Skip to content

All content is available under the Open Government Licence v3.0, except where otherwise stated.

To view this licence, visit:
https://nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3

or write to:
Information Policy Team,
The National Archives,
Kew,
London TW9 4DU

or email: psi@nationalarchives.gov.uk.

This publication is available at:
https://hmcpsi.justiceinspectorates.gov.uk.

© Crown copyright

CCRC needs to significantly improve the assurance of its casework, says independent inspection report’

Published:

The Criminal Cases Review Commission must make significant improvements to how it manages and quality assures casework according to the first ever independent inspection of the organisation commissioned by its interim Chair, Dame Vera Baird DBE KC and published today by HM Crown Prosecution Service Inspectorate (HMCPSI).

In all 60 cases examined, casework teams had reached sound conclusions in their recommendations to Commissioners.

Inspectors found staff at every level committed to the organisation’s work. A commitment to doing the right thing and leaving no stone unturned is tangible when engaging with staff across the organisation. The CCRC needs to harness this commitment making the improvements set out in the 34 inspection recommendations in the report.

While there was evidence of great commitment and some elements of quality work seen in the cases examined, inspectors found quality assurance to be inconsistent and lacking structure. In too many cases, this causes a lack of focus, opening unnecessary investigatory avenues leading to drift, delays, and wasted resources for the CCRC.

Existing quality assurance is focused on timeliness or process rather than on the quality of the casework. The CCRC needs to ensure that enquiries are proportionate, effective and affordable. In every case, a risk-based and proportionate approach to further investigations and enquiries needs to be adopted.

The lack of proactive, effective casework quality assurance is a significant gap that the CCRC must address urgently.

There is a lack of clarity regarding the responsibilities and expectations of group leaders. The CCRC must decide what it expects of group leaders and set clear internal standards particularly if it wants to improve casework quality.

Too many cases drifted without justification. The CCRC must ensure its revised assurance mechanisms identify and address delays before they become entrenched. 

With the new leadership of the interim Chair and interim Chief Executive the recommendations in this inspection provide a roadmap for improvement. We were assured of the desire of the new senior leadership to drive improvement and change in the CCRC.   

HMCPSI Chief Inspector Anthony Rogers said:

“The CCRC exists for one purpose: to help people who may have been wrongly convicted get their cases properly reviewed.  Every delay, every gap in quality assurance, and every case that drifts without justification is a real person waiting longer for answers they deserve.

“This report provides a clear and practical roadmap and addressing these issues will help the CCRC work more efficiently and give applicants greater confidence in how cases are handled.”

HMCPSI provided six priority recommendations to be addressed within 12 months:

  • Carrying out a training needs assessment to address individual and organisational learning gaps
  • Reviewing and strengthening first-line assurance mechanisms so casework quality — not just process — is consistently assessed
  • Reforming the Long-Running Cases Committee to focus scrutiny on risk, complexity and sensitivity rather than case duration alone
  • Incorporating assurance of internal legal research, including work by interns, into the Quality Assurance Programme
  • Developing and implementing a casework quality action plan underpinned by a clear plan-do-review cycle
  • Clarifying and strengthening the Group Leader role, with defined standards, expectations and accountability