Upheld, recommendations

Summary
Mr C complained that the SPS unreasonably refused his request to access and review the Integrated Case Management Guidance Manual. This manual is aimed at staff, to help them help identify needs and programmes that may assist prisoners throughout their sentence, and to guide the management of prisoners’ case conferences. Mr C received notice that a case conference was due. The notice mentioned the manual, and he asked to see it. He was told that he could not, as it was for staff use only.

When we investigated, the SPS confirmed that they designed the manual to provide staff with support and guidance. They were therefore not obliged to give Mr C direct access to it. We also, however, identified that a copy is held in the prison library and prisoners are allowed to see it. No one told Mr C this. It appears that when he complained he in fact received mixed messages from staff at different stages of the complaint process about whether he could have access to the manual. Had staff simply told him it was available in the library, his complaints to the SPS and to us could have been avoided. We therefore upheld his complaint.

Recommendations
We recommended that the prison:
• apologise to Mr C for failing to explain how he could access the manual; and
• take steps to remind staff what documents are available for prisoners to access
from the prisoner library.

Summary
Mr C is the father of a boy who was temporarily excluded from secondary school. He complained that the council did not reasonably investigate his complaints. In the course of our investigation, we looked at the council’s Management Circular No. 8: Procedures Governing the Exclusion of Children and Young People from School (the circular) which lays out the procedures that must be followed when pupils are excluded.

The council gave us information about how the school handled the exclusion. This showed that the school did not comply with some sections of the circular. They did not arrange a meeting within seven days of the date of exclusion, and there was no evidence of a homework programme being sent to the excluded pupil or tutorials being offered on his return to school. They did not use relevant forms and the information that the school recorded did not reasonably cover the information to be recorded on these forms. We saw no evidence that the school investigated the complaints. We therefore considered the response sent to Mr C to be unreasonable and noted that the council previously accepted that it was not in line with their guidance.

Recommendations
We recommended that:
• the council apologise to Mr C that they did not reasonably investigate or respond to the complaints lodged;
• the school revise their procedures to ensure that the terms of the circular are
properly fulfilled, and the council audit the school’s revised procedures; and
• the council ensure that senior staff from the school participate in the first wave of
the refresher sessions on handling formal complaints that they are planning.

Summary
Mrs C complained that her medical practice removed her and her baby from the
practice list without prior discussion, warning or reasonable explanation. In the course of the investigation, we found that the practice removed Mrs C because they believed that she had missed an appointment. This was in line with the practice’s protocol for new patients missing appointments. We found, however, that their protocol did not adhere to the General Medical Council Regulations on this issue (Section 20 of Schedule 5, Part 2, of The National Health Service (General Medical Services Contracts) (Scotland) Regulations 2004).

Recommendations
We recommended that the practice:
• apologise for removing Mrs C and her baby from the practice list without any prior warning, discussion or reasonable explanation;
• provide us with a copy of the revised protocol for removing both new and existing
patients from the practice list in situations where appointments are not kept and
adequate cancellation notice is not given; and
• review their systems for documenting when appointments have been made, in
particular when they are made at the patient's request, to ensure they are robust
and accurate.