The OIA’s remit and review process

ONLINE SEMINARS – JUNE/JULY 2015

Felicity Mitchell – Deputy AdjudicatorHilary Jones – Membership Project Co-ordinator

HOUSEKEEPING FOR ONLINE SEMINARS

Using a laptop or desktop? Please click on the ‘audio box’, select ‘telephone’ and then dial-in by telephone also using the number provided to you

Using a tablet? Don’t forget to ‘unmute’ and then click on the ‘audio box’ and select ‘microphone and speakers’

We have prepared a short presentation BUT will pause regularly to invite questions. If you wish to ask a question, please ‘raise your hand’ through the software

We will update the guidance on our website to reflect any key issues coming out of each group of seminars http://www.oiahe.org.uk/providers-joining-the-scheme-on-1-september-2015.aspx

2

WHO ARE WE? WHAT DO WE DO?

• Operator of students’ complaint scheme

• Since 2005• Ombudsman of last

resort• Free to students• Over 10,000 complaints• Almost universal

compliance

• Review complaints about acts or omissions of member providers

• Recommend changes to practice and/or remedies for students

• Promote good practice in handling complaints and academic appeals

3

4

Complaints Received

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 20140

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

33 41 51 45 81 54 112 161 138 163

509 545683

855926

1287

1493

1851 18341877

0 0

0

00

0

0

0 05

Dummy TotalEnglish institutions

5

Complaints Closed

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 20140

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

213381

639786

886 825

1443

1795

2251 2175

6

Complaints closed in 2014 by principal category

Academ

ic Stat

us

Servi

ce Iss

ue (Contra

ct)

Finan

cial

Not Known

Academ

ic Misc

onduct, Plag

iarism

& Chea

ting

Discrim

ination/H

uman Righ

ts

Disciplin

ary M

atters

(non-ac

adem

ic)

Welf

are &

Accommodati

on0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

61%

15%

7%4% 4% 4% 2% 2%

Common areas of complaint

• Academic appeals• Extenuating circumstances• Teaching provision and

facilities• Disciplinary matters• Academic misconduct

(including plagiarism)• Bullying and harassment• Fitness to practise• Discrimination

What we cannot look at

• Admissions• Academic judgment

• Matters subject to legal proceedings

• Student employment

OUR REMIT (1)

7

OUR REMIT (2) We will not normally consider complaints that have

not been through the internal procedures at the member provider

We will not normally consider complaints about events that happened before the member provider joined the OIA SchemeWe may do so if the events formed part of a course of

conduct which continued after the provider became a member

We will not consider complaints where we receive the Complaint Form more than 12 months after the conclusion of the provider’s internal procedures

8

QUESTIONS

ANY QUESTIONS?

9

10

OUR REVIEW

We review student complaints to see whether they are Justified, Partly Justified or Not Justified

Focus of our review is the provider’s final decision evidenced in the Completion of Procedures (COP) letter

In deciding whether a complaint is Justified we consider the following three key issues:Did the provider properly apply regulations and follow

procedures?Were those procedures reasonable?

Was the provider’s decision reasonable in all the circumstances?

WHY MIGHT WE FIND A COMPLAINT JUSTIFIED?

The member provider has failed to follow its procedures or has acted unfairly

Insufficient evidence to indicate information properly considered

Delay or maladministration Inadequate teaching or facilities Poor communication or misinformation Discrimination issues, including disability

The OIA does not make findings of discrimination as a court would

11

QUESTIONS

ANY QUESTIONS?

12

OUR RECOMMENDATIONS

Principal aim: to put the student back into the position they were in before whatever they complained about happened.

Types of recommendation include: Provider to rehear academic appeal or reconsider complaint Provider to change its internal procedures Provider to pay financial compensation

Our recommendations have resulted in: Students being readmitted to courses or having their results

improved (following re-hearing of appeal by provider) Students being allowed further assessment opportunities Changes in providers’ internal procedures

13

QUESTIONS

ANY QUESTIONS?

14

15

OUR REVIEW PROCESS: INITIAL ASSESSMENT

Student submits a Complaint Form to us; online or through post

Acknowledgement of receipt sent to student (and representative, if applicable) and our Point of Contact (POC) at the provider

If student has a representative, we will correspond with them (not student) during review process

Initial assessment made by our Enquiries TeamHas student submitted COP letter?Any other missing information? Straightforward eligibility decisions

16

OUR REVIEW PROCESS: TRIAGE STAGE

Initial review – eligibility Student’s complaint is sent to provider for response Provider’s representations are sent to student for

comment Opportunities for informal resolution considered at

every stageOptional and agreed by both partiesQuicker than full review, avoids need for formal adjudication

17

OUR REVIEW PROCESS: ADJUDICATION Consider how best to resolve complaint

Settlement? External mediation? Our Rules permit oral hearings Complaint Outcome

Complaint Outcome Justified (J), Partly Justified (PJ), Not Justified (NJ) decisionMay make Recommendations if J/PJ decision

Opportunity for the parties to comment on practicalities of any Recommendations

Compliance by provider May make Suggestions if NJ Decision

intended as good practice

18

TRANSPARENCY

All relevant case material shared with the parties Three Pathway consultations with the sector Annual published letters to each provider, setting

out its record in complaints handling Instances of non-compliance published in Annual

Report (very rare) Publish case studies, including by name of

provider where there is public interest in doing so

QUESTIONS

ANY QUESTIONS?

19