For many years my office has provided advice on complaints handling to a number of organizations in our jurisdiction and has published numerous complaints handling guides. These Australian Best Practice Guidelines for Complaints Handling in Universities have been developed as a joint project by Australian ombudsmen. I am sure you will find these guidelines useful in achieving best practice in complaint handling.
Introduction
The organization's complaint handling process should provide avenues for the outcome of the complaint to be reviewed by people other than the original decision maker. Complainants and other parties to the complaint handling process should be treated with respect and engaged in the complaint handling process to the extent possible. This led to the development and publication of complaints handling guidelines for NSW universities in 2006.
Complaint management systems
A strong commitment from staff at all levels of the University is essential to the effective handling of complaints. Different types of complaints and disclosures require different types of complaint handling mechanisms and investigative techniques. A/NZ S 7.6] This should be complemented by training that addresses the specific challenges that arise in dealing with complaints.
Taking complaints
A 'complaint' can be defined as any expression of dissatisfaction, directly or indirectly, explicitly or implicitly, expressed to the University or its staff regarding the University. It may relate to any aspect of teaching, supervision, research, policies and/or services provided by University staff. Guidance on how to appeal should ideally be readily available on the front page of the university's website.
These and other barriers can be reduced if students are told that complaints are welcome, will be treated confidentially and will be used by the university to address any problems identified and improve its services. Therefore, it is reasonable for the university to ask complainants to show cause why complaints should be considered if they relate to events that occurred more than one year before the complaint was filed. Information about these persons should be provided in the university handbook and on the university website.
Complainants must also be told that the University will be impartial in handling their complaint. Always ask: 'What do you hope the university can do to help solve this for you?'. The university has a responsibility to act professionally in relation to this type of problematic behaviour.
In limited cases, it is justifiable to limit a complainant's access to the university's complaint handling system.
Assessing complaints
Often the scope of a complaint is not initially clear – either to the complainant or the university – and clarification is required. A complaint must be acknowledged quickly to assure the complainant that their complaint is being attended to. As far as possible, the acknowledgment should indicate how long it is likely to take before the complainant is next contacted.
If the complaint is made by telephone and cannot be resolved immediately, it may be more effective to verbally explain how the complaint will be handled and when the complainant will be contacted next. This response must include an email address and complaint identification number that the complainant can use in future contacts. If the complaint or its preliminary assessment does not provide evidence of misconduct, advise the complainant that no further action will be taken.
Once the initial assessment has been completed, it may be necessary to transfer the complaint to another University employee or advise the complainant to contact another organisation. The complainant must be informed of the contact number of the person who will handle the case, so that he does not get lost in the process. If there is a legal requirement to refer matters to the police or other outside agency, it would normally be a good idea to inform the complainant that such a referral will be made.
If it is not appropriate to do so, the university must ensure that the reasons for the decision not to tell the complainant are recorded.
Investigating complaints
A problem-focused investigation may require no more than consideration of the terms of the complaint and a study of any relevant documents to amend, for example, a flawed procedure. The choice of investigator should also take into account the type of investigation likely to be required and the investigator's capacity in terms of their training and experience to undertake it. It is wise to prepare a short written plan to guide the drafting of the terms of reference for the investigation.
Transparency – a complainant must be informed of the steps in the complaint process, and given an opportunity to comment on adverse information or before a complaint is dismissed. By making a complaint themselves, a complainant shows some recognition of the university's responsibilities to consider and respond to their complaint. Dropping items of information (known to the complainant from the outset) into the course of an investigation may jeopardize the proper conduct of the investigation.
They are also entitled to be informed of the results of an investigation, regardless of whether any material adverse to them is shown in the investigation report. Regardless of the times taken for these steps, it is generally unwise to leave too long a time between updates. This will be given to the university, but providing a copy of the final report to the complainant or to a person who was the subject of the investigation will depend on the circumstances.
A statement of the reasons for the grievance determination in sufficient detail to enable an assessment of its validity and the viability of pursuing any available avenue of appeal.
Following up on complaints and issues
If the complainant would like the University's actions or findings to be better explained, this can usually be done by a designated contact person. If the complainant is not satisfied with the findings or conclusions of the investigator, he must be informed of the possibility of an internal review. The option to appeal to the ombudsman or request a review of the decision by another supervisory body or court should be included in any final letter from the university.
Level two in the model are the processes of internal assessment, facilitated solution or internal review that the university itself would be able to offer – including an investigation by an external investigator on contract. At each level, either the complainant or the University may decide to escalate the matter to a higher level. An individual's complaint can point to a systemic problem at the university – that is, a problem that has either occurred in other cases or can be repeated.
Delay in handling an individual's complaint may point to a need for greater efficiency in the University's complaint handling procedures and practices or better communication between different units of the University or other education providers or contractors jointly responsible for the complaint matter. The responsibility for implementing these improvements usually lies elsewhere in the university and not with the complaints unit. It is therefore important that complaint problems and trends are reported to – and analyzed by – the executive board.
Universities with a complaints center can also have the center draw up a regular report for the university council's audit committee for tabling at the next council meeting.
Providing protections and support
Making a knowingly false complaint may result in disciplinary action being taken against the complainant. Where practical and appropriate, the identity of the subject of an investigation should be kept confidential during the investigation. If the complaint is found to be frivolous, unproven, or incapable of determination, the University should take reasonable steps to provide compensation for any substantial damage that may have occurred to the subject of the complaint.
Options the university could consider would include an apology on behalf of the university and/or publication of the findings. If there is a reasonable possibility of adverse action against a complainant (either by the subject of the complaint or by fellow staff or students) in retaliation for making the complaint, there should be a presumption that the complainant's identity will be kept confidential if it is possible and appropriate. In many cases, the identity of the complainant will be clear and confidentiality is simply impossible.
Any attempt to maintain confidentiality may mean that it is impossible to effectively investigate the complaint, often due to the requirements of procedural fairness regarding the subject matter of the complaint. Confidentiality issues should be discussed with the complainant in the beginning and, if confidentiality is required, discussed. If this happens, there are generally certain legal rights to confidentiality of the complainant's identity - and the risk of significant criminal penalties for anyone who takes adverse action against the complainant in retaliation for disclosing a protected/public matter.
Maintaining appropriate levels of confidentiality about all aspects of an investigation during its duration (and, where appropriate, after completion) is essential for those conducting or assisting with an investigation.
Working with overseas students
Universities that provide services to overseas students – which would be the vast majority, if not all, universities – are required by the National Code of Practice for Registration Authorities and Providers of Education and Training for Overseas Students 2007 (the National Code) to developed complaints and complaints processes. The provider must maintain the student's registration while the complaints and appeals process is ongoing. The provider must have arrangements for an independent external person or organization to hear complaints or appeals when the provider's internal process has been completed and the student remains dissatisfied.
The process must begin within 10 working days of the formal submission of the complaint or appeal. The provider's documented internal complaints and appeals process must include provision of a written statement of the outcome, including details and reasons for the decision. If the outcome of a student's appeal through a provider's internal or external complaint and appeal handling process is favorable to the student, the provider must immediately notify the student of this and any decision and/or corrective and preventive action that is required , implement.
Ombudsman offices are independent external organizations well equipped to review university decisions. Australian Standard® AS ISO Customer satisfaction – guidelines for handling complaints in organizations (ISO 10002-204 MOD), Standards Australia. Good Conduct and Administrative Practice: Guidance for State and Local Government (2nd edition) NSW Ombudsman, May 2006.
National Code of Practice for Registration Authorities and Providers of Education and Training for Overseas Students, 2007.
