The Quality Standards scores are mapped and compared with the Service Charter commitment scores, which include feedback from complainants and organisations we investigate.
| Quality Standards | Quarter 3 (October to December 2021) | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Complainant feedback (CF) | Organisations we Investigate feedback (OWI) | Quality Standards score (QS) | |
| 1. We take equal consideration of the complainant's and OWI accounts statements and evidence | 64% | 81% | 93% |
| 2. We evaluate all evidence to make an impartial decision | 64% | 81% | 91% |
| 3. We apply an appropriate standard when deciding if something went wrong | 54% | 85% | 84% |
| 4. We explain how the clinical advice we have sought has been applied to the complaint | 58% | 80% | 69% |
|
5. We provide clear rationales for our decisions |
46% | 83% | 68% |
|
6. Our reports and decision letters contain an appropriate level of empathy |
85% | 89% |
75%
|
What the results tell us
- There is strong correlation between the Quality Standard and Organisations We Investigate scores for Quality Standard 3 (We apply an appropriate standard when deciding if something went wrong) and 2 (We evaluate all available evidence to make an impartial decision).
- There is an improved correlation between the Quality Standard and Complainant Feedback scores for Quality Standard 6 (Our reports and decision contain an appropriate level empathy). This is an improvement on previous quarters, as we have seen stronger empathy scores in the Quality Standard this quarter.
- We have previously noted that the quality measure is based solely on the written decision, whereas the Organisations We Investigate and Service Charter scores are based on how we have interacted with people at all stages of the process. The Quality Team has begun work on reviewing internal expectations around empathy, and the improved correlation in scores reflects the beginning of that process.
- Levels of correlation across the remaining measures have remained stable for the previous three quarters.