Case study
Taking responsibility: misconduct management by Queensland Health

Speakers:
Helen Couper
Director, Integrity Services, Crime and Misconduct Commission
Stephen Hardy
Director, Ethical Standards Unit, Queensland Health

Abstract:
Devolving greater responsibility for managing complaints of official misconduct to local managers — the CMC’s strategic direction from a Queensland Health experience’

Following the Fitzgerald enquiry, the Criminal Justice Act 1989 placed primary responsibility for dealing with misconduct in the Queensland public sector with the Criminal Justice Commission (CJC).

The Crime and Misconduct Act 2001 provided legislative recognition for the evolving nature of integrity systems in the Queensland Public Sector. The objective of the Act is to continuously improve the integrity of, and reduce the incidence of misconduct in, the public sector, through a framework that supports a shared responsibility between the Crime and Misconduct Commission (CMC) and the public sector for the achievement of that objective.

While re-enforcing that the CMC has primary responsibility for dealing with official misconduct, the legislation acknowledges the responsibility of chief executives for their conduct and discipline of their employees. In practice, application of the principle of devolution means that chief executives of public sector agencies are given greater responsibility to deal with the majority of complaints of official misconduct involving their agency, subject to monitoring by the CMC.

The CMC’s experience is that to achieve continuous improvement in the integrity of the public sector and thereby reduce the incidence of misconduct requires public sector managers at the appropriate local level to accept responsibility, and be accountable for, the culture of and behaviour in the workplace.

Dealing with complaints is not just about identifying and dealing with any inappropriate conduct of an employee. It is equally about identifying and addressing any systemic issues, control failures, policy and procedure deficiencies or workplace issues, including poor standards or culture and client service issues. The focus is on learning from complaints. It is also about resolving the concerns of a complainant or whistleblower.

Many complaints are capable of resolution other than by way of investigation, and other management action can be taken to deal with less serious inappropriate behaviour of staff and address any underlying systemic or workplace issues and resolve the concerns of complainants / whistleblowers.

Devolution within public sector agencies of responsibility for the management of complaints from the chief executive to managers at the appropriate local level facilitates this approach.

With this added responsibility for managers comes the need for support, both internal and external, to build manager’s capacity and confidence to make sound decisions. There must be a robust and effective framework for education and training of managers; monitoring and quality assurance to ensure compliance with standards and consistency of management action.

Of course, the more serious and sensitive matters require high level investigations by the agency which comply with the standards and guidelines established by the CMC for public sector investigations. When the public interest requires, or when the agency lacks the necessary capacity, the CMC is able to conduct the necessary investigation.

This presentation will examine the practical application of the CMC’s strategic direction for further devolving greater responsibility for managing suspected official misconduct within the context of the health sector. The presentation will focus on the CMC’s ‘Devolution Project’ in partnership with Queensland Health, an agency of 68,000 employees involving numerous professional streams interacting in a large number of facilities across the state.

In examining the two year project, the presenters will address a range of issues including:

• the CMC’s enhanced monitoring framework
• the role of Queensland Health’s Ethical Standards Unit
• processes for receipt and assessment of complaints
• pre-assessment of allegations types
• integrated records management and case management systems
• organisational improvement from complaint outcomes
• capacity building strategies
• educational tools
• training and mentoring of investigators
• internal and external project communication
• project evaluation methodologies.