friendly for members of the public and determine whether members of the public have trust and confidence in customer feedback/complaints processes.
3. To identify and analyse the effectiveness of the Customer Feedback/Complaints systems  within  the  Government  of  Jersey  and  how  learning  from  customer feedback/complaints is implemented and improvements are evidenced.
4. To identify and analyse the effectiveness of the Customer Feedback/Complaints systems within the Government of Jersey in terms of achieving value for money.
5. To examine the implementation of relevant PAC and Comptroller and Auditor General recommendations  in  respect  of  handling  and  learning  from  complaints  by  the Government of Jersey and identify any progress made in achieving implementation of those recommendations.

2. PAC Membership

The PAC is comprised of the following Members:

Deputy Inna Gardiner Chair, Public Accounts Committee

Deputy Kristina Moore Vice-Chair, Public Accounts Committee

Deputy Raluca Kovacs Member, Public Accounts Committee

Deputy David Warr Member, Public Accounts Committee

Mr Graeme Phipps

Lay Member, Public Accounts Committee

(until 25th February 2025)

Deputy Karen Wilson Member, Public Accounts Committee

Mr. Philip Taylor

Lay Member, Public Accounts Committee

Mr. Vijay Khakhria

Lay Member, Public Accounts Committee

Mr. Glenn Kehoe

Lay Member, Public Accounts Committee

3. Public Hearings

The Committee undertook the following public hearings during the course of its review:

4. Review Costs

The total external costs of this review totalled £629 This was broken down as follows:

• Public Hearings (transcription services) - £429

• Digital and Public Engagement Costs - £200

States Greffe | Morier House | Halkett Place |St Helier | Jersey | JE1 1DD T: +44 (0) 1534 441 020 | E: statesgreffe@gov.je | W: Statesassembly.gov.je

[1] Gov.je – Customer Feedback Policy

[2] Gov.je – Customer Feedback Policy

3 Gov.je – Customer Feedback Policy

[3] Gov.je – Customer Feedback Policy

[4] Gov.je – Customer Feedback Policy

[5] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24TH October 2024

[6] Transcript – Chief Officer ESSH - 20th November 2024 p.2/3

[7] Transcript – Chief Officer ESSH - 20th November 2024 p.2/3

[8] Transcript – Chief Officer ESSH - 20th November 2024 p.4/5

[9] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24TH October 2024

[10] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24TH October 2024

[11] Transcript – Chief Officer ESSH - 20th November 2024 p.3

[12] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24TH October 2024

[13] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24TH October 2024

[14] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24TH October 2024

[15] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24TH October 2024

[16] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24TH October 2024

[17] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24TH October 2024 19 Letter – Chief Officer ESSH – 10th January 2025

20 Customer Feedback Summary 2023

21 Letter – Chief Officer ESSH – 10 January 2025

[18] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[19] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[20] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[21] Letter – Chief Officer ESSH – 31st January 2025

[22] Letter – Chief Officer ESSH – 10 January 2025

[23] Letter – Chief Officer ESSH – 10 January 2025

[24] Letter – Chief Officer ESSH – 10 January 2025

[25] Letter – Chief Officer ESSH – 10 January 2025

[26] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[27] Letter – Chief Officer HCS – 10th January 2025

[28] Letter – Chief Officer HCS – 10th January 2025

[29] Letter – Chief Officer HCS – 10th January 2025

[30] Letter – Chief Officer HCS – 10th January 2025

[31] Letter – Chief Officer ESSH – 10 January 2025

[32] Letter – Chief Officer ESSH – 10 January 2025

[33] Letter – Chief Officer ESSH – 10 January 2025

[34] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[35] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[36] Executive Response – Handling and Learning from Complaints Follow up

[37] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[38] Transcript – Public Hearing with HCS Officers – 4th December 2024

[39] Transcript – Public Hearing with HCS Officers – 4th December 2024

[40] Transcript – Public Hearing with HCS Officers – 4th December 2024

[41] Transcript – Public Hearing with HCS Officers – 4th December 2024

[42] Transcript – Public Hearing with HCS Officers – 4th December 2024

[43] Transcript – Public Hearing with HCS Officers – 4th December 2024

[44] Letter – Chief Officer for HCJ – 10th January 2025

[45] P.A.C.2/2022 – Performance Management

[46] Transcript – Chief Officer ESSH - 20th November 2024

[47] Transcript – Chief Officer ESSH - 20th November 2024 p.4/5

[48] Executive Response – Handling and Learning from Complaints Follow up

[49] Transcript – Public Hearing with HCS Officers – 4th December 2024

[50] Transcript – Public Hearing with HCS Officers – 4th December 2024

[51] Letter – Chief Officer for HCJ – 10th January 2025

[52] Written questions – Chief Executive – 24 October 2024

[53] Transcript – Public Hearing Chief Officer IE – 4th December 2024

[54] Transcript – Public Hearing Chief Officer IE – 4th December 2024

[55] Transcript – Public Hearing Chief Officer IE – 4th December 2024

[56] Transcript – Public Hearing Chief Officer IE – 4th December 2024

[57] Transcript – Public Hearing Chief Officer IE – 4th December 2024

[58] Letter – Chief Officer I&E – 6th January 2025

[59] Letter – Chief Officer I&E – 6th January 2025

[60] Transcript – Chief Officer ESSH - 20th November 2024

[61] Transcript – Public Hearing Chief Officer IE – 4th December 2024

[62] Written questions – Chief Executive – 24th October 2024

[63] Letter – CEO to PAC – 24th October 2024

[64] Letter – CEO to PAC – 24th October 2024

[65] Letter – Chief Officer ESSH – 10th January 2025

[66] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[67] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[68] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[69] Transcript – Interim Chief Officer ESSH – 20th November 2024

[70] Transcript – Interim Chief Officer ESSH – 20th November 2024

[71] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[72] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[73] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[74] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024 79 What we do with your feedback (you said, we did)

[75]80 What we do with your feedback (you said, we did) 81 What we do with your feedback (you said, we did)

[76] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024

[77] Letter – Chief Executive to PAC – 24 October 2024