Criminal Justice Programme Board minutes: June 2023

Attendees and apologies

• Neil Rennick (Chair, Scottish Government (SG))
• Willie Cowan (Deputy Director Justice Transformation, SG)
• Anna Donald (Deputy Director Criminal Justice, SG)
• Fiona Cameron (SG)
• Ruth McCallum (TCP 3 Programme Manager, SG)
• Lucy Gibbons (TCP 1 Programme Lead, SG)
• Amy Wilson (Head of Justice Analytical Services (JAS), SG)
• Gemma Fraser (Community Justice Scotland (CJS))
• Marie-Louise Fox (Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB))
• Mark Stangoe (Scottish Courts and Tribunals Service (SCTS))
• Sue Brookes (Scottish Prison Service (SPS))
• Edward Seery (Police Scotland)
• Cameron Stewart (Strategy and Performance Unit Head, SG)
• Naomi Gregg (Head of Justice Portfolio Management Office (PMO), SG)
• Karl Champion (Senior Officer PMO, SG)

Apologies

• David Fraser (SCTS)
• Jennifer Harrower (COPFS)
• Mike Milligan (SCTS)
• Rob Hay (Police Scotland)
• ACC Wendy Middleton (Police Scotland)

Items and actions

Agenda

1    Welcome and introductions 
2    Key notes and actions
3    Audit Scotland report
4    Transformation Change Programme (TCP) 3 update
5    TCP 1 update
6    Virtual Domestic Abuse Model
7    TCP 3 Summary Case Management Project deep dive
8    Any other business

Welcome and introductions

The Chair welcomed members to the third meeting of the Criminal Justice Programme Board.

The Chair informed members that due to absence the agenda items on Scottish Courts and Tribunal Service (SCTS) projects (items six and seven) will take place at the next board meeting.

Key notes and actions

The Chair noted that key notes and actions were circulated following the last meeting. No comments/feedback were received from members so the key notes and actions are considered agreed by all. There are no outstanding actions from the last meeting. 

Audit Scotland report

The Chair gave a brief overview of Audit Scotland’s report on criminal court backlogs, noting the positive comments regarding SCTS and partners’ response and innovation during the pandemic. The Chair highlighted the key recommendations from the report and the expectation is that Audit Scotland will return in 12 months to assess progress against court backlogs and the specific recommendations from the report.

Scottish Government (SG) explained that given TCP 3’s focus is on efficiency it makes sense to use the recommendations to focus the programme on journey times. This will help to create robust assurance and governance processes. SG expanded that journey times were highlighted in the new Policy Prospectus from the First Minister and will be considered as part of the budget round. 

The Chair noted that the issue around timescales was discussed at Victims Taskforce and the Lord Advocate is passionate about improving the experience of victims and witnesses. However, recognises resource constraints, limits on court capacity and availability of defence solicitors.

Board members agreed that the proposal in terms of looking at journey times should be further developed and brought back to the next meeting.

Action 1-1306 – TCP 3 programme team to further develop the proposed shift in focus for TCP 3 and bring it back to the next board meeting.

The Chair introduced the plan to host a lessons learned session focusing on learnings from the Audit Scotland report and the previous Recover, Renew, Transform (RRT) programme.

Action 2-1306 – SG colleagues to arrange a lessons learned session to focus on learnings from the Audit Scotland Report and the previous RRT programme.

Action 3-1306 – Partners to provide information on the current planned assurance processes for each project. 

TCP 3 update

The TCP 3 Programme Manager presented a highlight report on the programme and invited attendees to feedback on the format. The programme team have taken on board commentary in terms of including effectiveness in the programme. The RAG status for the programme is amber going to red, the reason is that not all projects have baseline information and there is lack of clarity on products/deliverables, milestones, and outcomes. Another concern is that many projects are in pilot and lack a clear plan for moving from pilot to rollout. The SG programme team are developing a dashboard to provide status updates on the programme as well as the individual projects. The aim is to pull all measurements that affect journey times into the dashboard. 

Action 4-1306 – TCP 3 Programme Manager to work towards establishing a delivery plan and programme dashboard for the next board meeting.

Action 5-1306 – SG to circulate slides and ask for feedback.

SG presented the defined success criteria for Digital Evidence Sharing Capability (DESC) as an example for other projects. DESC will develop a dashboard for the pilot to provide statistics on the amount of evidence being handled and highlight savings. The purpose of doing this is to ensure we achieve the correct overall outcome in the quickest possible time. To have a more efficient, effective system and the key measurement should be how much staff time is saved. 

SG presented on the Summary Case Management (SCM) pilot project data from SCTS and queried how success will be measured against all Key Performance Indicators (KPIs). SG recognised that while analysis needs to be done on how effective the project is, other projects are less defined, so there is work to be done to bring all projects up to the same standard.

SG presented a risk overview which has been agreed within SG. SG are open to receiving feedback from members and will present an updated extract from the programme risk register at the next meeting.

Action 6-1306 – TCP 3 Programme Manager to present on programme risk register at a future board meeting.

The Chair summarised that it’s not about the lack of activity but the lack of clear definitions, baselines, delivery plan and measurements for success which puts the overall programme at risk, hence the RAG status. 

The board discussed the need for alignment across partners to agree on what is being measured and what the targets/outcomes/indicators are. 

The board also talked about how the relationship between this board and the Community Justice Programme Board is key. We need to assess the impact of moving people through the system more quickly. It is about balancing measures to avoid negative effects elsewhere. 

The Chair presented two asks of members - to work with the TCP 3 Programme Manager to baseline projects in a consistent manner; and to move to a position where there is consistent highlight reporting across the programme, so that we are able to report to the Criminal Justice Board.

Action 7-1306 – Partners to work with TCP 3 Programme Manager to baseline projects in a consistent manner ahead of the next board meeting.

Action 8-1306 – Project leads to work with TCP 3 Programme Manager to produce monthly highlight reports which focus on outcomes.

TCP 1 update

The TCP 1 Programme Lead explained that TCP 1 is in a similar position to TCP 3 in terms of baseline information. This is an opportunity to agree how the evaluation of projects feeds into a programme. Programme level governance has now been agreed and was included in papers to the board. One key element is workstreams that report to Victims Taskforce and to have a better understanding of how they feed into the programme. The programme is taking recommendations from Audit Scotland to have the programme informed by those with lived experience.

SG highlighted the ask in the paper around the Pre-recorded Evidence project. The paper sets out the way we want to bring the work together, partner buy-in is good and there is a lot of activity already. The key actions are: understand barriers to implementation; make better use of existing capacity; inform best practice model; develop an accurate picture of resource and capital costs. Happy to receive feedback and/or offers of assistance. SG keen to work with the Operations and Analysis Group (OAG) to get a more accurate forecast of demand across the programme. 

Action 9-1306 – SG to approach OAG to get a more accurate forecast of demand across the programme.

The Chair summarised that there has been good monitoring and progress around court backlogs and good individual projects but we don’t have something that feels like a coordinated programme so there is work to do in this respect.

SG made a point around how TCP 1 relates to TCPs 2 and 3 and how there is a Justice PMO in place looking at how all three TCPs work together to reassure the board that this is in hand. 

Action 10-1306 – SG to follow up with SCTS and COPFS colleagues regarding Pre-recorded Evidence Project.

SG noted there are a number of meetings taking place over the coming weeks with key stakeholders to discuss transitioning workstreams and governance structures into the overall programme structure.

Virtual Domestic Abuse Model

Due to absence this item was postponed until the next board meeting. The Chair asked that we reschedule SCTS’ planned presentations for the next board meeting and have a backup in place just in case.

Action 11-1306 – SCTS to present on Virtual Trials Domestic Abuse Model at next board meeting.

TCP 3 – Summary Case Management Project deep dive

Due to absence this item was postponed until the next board meeting. The Chair asked that we reschedule SCTS’ planned presentations for the next board meeting and have a backup in place just in case.

Action 12-1306 – SCTS to present Summary Case Management Project deep dive at next board meeting.

Any other business

The Chair confirmed that the next meeting will take place on Wednesday 12 July.