NATIONAL AUDIT OFFICE

REPORTBY THE COMPTROLLERAND AUDITORGENERAL

CrownOffice and the ProcuratorFiscal Service: Scottish CourtsAdministration Resourcesin Courts

ORDEREDBY THE HOUSEOF COMMONS TO BE PRINTED 10 JANUARY1995

LONDON:HMSO HC 119 Session 1994-95 Published 20 January 1995 f8.95 NET CROWN OFFICE AND THE SERVICE: SCOTT,SH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

This report has been prepared under Section 6 of the National Audit Act, 1983 for presentation to the House of Commons in accordance with Section 9 of the Act.

John Bourn National Audit Office Comptroller and Auditor General 29 November 1994

The Comptroller and Auditor General is the head of the National Audit Office employing some 800 staff. He, and the NAO, are totally independent of Government. He certifies the accounts of all Government departments and a wide range of other public sector bodies; and he has statutmy authority to report to Parliament on the economy, efficiency and effectiveness with which departments and other bodies have used their resources. CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Contents

Summary and Conclusions 1

Part 1: Introduction 7

Part 2: Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service 11

Part 3: Allocation of Resources to Sheriff Courts 21

Appendices

1. The Committee of Public Accounts report recommendations 39 on the Prosecution of Crime in : Review of the Procurator Fiscal Service and government response

2. Jurisdiction and powers of courts in Scotland 44

3. Fiscal Office information collated by Crown Office Management 46 Information Unit

4. Targets and performance indicators for Sheriff Courts 48 of and Sfrathkelvin

The Secretaryof Statefor Scotlandis responsiblefor the centralorganisation and administrationof the SheriffCourts CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Summary and conclusions

1 In March 1989 the former Committee of Public Accounts took evidence from Office on the prosecution of crime in Scotland. The Committee concluded that there was scope to improve the management and operation of procurator fiscal offices; and they were concerned at delays in and utilisation of courts.

2 The subsequent Treasury Minute undertook to improve the management of fiscal offices through improvements In: management information systems; targets and performance indicators; the standard of police reports; information on cases marked ‘no proceedings’; and the staffing of fiscal offices. The Crown Office were also to undertake a high level review of the fiscal service. The Treasury Minute acknowledged the Committee’s concerns over delays In and utilisation of courts. These issues raised matters within the responsibility of Sheriffs Principal and the Scottish Courts Administration.

3 This report sets out the results of a National Audit Office examination of the progress made by the Crown Office in implementing the Committee’s recommendations in the light of the Treasury Minute; and, in the light of the Committee’s concerns over courts, the results of a National Audit Office examination of how Scottish Courts Administration allocate resources to courts. The National Audit Office’s main findings and conclusions are set out below.

Findings on the 4 On management information and performance monitoring Crown Office (Committee conclusions (i), (vii) and (xiii))

(paragraphs a) The Crown Office have further developed performance indicators to monitor 2.8-2.13) fiscal offices’ workload, outstanding cases, costs and activities, and collect other managomont information including the reasons why “no proceedings” are taken. Since 1989 they have developed a computerised system to improve efficiency and the accuracy of records, to track cases and to improve communications with the police and sheriff courts. By June 1994 the system had cost E2.2 million and was Installed in ten of the 49 fiscal offices.

(pawgaphs b) Since 1990 the Crown Office have been developing unit costing and by 1993 2.14 and 2.15) they were analysing costs to compare the costs of outputs between offices and to assist in the allocation of resources to fiscal offices. Further development of the unit cost measurement system is underway.

(paragraphs cl Targets have been set for fiscal offices to have a complaint ready to serve on 2.16-2.17) the accused within six weeks (local office1 or nine weeks (regional office) of receipt of a police report. Since 1989 the number of offices achieving these targets has improved although performance against the target fluctuates both in Individual offices over time and between offices. CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTT,SH COURTS ADMINKTRATTON RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

5 On reports submitted to fIsca.ls (Committee conclusion (ii))

(paragraph 2.19) Since 1990, a standard format for police reports to fiscals has been adopted and is working satisfactorily.

6 On cases marked “no proceedings” (Committee conclusions (ii), (iv), (VI and (vi))

(paragwbs Fiscals decide whether to institute criminal proceedings. The proportion of 2.20-2.221 cases marked ‘no proceedings’ fell from 20 per cent in 1986 to 9 per cent in 1992, with an accompanying increase in the use of alternatives to prosecution and rose to 11 per cent in 1993 with a corresponding reduction in reports of road traffic offences following the introduction of police conditional offers. The Lord does not expect a uniform rate of no proceedings cases across all fiscal offices.

7 On the review of tbe fiscal service (Committee conclusion (xiv))

(paragraphs From April 1993 the Crown Office gave Regional Procurators Fiscal greater 2.23-2.26) control over resources and the management of their operations. The Crown Office expect efficiency gains to arise from these changes and from the introduction of new technology and improvements in working practices. They are monitoring progress.

8 On staffing fiscal offices (Committee conclusions (x) and (xiii))

(p-graphs The Crown Office no longer experience difficulty in the recruitment and 2.27-2.29) retention of staff. The vacancies which existed in 1987 have been filled and in the period to 1993 the number of legal staff employed in the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service rose by 10.6 per cent and numbers of administrative staff increased by 7.7 per cent. In the same period the number of cases rose by 5.6 per cent. Factors such as the complex@ of cases and the innoduction of new technology restrict scope for direct comparison between increases in business and staff numbers. Due to changes in the law, the scope for transferring work from legal to administrative staff has been reduced.

9 The Crown Office have acted positively in response to the Committee’s recommendations and have addressed each of the areas identihed for Office improvement to the Procurator Fiscal Service. They have introduced a wide range of new systems and practices with limited resources but they recognise that they still have some way to go before the full benefits of the changes made can be realised. In particular they need, as they intend, to continue the development of weighted unit cost information in order to further improve performance. Similarly it is too soon to know whether they will achieve the efficiency improvements expected from their information technology system. It is therefore important that they maintain a close control of the various management changes they have instituted and continue to work effectively with the other agencies in the Criminal Justice System.

2 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Findings on 10 Sheriffs exercise their judicial functions independent of Ministerial control. The the Scottish Secretary of State for Scotland is responsible for the central organisation and Courts administration of the sheriff courts and for providing the accommodation, staff Administration and other resources they need. His functions are discharged by the Scottish Courts Administration.

11 On court delays (Committee conclusions (viii), (ix), (xii))

(paragraph 3.9) a) Under statute Sheriffs Principal are responsible for programming court business and sheriff clerks timetable individual cases, Court programmes need to be capable of adjustment at short notice. Sheriff clerks normally allocate more summary criminal cases than can be accommodated in a court sitting, as experience shows that seven out of every nine such trials will not go ahead.

(paragraph 3.11) b) Scottish Courts Administration have been developing performance targets for court and court office business since 1987. These are designed to provide information on the level of service provided from resources, to allow managers better understanding and control, and to pinpoint areas for further attention. In all, twenty-seven targets have been established including, in co-operation with the , a 12 week target between pleading and trial diet for summary criminal business, a similar waiting period target for civil business and a target that the number of summary criminal trials adjourned due to lack of court time is five per cent or less.

(paragraphs c) Targets have not, however, been set for the total time cases are before the 3.12-3.13) courts since this depends not only on the availability of resources but also on judicial decisions. In 1992 Scottish Courts Administration analysis found that 57 per cent of cases in one court required more than one trial diet and that, whilst the time taken from pleading diet to determination of guilt or innocence was 12 weeks in 70 per cent of cases, the average period was 27.8 weeks for cases requiring more than one trial diet. In April 1991, after consultation with Sheriffs Principal the Secretary of State established two groups on court programming who reported in June 1993, recommending, inter alia, new waiting period targets. The report was accepted by the Secretary of State who has reconstituted a group with wider membership to facilitate implementation of the recommendations and consider further aspects of court programming.

(paragraphs d) Between 1988 and 1993 the longest waiting periods for summary criminal 3.14-3.16) business in individual courts fell from 45 weeks to 23 weeks. The average waiting period, at between 14 and 15 weeks or some 2 to 3 weeks above the target, has shown no significant improvement since 1988 although all sheriff courts recorded waiting periods at or below the target at some stage during the period.

(paragraphs e) The Scottish Courts Administration review outturn against performance 3.17-3.20) targets monthly. Where action is necessary to improve performance against waiting period targets Sheriffs Principal will normally increase the number

3 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES ,N SHERIFF COURTS

of court sittings and may ask Scottish Courts Administration to allocate additional resources. The National Audit Office found that the courts they visited were generally able to increase court sittings within budgeted resources. Sheriffs Principal appreciated the close relationship which had enabled Scottish Courts Administration to provide a very good service in allocating resources to meet their needs.

12 On utilisation of court resources (Committee conclusion (xi))

(paragr”plls a) Scottish Courts Administration provide ~e~oum?s to courts in the form of 3.21-3.22) buildings, staff, direct and indirect costs, and they have established twenty-seven targets and twelve performance indicators to measure the utilisation of those resources. Performance is monitored by court staff and regional managers and Scottish Courts Administration who also assess specific aspects of performance. In 1993 consultants engaged by Scottish Courts Administration recommended developing revised performance measures. A working group has been established to develop recommendations for a framework document for the proposed Court Service Agency.

hmwrap~ b) Scottish Courts Administration assumed responsibility for managing the 3.23-3.26) capital programme and maintenance of court buildings from the Property Services Agency in 1990. Their accommodation strategy is to secure courthouses in convenient locations equipped with enough courtrooms of appropriate size and suitable accommodation for court stti and users. They have developed guidance on accommodation standards for courtrooms and are developing this further to include furniture and fittings, specific building requirements, security etc.

(p=waphs c) The Property Services Agency’s information on court buildings, did not fuhy 3.27-3.28) meet Scottish Courts Administration requirements as estate managers. They are therefore developing their own estate database which will be substantially complete with the conclusion of the first cycle of building condition surveys in November 1994. The absence of complete building condition surveys made it more difficult for Scottish Courts Administration to establish either the scale of outstanding maintenance or a cyclical programme of preventative maintenance. They have therefore concentrated on making buildings water-tight and on major restorative maintenance.

(paragraphs d) Scottish Courts Administration’s policy is that, where practicable, justice 3.29-3.31) should be provided locally even in areas where the volume of business does not require the full-time use of court accommodation. In 1993-94 courtroom usage ranged from 21 per cent to 108 per cent of theoretically available court sitting days. No targets or performance indicators have been set for court buildings but, in preparation for the proposed Court Service Agency, Scottish Courts Administration are devising performance indicators for the relative utilisation of court buildings.

4 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Wmgraph e) Courts rarely received complaints about the facilities they provided. But the 3.32-3.34) saw scope to improve facilities for solicitors and witnesses. In visits to eight sheriff courts the National Audit Office noted that the facilities provided for court users varied considerably and that new and recently refurbished courthouses contained much better facilities.

(p=agwhs fJ Between 1988 and 1993 sheriff court staff numbers rose by 5.8 per cent 3.35-3.38) while court cases rose by 14.8 per cent. Different court business requires varying staff resources. Scottish Courts Administration plan replacement of their current work measurement system by 1995. Meantime they use the information it generates in assessing the efficiency of court staff and the need for changes to staff complements at individual courts.

(p-graphs g) Since 1982 Scottish Courts Administration have undertaken their own staff 3.39-3.40) inspection to supplement reviews by the Treasury and by the end of 1993 they had inspected all 49 courts. Between 1986 and 1992 staff inspections added four posts to complement, removed 12.5 posts and downgraded 13 others. In 1993, when Treasury and Scottish Office staff inspectors assisted at an inspection of the largest court, a reduction of 28 posts was identified.

(pawpphs h) Scottish Courts Administration have introduced into the 49 sheriff courts a 3.43-3.46) computer system covering criminal business. Word processors and personal computers have also been introduced to all courts and Scottish Courts Administration are developing an information systems strategy.

Conclusions on 13 Although Scottish Courts Administration are responsible for the resources the Scottish they provide to support court business, they are unable to exercise complete Courts control over the use of those resources. A number of factors influence the Administration economy and efficiency with which resources can be used, including decisions made by the judiciary in relation to individual cases. The Administration have rightly established a close working relationship with the judiciary.

14 Targets and performance indicators provide Scottish Courts Administration with information to support the allocation of and monitoring of the utilisation of resources for which they are accountable. But the waiting period targets do not represent all the time and resources necessary while cases are before the court. An independent review of court programming has recommended the development of revised performance measures, and working groups have been established to reconsider targets and indicators in the light of the decision to establish the Scottish Court Service as an Executive Agency. It is important that this work takes the opporhmi~ to explore the scope to develop an appropriate range of targets and indicators encompassing all the resources Scottish Courts Administration provide, taking advantage of the extra management information which can be made available from the development of new computer systems covering all court business. CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOT’“SH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

15 Scottish Courts Administration inherited a mixed stock of courthouses, varying substantially in age, size and condition. This poses a major challenge in providing suitable accommodation to meet all the requirements of court business across Scotland. Scottish Courts Administration have therefore taken steps to establish the condition of their estate. This will enable decisions on capital and revenue expenditure on buildings to be prioritised and requirements for new or refurbished buildings to be set. Further development of their accommodation standards for courtrooms, furniture and fittings, specific building requirements, security etc will also aid this process. In addition, regular monitoring by Scottish Courts Administration of space usage by court staff and court users would contribute to the effective management and utilisation of the court estate.

16 Staff are Scottish Court Administration’s most expensive resource. In order to control their efficient deployment Scottish Courts Admiistration need to relate staff numbers to the needs of the job. It is therefore right that Scottish Courts Administration should have recently taken steps to replace their work measurement system which provides essential management information in this important area. It is equally important that effective organisational review systems should constantly monitor staff needs against work measurement.

17 Scottish Courts Administration have introduced computerised systems for their criminal business records and for collecting management information, but considerable scope exists for further computerisation of the work of court offices. Given the scale of investment since 1988, the future investment required for new systems and the continuing improvements in information technology, Scottish Courts Administration need to complete their Information System Strategy.

6 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL. SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Part 1: Introduction

1.1 In March 1989, following a report by the Comptroller and Auditor General (HC187 of 1988-891, the former Committee of Public Accounts took evidence from the Crown Office on the way they discharged their responsibility for prosecuting crime in Scotland. In their 35th Report, Session 1988-89 (HC2241, the Committee were concerned at the performance of procurators fiscal offices and at delays in and utilisation of courts. In the subsequent Treasury Minute of January 1990 the Crown Office undertook to take action in response to these concerns and noted the responsibilities of Sheriffs Principal and the Scottish Courts Administration for the administration of court business. The Committee’s main recommendations and the Treasury Minute undertakings are set out in Appendix 1.

The Crown Office and the Procurator Fiscal Service

1.2 The Procurator Fiscal Service provides a system of independent public prosecution in Scotland under the ministerial control of the through the Crown Office. The service receives reports of crimes and offences from the police and over fifty other agencies and procurators fiscal decide whether or not to take criminal proceedings in the public interest or whether to pursue one of a number of alternatives to prosecution in respect of an individual offender. The service investigates the more serious cases and prosecutes in all courts. The procurator fiscal also enquires into all sudden, unexplained and suspicious deaths which occur in Scotland (including offshore deaths) and investigates complaints against the police. There are 49 local fiscal offices throughout Scotland (see Figure 1 overleaf). They employ some 270 legal staff and 820 support staff including 243 legal staff and 730 support staff at the fiscal offices. In 1993-94 the total costs of the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service were E36 million. Fiscals and Crown Counsel will decide in which court individual cases should be prosecuted on the basis of the seriousness of the crimes involved.

The Scottish Courts Administration and Sheriff Courts

1.3 The has exclusive jurisdiction over certain serious crimes; sheriff courts deal with solemn ( and jury) and summary (judge only) criminal cases and a wide range of civil court business; in district courts minor offences are heard by justices of the peace. The jurisdiction and powers of courts in Scotland are set out at Appendix 2.

7 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL.SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Figure 1: Location of and procurator fiscal regions in Scotland

GrampianHighland and Islands

Lothianand . Borders

Strath~e,“i” Glasgow/and

A Sheriffcourt location of SheriffPrincipal . Locationof regionalprocurator fiscal office . Locationof othersheriff courts and procurator fiscal offices

Source: Scottish CourtsAdministration and Crown Office.

The 49 sheriff courts and procurator fiscal offices are organisedinto six regions.

8 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

1.4 The 49 sheriff courts in Scotland are organised into six Sheriffdoms (see Figure 1) each headed by a Sheriff Principal. Criminal business takes up the majority of courtroom time but the time of the judiciary and other court staff and resources is more evenly distributed between civil and criminal business (Figure 2). There are 100 permanent sheriffs and 120 temporary sheriffs, supported by 640 court staff who are employed by the Scottish Courts Administration. In 1993-94, Scottish Courts Administration’s expenditure on sheriff courts totalled E48 million, including f18 million on capital works.

Figure 2: The types of business processed hy sheriff courts

Description Prapotfionof cowl time occupied(%)

SummaryCriminal pleas,custody hearings, intermediate hearings, 54 trials, continuedor deferredcases, means enquiries

SolemnCriminal petitions,pleas of guilty on indictment, 20 preliminaryhearings. sheriff and jury trials, deferredcases, judicial examinations

OrdinaryCivil non-proof/debatebusiness eQ tablings 17 (including divorce) adjustment/motion/dietprocedure rolls, interim interdicts:proof/debate hearings

SummaryCause non-proofbusiness eg first callings, 5 continuations,incidental applications, approval of expenses;proof hearings

all other businesseQ social work referrals,fatal 4 accidentinquiries, adoption hearings, bankrupts’ examination

Source: ScottishGouts Administration.

Sheriffcourts processa wide variity of criminaland civil business.

1.5 The Secretary of State for Scotland is responsible for the central organisation and administration of the sheriff courts. The Scottish Courts Administration discharge these functions through the provision of accommodation and the supply and management of staff. Sheriffs exercise their judicial functions independent of Ministerial control; under Section 15(l) of the Sheriff Courts Act 1971, Sheriffs Principal are required to arrange for the speedy and efficient disposal of court business.

1.6 In May 1994 the Secretary of State for Scotland announced his decision to establish the Scottish Courts Service as an Executive Agency from April 1995 under the Government’s “next steps” initiative. The Scottish Courts Administration will continue to discharge their Departmental responsibilities and will act as sponsor Department for the proposed Agency.

9 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMlNlSTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Scope of the National Audit Office examination

1.7 The National Audit Office examined the action taken by the Crown Office to respond to the Public Accounts Committee’s conclusions in the light of the Treasury Minute (Part 2); and whether the Scottish Courts Admiistration allocate resources to sheriff courts in accordance with their needs (Part 3).

1.8 The National Audit Office examined documents and interviewed staff at the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal offices and at Scottish Courts Administration and a sample of sheriff courts. The National Audit Office also consulted members of the judiciary, the Law Society of Scotland and took advice from Professor Ian Scott, Faculty of Law, Birmingham University.

10 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Part 2: Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service

2.1 This part of the report sets out the National Audit Office’s findings on the progress achieved by the Crown Office in implementing the undertakings given in the Treasury Minute.

2.2 The Lord Advocate’s objectives for the Procurator Fiscal Service include:

l to ensure that all crime made known to the Procurator Fiscal Service is adequately and timeously investigated;

l to ensure that persons charged with offences are dealt with in the most appropriate way having regard to the public interest;

l to ensure that all cases are properly prepared, fairly presented and, if necessary, discontinued; and

l to ensure that prosecutions are progressed within statutory time limits and without unnecessary delay and, so far as within the control of the Department, brought to a conclusion.

2.3 The Crown Offrce have implemented a number of initiatives in response to these objectives including:

l setting targets for the performance of key activities and establishing systems for monitoring performance against targets as well as the throughput of workload:

l developing and implementing a computerised system to improve the efficiency and the accuracy of records, to track cases, and to improve communication with all police forces and the sheriff courts;

l working with other agencies within the criminal justice system to improve performance; and

l establishing a programme of of&e reviews which includes examination of the quality and efficiency of performance. CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

The Committee of Public Accounts’ recommendations

2.4 The Committee found scope for improvements in Crown Office management information systems and endorsed Crown Office plans for more clearly dellned objectives, targets and performance indicators. They expected that the improvements would identify operational priorities, target resources and facilitate the monitoring of performance and effectiveness including achievements in meeting targets for processing cases.

2.5 The Committee were concerned about weaknesses in the quality of police reports submitted to procurators fiscal and expected the Crown Office to look for improvements. The Committee welcomed the Crown Office’s assurances that they would obtain information and explanations about the categories of cases marked “no proceedings” and expected the Crown Office to identify the need for action in particular areas or in individual fiscal offices.

2.6 The Committee noted that the Crown Office cited the shortage of resources as a major factor in the problems faced in prosecuting crime in Scotland. The Committee believed that streamlined procedures and improved efficiency would help overcome staffing pressures but considered that additional resources might be needed. The Committee recommended that a high level review of the Procurator Fiscal Service be undertaken which should be wide enough to consider, in conjunction with other parties involved, how the problems faced by the prosecution system as a whole could best be tackled.

The Treasury Minute response

2.7 The Treasury Minute confiied that the Crown Office had a number of important measures in hand to improve management information systems and to monitor and analyse individual offtce workloads. Targets and performance indicators, including unit cost information and targets for processing business, were being developed to identify areas where action might be required. Monitoring of the quality of work was being improved by extending the system of visits to fiscal offices by regional procurators fiscal and regional administrative managers, and improvements in the standard of reports submitted by the police were being sought. Information technology was being developed to allow the electronic exchange of information between fiscal offices and the police. Reasons for “no proceedings” were being reported to the Crown Office and analysed and the high level review of the Procurator Fiscal Service was to be undertaken as soon as possible.

12 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Management information and performance monitoring (Committee conclusions (i), (vii), and (xiii))

Information systems and performance indicators 2.8 The Crown Office have continued to develop their management information systems and have established a management information unit to collate monthly statistical information on performance, workloads and outstanding cases at individual fiscal offices. They are further developing performance indicators in relation to cost and activity (Appendix 31. This information is reported monthly to the Crown Office and to senior managers locally.

2.9 In 1989 the Crown Office and Treasury endorsed an information technology strategy for fiscal offices. This reflected CCTA approval of Crown Office proposals to introduce a computerised system (the Standard Office System) into all fiscal offices to improve efficiency and the accuracy of records: to track cases; and to improve communication with &II police forces and sheriff courts. The system was designed, written and tested during 1989-90 and piloted in one fiscal office (Paisley) between July 1990 and January 1991.

2.10 Following evaluation of the pilot system the Crown Office produced a business case to introduce the system on a network basis to all fiscal offices in stages between 1992 and 1996. The business case estimated the cost of introduction at 56.78 million over a ten year period (including E2.8 million capital costs). The business case anticipated benefits of E9.46 million over the same period and recognised that the benefits depended on establishing computer links with all eight police forces and the sheriff courts. The proposed timetable reflected anticipated progress by the police in introducing compatible systems. Treasury approved the case in August 1991.

2.11 By June 1994 the Standard Office System was installed in ten of the 49 fiscal offices (including the largest fiscal office - Glasgow) and the Crown Office had spent E2.2 million on the system. The 8nancial benefits of the new system forecast in the business case were mainly atixibutable to savings arising from reduced staff numbers. Projected savings for each office have been set as targets to be achieved through natural wastage or staff transfers by the end of the financial year following the introduction of the system. The Crown Office review progress against these targets in a series of post-implementation reviews. The first review, conducted six months after the system went live in the office concerned, found that anticipated savings in typing staff had been realised but that improvements in administrative staff efficiency could not be achieved until irregular work patterns had been eradicated. In March 1994 a Crown Office report noted that local management were addressing the scope for administrative staff savings through organisational changes and new working practices in the office.

13 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

2.12 The business case recognised that computer links between fiscal offices and sheriff courts were likely to result in administrative staff savings. Investment appraisal projected that savings would accrue from 1992-93 and rise to annual savings of S400,OOOby 1995-96. Delay in project approval and the joint development of the link have caused implementation of this part of the project to slip by a full year. Crown Office expect savings to accrue from 1994-95 and rise to the f400.000 target following completion of the roll-out at the end of 1996. All 49 sheriff courts are running Scottish Courts Administration’s Criminal Operations Project system and it is expected that data interchange with the Standard Office System will be achieved by the use of exchangeable computer media. A pilot system which started in February 1994 is currently running in Airdrie linking the fiscal office with the sheriff court. When this exercise is complete the results will be evaluated and the link introduced to the Standard Office System network at other locations within the timetable for full implementation.

2.13 A National Audit Office survey of five of the six offices revealed that fiscals saw significant benefits arising from the computer system in better case tracking, more prompt preparation of management information and improved processing of typing work; but the process of adjustment to the new system had resulted in some increases in admintstrarlve effort, They also expected further improvements in the processing of cases from plans to link up with sheriff courts.

2.14 The mix of business in fiscal offices is a major influence in establishing resource requirements and, since 1990, the Crown Offricehave been developing methods of unit costing as a more meaningful measure of performance. By April 1993, the Crown Offricewere using weighted units and costs for a range of business in each office together with a cost per case covering staff and other administrative costs to compare the costs of outputs between offices and to assist in the allocation of resources.

Performance achieved Unit costs 2.15 The use of weighted unit costs provides the Crown Office with a sound comparative base to investigate variations in outturn (Figure 3 opposite) beyond known factors such as differences in fixed costs; geographical factors; and the mix of business in different offices. The Crown Office consider, however, that further work on the measurement of unit costs is necessary to improve their accuracy; to ensure that all fiscal work is included; and to reflect the introduction of new technology. A working group has been established to review performance measurement and unit costs and they expect to report on the the weightings used in the unit cost system by the end of 1994 to enable a refined system to be put in place for the financial year beginning 1 April 1995.

2.16 Some 90 per cent of cases dealt with by fiscal offices relate to summary criminal cases although this type of work accounts for only 50 per cent of staff time. Statutory limits for the commencement of trial apply to all solemn cases, and to the commencement of proceedings in summary cases where the accused is held CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Figure 3: Procurator fiscal office unit costs 1993-94

Fiscal Office Numberof Total Staff Fiscal Office Numberof Total Staff WeightedUnits Costper WeightedUnits Costper WeightedUnit(f) WeightedUnit(f)

1,778,797 0.53 Duns(D) 85,091 0.31 Banff 127,814 0.59 (E) 4,712,731 0.55 Dingwall 156,121 0.53 Haddington 417,614 0.36 Dornoch(A) 59,871 0.46 Jedburgh (D) 191,713 0.26 Elgin 320,050 0.44 Linlithgow 946,581 0.38 FortWilliam 148,611 0.46 Peebles(E) 93,944 0.42 Inverness 675,171 0.52 Selkirk 178,984 0.40 Kirkwall (6) 54,531 0.61 Lerwick (6) 41,239 1.16 AverageRegion 3 6,626,659 0.49 Lochmaddy(C) 34,577 0.89 Peterhead 256,515 0.38 Glasgow(Region 4) 9,003695 0.56 Pottree(C) 43,801 1.06 Campbeltown 112,078 0.52 Stonehaven 21&i 80 0.38 Dumbarton 1,003,273 0.51 Stornoway 82,867 0.79 Dunoon 175,872 0.42 Tain (A) 152,656 0.48 Greenock(F) 781,516 0.49 Wick 115,088 0.56 Kilmarnock 1,482,519 0.45 Oban 161,769 0.45 AverageRegion 1 4,265,866 0.52 Paisley 2,066,544 0.41 Rothesay(F) 64,063 0.36 Alloa 334,599 0.40 Arbroath 345,758 0.32 AverageRegion 5 5,641,634 0.45 Cupar 280,174 0.46 Dundee 1,437,236 0.50 Airdrie 1,147,840 0.51 Dunfermline 857,507 0.41 Ayr 1,105,439 0.42 Falkirk 918,888 0.52 Dumfries 875,368 0.46 Forfar 260,774 0.29 Hamilton 2,688,564 0.51 Kirkcaldy 954,168 0.41 Kirkcudbright(G) 156,220 0.22 Perth 905,324 0.47 Lanark 499,572 0.29 Stirling 617,267 0.55 Stranraer(G) 308,922 0.31

AverageRegion 2 6,911,695 0.46 AverageRegion 6 6,761,925 0.45

40,237,496 0.49

Some: CrownOffice finance Division. Notes: Bracketedsuffix indicateslinking between&ices which sharea wmmon lega/staff resource. CrownDffice use weighted unit coststo comparethe costs of outputs betweenoffices.

in custody and to summary statutory offences. With certain exceptions there are no specific time limits for summary proceedings in respect of common law offences which form a substantial proportion of summary criminal business. The Crown Office have set a target for local (district) offices to have a complaint ready for service on the accused within six weeks of receiving a police report where the accused has not been detained in custody or released on an CROWNOFFICE AND THE PROCURATORFISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISHCOURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFFCOURTS

undertaking (or nine weeks in larger (regional) offices). Since 1989 the number of offtces achieving these targets has improved and in the year to March 1994 an average of 44 of the 49 offtces met them (see Figure 4).

Figure 4: The number 01 procurator fiscal offices not achieving the complaint ready to service target

Number of oHices 14 1

2’1 11 ’ ’ 1 ’ 11 11 11 ’ 1 ” / I Jun Sep DeeMar Jun Sep DeeMar Jun Sep DeeMar Jun Sep OecMar Jun Sep OeCMar ,989 1990 ,991 1892 1993 1994

Source: Crown Office ManagementInformation Unit. The number of offices not achieving the receipt of report and complaint readyfor Servicetarget has fallen since 1989-90.

2.17 Performance against the target fluctuates both in individual offices over time and between offices. The Crown Office have identified short-term staff shortages and unforeseeable peaks in workload as the main causes for offices exceeding targets. They consider that they do not need to carry out formal analysis as to why some offices operate significantly within the target.

Monitoring quality 2.18 The quality of work in fiscal offices is monitored through regular regional management visits, and through Crown Office management reviews. The hrst such review (July/August 1993) concluded that: the introduction of the Standard Office System had achieved anticipated savings in typing staff; the system had produced scope for flexibility in the use of administrative and typing staff; and information technology was not yet being used to full potential. The review also noted scope for improved management of workload, prioritisation, communication, and strategic planning and highlighted a number of quality of service initiatives aimed at reducing inconvenience to witnesses; observed that the quality of work was high; and that staff were committed, enthusiastic and hard working.

16 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Reports submitted to Fiscals (Committee conclusion (ii))

2.19 In 1990 a joint Crown Office/Association of Chief Police Officers (Scotland) Working Group recommended a standard format for police reports to fiscals. The format, with subsequent revisions, has been adopted by all police forces and fiscals are satisfied that its introduction has resulted in improved reports. The introduction of the Standard Office System with direct electronic links to police offices is further enhancing the efficiency of communication between fiscals and the police.

Cases marked “no proceedings” (Committee conclusions (iii), (iv), (v), and (vi))

2.20 Procurators fiscal are responsible to the Lord Advocate for dealing with alleged offences in the most appropriate way having regard to the public interest. It is neither necessary nor appropriate to institute court proceedings in all cases and fiscals may decide to take no proceedings or select one of a number of other alternatives to prosecution. Each case is considered individually on its merits and the fiscal uses his professional judgement and knowledge of particular problems and features in his own area, the Lord Advocate’s policy on certain classes of case and Crown Counsels instructions on individual cases, among other factors, in deciding what action should be taken. Because of fiscal discretion, differences in the nature and prevalence of different types of offence in an area, variations in reporting practice by police and other agencies, and because the same alternatives are not universally available, the pattern of decisions is not uniform across all fiscal offices. Where ilscals are satisfied that sufficient evidence is available in any case they normally consider whether alternatives to prosecution would be in the public interest.

2.21 The number of cases marked ‘no proceedings’ has fallen from 71,000 (20 per cent of reports received) in 1986 to 36,000 (9 per cent) in 1992 in a period when there has been an increased use of alternatives to prosecution. In 1993, 36,000 cases were marked “no proceedings” but the proportion rose to 11 per cent as the number of cases being referred to fiscals fell due to the introduction of powers allowing the police to make conditional offers to some offenders. The Lord Advocate does not expect a uniform rate of “no proceedings” for fiscal offices. In 1993 the proportion of “no proceedings” cases in individual offices ranged from three per cent (Forfar) to 17 per cent (Peterhead) (Figure 5 overleaf) (compared with a range of 2.5 per cent to 25 per cent in 19871, although some 30 of the 49 offices reported proportions within three percentage points of the national average. The main causes of “no proceedings” recorded by fiscals are lack of evidence and triviality. Few cases are marked “no proceedings” because of a shortage of fiscal resources.

17 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTlSH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Figure 5: Procurator fiscal office no-proceedings rates 1993

Fiscal Ofiice Reports No % Fiswl Oflice Reports No % Received Pmceedings Received Proceedings

Peterhead 2,758 474 17.19 Aberdeen 14,166 1,333 9.41 Airdrie 7,569 1,273 16.82 Greenock 5,512 517 9.38 Falkirk 8,202 1,365 16.64 Stirling 5,605 504 8.99 Perth 8,175 1,283 15.69 Paisley 12,721 1.128 8.87 Hamilton 18,749 2,654 14.16 Edinburgh 32,234 2,734 8.48 Glasgow 77,060 10,803 14.02 Dundee 11,315 961 8.49 Lanark 4,955 648 13.08 Inverness 7,841 650 8.29 Wick 1,169 146 12.49 Duns 1,259 104 8.26 Kilmarnock 10,752 1,328 12.35 Elgin 3,842 308 8.02 Banff 12,631 153 12.11 Selkirk 1,592 121 7.60 Alloa 3,122 376 12.04 Rothesay 270 20 7.41 Lerwick 870 102 11.72 Dornoch 545 40 7.34 Tain 1,368 160 11.70 Dunoon 1,203 88 7.32 Dumbarton 8,185 925 11.30 Portree 474 34 7.17 Stomoway 829 92 11.10 FortWilliam 1,655 118 7.13 Haddington 3,942 433 10.98 Dunfermline 7,002 483 6.90 Jedburgh 1.831 199 10.87 Sbanraer 2,255 155 6.87 Cupar 2,333 243 10.42 Dumfries 6,880 445 6.47 Oban 1,153 120 10.41 Peebles 920 58 6.30 Dingwall 1,501 156 10.39 Linlithgow 7,672 480 6.26 Kirkcaldy 7,497 764 10.19 Stonehaven 2,257 133 5.89 Ayr 8,865 890 10.04 Kirkcudbright 1,233 69 5.60 Campbeltown 699 69 9.87 Lochmaddy 269 15 5.58 Kirkwall 719 70 9.74 Forfar 2,512 77 3.07 Arbroath 3,048 289 9.48 Totals 317,840 35,590 Il.20

Source: CrownOffice Manaoement Information Unit Thelevelof"no-proceedings"acrossfiscalofficesvariesfrom3percentto17 percent.

2.22 It has been the policy of successive Lord to keep conhdential the reasons for marking individual cases “no proceedings”. Exceptions may be made where the decision not to proceed is attributable to the reporting agency’s misunderstanding of procedures or relevant evidential requirements, in order to avoid a repetition of the situation.

Review of the Fiscal Service (Committee conclusion (xiv))

2.23 In October 1990 the Crown Office appointed consultants to review the Crown Office and fiscal service management structure, their working practices and their relationships with other agencies. Their report, in August 1991, recommended delegation of executive authority to make regional fiscals accountable for their performance in financial and manpower control and in

18 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

administrative efficiency; the pursuit of improvements in working practices which they assessed could result in efficiency savings of 10 to 15 per cent in administrative and Qqring costs; and strengthening relations with other agencies through a greater concentration on the quality of service provided to the public in the administration of justice at a regional level.

2.24 The Crown Offtce introduced a revised delegated management structure for the fiscal service from April 1993. The new structure provides regional procurators fiscal with specific powers and responsibilities for: annual assessments of financial and manpower needs; the appointment and transfer of staff; the evaluation of fiscal offices’ workloads, resource levels, work practices and qualitative and quantitative performance; and consultation between the region and other criminal justice agencies. The regional fiscals also became members of a new management board responsible for Crown Office strategic management and policy.

2.25 The Crown Office also appointed consultants to assess the effects of the new management structure and to recommend scope for further improvement. In November 1993 the consultants reported that implementation of the new structure was going well in most areas although there was scope for more strategic plating to underpin financial plans. The Crown Office had already engaged the Civil Service College (September 1993) to advise on the production of a first departmental strategic plan. They further instructed the consultants to assist in the preparation of regional management plans. The National Audit Offricesurveyed 20 fiscal offices to establish fiscal service views on the revised structure. 75 per cent of those surveyed thought the changes would improve flexibility in the allocation of staff resources and improve liaison between regional fiscals and local offices leading to speedier, better informed decision making. Respondents also pointed to other advantages such as enhanced local awareness of departmental objectives and achievements, improved responses to Crown Offtce enquiries, and closer contacts with sheriff court staff,

2.26 The Crown Office have not used the original consultants estimate of lo-15 per cent improvements in efficiency in typing and adminstrative costs as a management target. They consider however that improvements in working practices will flow from management restructuring and the parallel introduction of the Standard Office System. They fully expect the savings forecast in their business case for the standard office system to he achieved over time. They have also sought to identify scope for further improvements in working practices through better management information, and the introduction of office reviews.

Staffing (Committee conclusions (x) aud (xiii))

2.27 In 1989 the Lord Advocate and the Solicitor General for Scotland established a committee to advise, inter alia, whether scope existed to relieve professionally quabRed members of the fiscal service of routine and less important duties. The committee concluded that there was little scope for staff who were not legally qualitied to take decisions on whether or not to prosecute although some duties, CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMlNISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

such as the offer of fixed penalties in traffic offences and the marking and citation of witnesses in certain minor categories of business, could be undertaken by such staff provided they were sufiiciently trained.

2.28 During 1987 the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service had vacancies for 11 legal staff and experienced di&ulties in recruitment. Between 1987 and 1993 the number of legal staff employed rose from 246 to 272 (an increase of 10.6 per cent) and administrative staff rose from 762 to 821 (7.7 per cent) leaving no vacancies for legal staff. In the same period the number of cases received by the fiscal service increased from 354,000 to 374,000 (5.6 per cent). A number of factors such as the relative complexity of cases and the introduction of new technology restrict the scope for direct comparison between the increases in business and staff numbers. The development of weighted units of work for the unit costing system will provide the Crown Office with further information to assist in the allocation of resources.

2.29 From April 1993, under the Road Traffic Act 1991, Scottish police forces may offer fixed penalties to those accused of minor road traffic offences using guidelines issued by the Lord Advocate. Thus, the number of such offences being referred to fiscal offices will reduce, a development which the Crown Office consider removes much of the potential for transferring work to unqualified staff, The Crown Office no longer experience dlfliculties in retaining legal staff because of the reduced demand for private sector solicitors as a result of the recession and other factors.

20 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Part 3: Allocation of resources to Sheriff Courts

3.1 This part of the report sets out the National Audit Office’s findings on the Scottish Courts Administration’s role in allocating resources to sheriff courts.

3.2 Sheriffs exercise their judicial function independent of Ministerial control. Under the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1971 Sheriffs Principal are responsible for securing the speedy and efficient disposal of business in their sheriffdoms. They have powers to fix sittings and the business of sheriff courts and, subject to the provisions of the Act, they may give instructions of an administrative nature to staff engaged in the administration of the court to secure the effective discharge of their functions.

3.3 Subject to the provisions of the Act the Secretary of State for Scotland is responsible for the central organisation and administration of the sheriff courts and for providing the accommodation, staff and other resources necessary to operate each sheriff court. His functions are discharged by the Scottish Courts Administration. The Act gives the Secretary of State powers to issue directives of an administrative nature for the purpose of the efficient organisation and administration of sheriff courts and, in particular, the speedy and efficient disposal of business in courts. No such directives have been issued. The terms of the Act lead to close and continued consultation between the Department on behalf of the Secretary of State and the Sheriffs Principal, and a broad agreement has been reached as to measures required to secure the efficient organisation and administration of sheriff courts.

3.4 The Secretary of State’s objectives for the Scottish Courts Administration in respect of sheriff courts are:

. to secure, in co-operation with the judiciary, the provision of ready access to justice through the speedy, efficient and cost-effective adminishation of sheriff courts; and

l to provide court-houses of sufficient size and of adequate quality to facilitate the efficient administration of justice in the sheriff courts.

3.5 The Scottish Courts Administration have responded to these objectives by:

. providing resources to assist in meeting the statutory time limits for first court appearances by persons who have been arrested: for persons held in custody under summary criminal proceedings; and for accused persons in solemn cases;

21 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOT’ITSH COURTS ADMINISTFATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

. setting, in conjunction with the judiciary, national targets for waiting periods in summary criminal trials and civil hearings;

. establishing a wide range of targets and performance indicators covering key activities of the work of sheriff clerks and their staff;

. pursuing a court building programme to ensure that every courtroom has either heen built or had one major refurbishment during the 20th century;

. implementing a computerised system for the management of criminal cases and the control of fines and other financial penalties imposed by the sheriff courts: and

l liaising with the judiciary and with other agencies in the criminal justice system.

3.6 Each of the 49 sheriff courts deals with a wide range of criminal and civil business. Each type of business involves different processes and therefore requires varying levels and different kinds of resources. More staff time is spent preparing and following up courtroom business and dealing with business handled administratively in court offices than in courtrooms. Figure 6 opposite illustrates a typical allocation of work between staff in the sheriif clerks office at a medium-sized sheriff court. The demand-led nature of court business and the different circumstances of individual courts makes it difhcult to predict accurately the level of resources required for each court. The Scottish Courts Administration forecast the level of business on a Scotland-wide basis in order to assess overall budgetary and resource requirements.

3.7 The Committee of Public Accounts expressed concern at extensive delays in processing summary criminal business in courts and over the utilisation of courts. The Treasury Minute noted that the speedy and efficient disposal of business in sheriff courts was not the responsibility of the Crown Office but that they were discussing the problems with Scottish Courts Admlnlstration. In 1988-89 the longest delays between pleas being heard and cases coming to trial in summary criminal business were 31 weeks and the average delay was 11 weeks. In the same period the proportion of trials adjourned through lack of courttime averaged less than 5 percent in 93per cent of courts.

3.8 In the light of the Committee’s concerns, the National Audit Office examined how Scottish Courts Administration administer the Secretary of State’s responsibility for allocating resources to courts.

Delays in processing cases in court (Committee conclusions (viii), (ix) and (xii))

Court programming 3.9 Under statute the Sheriff Principal has responsibility for programming court business in the sheriff courts in his . The general programme for court business in each sheriff court will take account of the balance of civil and

22 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Figure 6: Typical allocation of work in a medium sized sheriff court

’ Criminal Depute Criminal Clerk - Clerkof Court in all summary - registers and dispensesall criminal courts documentsreceived for - processessummary appeals hearing in court and applicationsfor assists with disposal of breach of probation/ criminal courts; completed community service orders court sheetscopied to police - monitors caseloading of and fiscal% intimates orders/ summarytrials and liaises sentencesto relevant with sheriffsand fiscal authorities - processesgranting/refusal of legal aid court decisions

Civil Clerk (2 posts) prepareswarrants for all normal ordinary, summary Sheriff Clerk Senior Depute Civil Depute causeand small claims actioru Main Duties - registersall notices of - planning of court - accommodationand Clerk of Court in all civil intentions, and all other diary computersystems courts documentsin manager - managementof staff - checksand signs all normal processes and other resotnces - Clerkof Court in ordinary, summary cause assists with disposal of civil sheriff and jury and small claim warrants courts: intimates returned - provision of advice sittings and assistanceto - processessimplified citations, preparesextract sheriffs, solicitors processeswork divorces,applications decrees,and undefended and othersas arising from for conjoined arrestment divorce interlocutors necessary bankruptcyand orders, miscellaneous liquidation actions applications,civil appeals Typist (2 posts) and divorce - monitors caseloadingof - generaltyping duties including affidavits civil proof/debatescourts extracts, interlocutors, sheriffs and liaises with sheriffs judgements,jury lists etc and agents

CashierDepute FinesClerk - accounts for fees and fines paid receivesand processespostal and counter fines - maintains receipt and disposal of criminal productions in safe reimbursesjurors’ expenses custody - preparesand assists in Fines - Clerk of Court as and when Enquiry Court and disposal of required 1same

Source: Sheriff Court, Dumfries; staff job descriptions. Dumfries Sheriff Court is a medium sized court of 12 staff processingthe normal range of court duties.

23 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATORFISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATTON RESOURCES IN SHERIFFCOURTS

criminal business expected at the court, requirements to accommodate the High Court on circuit and other anticipated flows of business. The programme will be capable of adjustment to take account of variations in court business, perhaps at short notice. A typical weekly programme is shown at Figure 7. Individual cases will be allocated a place in the programme by sheriff court staff. Major cases may be allocated a number of court days. A sheriff clerk will normally allocate more summary criminal cases to a court sitting than could be accommodated if all cases went ahead. This is because on average seven out of nine summary criminal cases do not proceed, normally due to late changes of plea or the absence of the accused or of key witnesses.

Figure 7: Typical weekly programme of courtsitlings

court lime I Vlonday Tuesday Wednesday Thutsday Friday

court 1 loam Iiigh Courtsitting high Courtsitting High Courtsitting siheriff and jury trials s heriff and jury Vials

court2 loam IIeferred sentences Zriminalplea diet Deferredsentences I ntermediatediet Intermediatediet

Ilpposed motionsand Opposedmotions and ,:ivil hearings civil hearings

I:riminal custodies Criminalcustodies Criminalcustodies

court3 I Oam Sheriffand jury trials sheriffand jury trials Sheriffand jury trials Cleferred sentences 0leferred sentences

I2 noon t Opposedmotions and Clpposed motions and c:ivil hearings cMl hearings

L15pm ( :riminal custodies C:dminal custodies

court4 loam Summarycivil lrdinary civil proofs Ordinarycivil proofs ()rdinary civil court Clrdinary civil proof including proofs Eiankruptcycourt (Opposed motions

?.15pm : iocial work referrals

court5 loam Ordinarycivil appeal 3rdinarycivil proof

Court6 loam Fatalaccident inquiry Summarycriminal Summarycriminal <;ummarycriminal I ;ummarycriminal trials trials t rials tldais

court7 loam Summarycriminal Summarycriminal Summarycriminal ‘ ;ummarycriminal t hdinarycivil proof trials trials trials t rials IIeferred sentence

Source: Sheriff Court,Paisley; coult roll for reweekcommencing ;111 November 1993. This tableshows a typical weekb programmeof sheriff court business.

24 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

3.10 In April 1991, following consultations with Sheriffs Principal, the Secretary of State for Scotland established two groups on Court Programming each chaired by a Sheriff Principal and comprising representatives of the judiciary, the Crown Office and the Procurator Fiscal Service, sheriff court staff and solictors. They reported in June 1993 and the Secretary of State subsequently reconstituted a group with wider membership, including representatives of the police and court users, to facilitate implementation of the recommendations of the earlier reports (para 3.13) and consider further aspects of court programming.

Performance targets

3.11 Scottish Courts Administration consider that targets provide specific information on the level of service expected from a given amount of public resources, and enable those concerned to have a better understanding and control of what is going on, and to pinpoint areas where further attention is required if objectives are to be met. The Scottish Courts Administration have therefore been developing performance targets since 1987. By 1993 they had set 27 targets for the performance of court staff and court functions (Appendix 4). Three of the targets relate to waiting periods for courtroom business: the requirement to produce programmes for consideration by Sheriffs Principal so that the waiting period between pleading and trial diets for summary criminal cases is 12 weeks or less; the waiting period between requests for a hearing in ordinary civil business and the date of a hearing is 12 weeks or less; and the requirement that the number of summary criminal trials adjourned due to lack of court time is 5 per cent or less. The waiting period targets reflect the time necessary to allow the parties involved to prepare their cases. They have been set by Scottish Courts Administration in conjunction with the judiciary. In addition, the sheritf courts require to meet statutory time-limits for solemn criminal business and for appearances by accused in custody.

3.12 Targets have not been set for the total length of time for which cases are before the courts since this depends not only on the availability and distribution of resources but also on judicial decisions, for example on interest ofjustice considerations, the priority to be associated with different types of case, and whether or not motions for adjournment are accepted. An analysis of summary court business at one court in 1992, carried out by the Scottish Courts Administration, found that in 57 per cent of cases’ trial diets were adjourned on one or more occasions. Where there were no adjournments, trials were completed within a period of 12 weeks of the pleading diet in 70 per cent of cases. Where there were one or more adjournments, the average period between the pleading diet and the completion of trial was 27.8 weeks, with 53 weeks recorded in one case.

3.13 The Groups on court programming established in 1991 were required to develop draft guidelines on the programming of criminal and civil business in the sheriff courts having regard to: the maintenance of high standards ofjustice:

25 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATlON RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

the efficient, effective and economical utilisation of the resources available to the court; and to the provision of the best possible service to court users. Their report recommended, inter alia, a number of targets for waiting periods covering:

. part-heard cases - not more than one week after the adjournment:

. cases adjourned for lack of time - not more than three weeks after the adjo-ent:

. other adjourned cases not more than five weeks after the adjournment;

. civil proofs, hearings and debates - not more than seven weeks after diet allowed:

. summary criminal trials where accused not in custody - not less than 10 and not more than 12 weeks after the pleading diet.

The Groups noted that while no immediate change should be made to existing national targets all courts should strive to achieve the recommended waiting periods and that national targets should be revised as and when it seemed appropriate to do so.

Performance achieved 3.14 Scottish Courts Administration publish outturn figures annually on all 27 sheriff court targets. The published figures give outturn in terms of the proportion of courts meeting the targets and also provide full lists of sheriff courts showing performance on criminal and civil waiting periods in the current and previous years. Further detail on individual court performance is made available at court level to court advisory committees and user groups as well as being displayed on court notice boards. As regards waiting periods, in 1993-94 72 per cent of courts met the summary criminal target, 81 per cent met the ordinary civil target and 83 per cent met the adjournment target. 3.15 0uttu~11against the waiting period targets for summary criminal cases is measured as the time taken between the date the sheriff clerk receives a request (eg a not guilty plea) and the date he programmes the case to be heard (eg the trial date). The single longest period recorded using this measure has fallen from 45 weeks (in 1988) to 23 weeks in 1993 (Figure 8 opposite). The average actual waiting period, weighted to take account of the volume of business in different courts fell from 17 weeks in 1988 to between 14 and 15 weeks in 1989, some 2-3 weeks above the target, but has shown no significant improvement since (Figure 9 opposite). Waiting periods for civil business fell from 17 weeks in 1988 to 13 weeks in 1990, and have since been maintained at a level close to the 12 week target. This performance has been recorded over a period when Scottish Courts Administration’s Management Plans have shown annual increases in court workloads between four and

26 CROWNOFFICE AND THE PROCURATORFISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISHCOURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCESIN SHERIFFCOURTS

Figure II: Summary criminal business in sheriff courts: Highest reported average waiting periods between pleading and trial dates in 1993

We& Week Weeks

Glasgow 23 Duns 14 Stirling 12 Peterhead 22 Jedburgh 14 Wick 12 Falkirk 19 Tain 14 Dumbarton 11 Haddington 19 Alloa 13 Edinburgh 11 Linlithgow 16 Kirkcaldy 13 Kirkcudbright 11 Airdrie 17 Arbroath 12 Stranraer 11 FortWilliam 16 Ayr 12 Campbeltown 10 Hamilton 16 Cupar 12 Domoch 10 Lochmaddy 16 Dumfries 12 Elgin 10 Stonehaven 16 Dunoon 12 Forfar 10 Stornoway 16 Greenock 12 Kilmarnock 10 Aberdeen 15 Inverness 12 Rothesay 10 Banff 15 Lanark 12 Selkirk 10 Dingwall 15 Oban 12 Kirkwall 9 Dunfermline 15 Peebles 12 Lerwick 9 Paisley 15 Perth 12 Dundee 14 Partree 12

Source: ScottishComts Administration. ScottishCourts Administration have been successful in reducingthe highestreported waiting periodsin sherii courts.

Figure 9: Ordinary civil and summary criminal cases-average waiting period

Weeks +4&weighted average waiting period -criminal

Sep Dee Mar Jun Sep Dee Mar Jun Sep Dee Mar Jun Sap Dee Mar Jun Sep 0% Mar 89 89 90 90 90 90 91 91 91 91 92 92 92 9* 93 93 93 93 94

Source: Scottish CourtsAdministration. There has been no significant improvementin waiting periods over time.

27 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL. SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

five per cent which, they estimate, would have lengthened waiting periods by two weeks if compensating action (such as the provision of temporary sheriffs) had not been taken.

3.16 There are a number of reasons why indlvldual courts may be unable to achieve consistently the target figure of 12 weeks. High priority must be given to cases where accused persons are in custody and where cases will fall if statutory time limits are not met. Sheriffs Principal may determine that certain types of civil cases, for example those involving issues relating to child protection or child custody, must be given high priority for an early hearing. The waiting periods for summary criminal nials reflect therefore not only the volume of such cases coming before the court, but the total workload of the court and the relative priority afforded to different business in that workload.

3.17 Scottish Courts Administration receive monthly reports of courts’ outturn against targets. Courts are required to provide explanations where they have failed to meet targets but they did not always do so. Where courts failed to achieve targets the most common reported reasons were: the need to accommodate visits by the High Court on circuit; courtroom refurbishment, and unplanned increases in business.

3.18 Short-term fluctuations in performance against targets may be remedied without the need for specific action. Where short or medium term action is required to improve performance against waiting period targets, a Sheriff Principal will normally increase the number of court sittings in the court’s programme for the type of business concerned. To achieve this, the Sheriff Principal may request Scottish Courts Administration to allocate additional temporary sheriffs, to allocate resources above local budgets or to assist with temporary accommodation. Longer term measures may mean new sheriffs, more staff, or new buildings.

3.19 In the sample of eight courts visited, the National Audit Office found that, where increases In the number of court sittings were necessary, courts had been able to achieve these within available court resources. This often involved a flexlble use of accommodation or allowing outturn against time targets to slip for a shortperiod.

3.20 The efficient and effective administration ofjustice in sheriff courts requires the maintenance of good communications between the Sheriffs Principal and the Scottish Courts Administration. In interviews with three of the six Sheriffs Principal the National Audit Office found that they appreciated the close relationship which they considered had enabled the Scottish Courts Administration to provide a very good service in allocating resources to meet their needs.

28 CROWNOFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTUSH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Utilisation of court resources (Committee conclusion (xi))

3.21 Scottish Courts Administration provide resources in the form of court buildings, court staff, direct costs associated with court cases and indirect costs (see Figure 10). Since April 1989 they have established 12 performance indicators to measure the utilisation of court resources (Appendix 41. They use information from each sheriff court to produce quarterly court “league tables” showing costs for each indicator and other management information which is monitored by staff in individual courts and more generally by regional sheriff clerks who also receive comparative information at sheriffdom level. In addition the Scottish Courts Administration undertake special central exercises to assess speciiic aspects of performance. Combined performance, cost and budget

Figure 10: Resources provided to sheriff courts

OutturnExpenditure 1993-94 (fmillion)

6CI-

. Full time sheriffs (f7.6 million) paid from the ConsolidatedFund 5cI- - Temporarysheriffs (f2.0 million) - Juror Expenses(f2.1 million) - Generalrunning costs (f4.0 million) 4cI- - Court buildings maintainance(f5.2 million)

L Court buildings rent and rates (f6.3 million) 3c/-

2cI- - Court buildings capital (fi8.3 million)

IOI-

- Court staff (910.5 million)

0

Source: Scottish GooftsAdministration, The largest elementof current expenditureis that of Sheriff Court staff whilst capital expenditure accounts for 33 per cent of the resourcesprovided to courts.

29 CROWNOFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFFCOURTS

returns are discussed at quarterly meetings of all regional sheriff clerks, the Principal Clerk of Session and senior managers from Scottish Courts Administration.

3.22 In January 1993 the Scottish Courts Administration commissioned a consultant from the Civil Service College to review the targets and performance indicators in use in the sheriff courts. The subsequent report, dated March 1993, concluded: that performance measures could be allied more closely to Departmental objectives; that existing performance indicators concentrated on unit cost and timeliness and could be supplemented with additional indicators on quality of office output; and that the performance indicators covered activities at a level which made it difficult to assess overall performance. The report made a number of recommendations, including a strategy for developing revised performance measures. Following the Secretary of State’s decision to establish a Court Service Agency, in May 1994 the Scottish Courts Administration established a working group to develop proposals for new performance measures for inclusion in the framework document being prepared for the Agency.

Court buildings

Background 3.23 Most of the 49 sheriff courts in Scotland date from the 19th Century and many are listed buildings. In 1973 responsibility for the provision and maintenance of court-houses was transferred to Scottish Courts Administration from statutory court-house commissioners. Only one new court-house was built between 1900 and 1973 and most of the buildings the Scottish Court Administration inherited were in urgent need of replacement, extension or improvement.

3.24 In 1988 Scottish Courts Administration assumed direct responsibility from Property Services Agency for managing major new works in the capital building programme and in 1990 they assumed responsibility for maintenance of the estate. Their accommodation snategy for sheriff courts is to secure:

. s&cient number of courtrooms to allow the business of courts to be discharged timeously:

. courtrooms of a size appropriate to the business of courts and of appropriate modern standards;

. court-houses with accommodation for court users and staff of a size and quality sufficient to allow the courts to operate efficiently and effectively: and

. courts at geographical locations convenient to court users.

3.25 Scottish Courts Administration’s objective for the condition of their court-house buildings is to ensure that all courts have been replaced or have undergone one major refurbishment in the 20th Century. Since 1975, Scottish Courts

30 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOlTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

I

Sheriff court of Dumbarton Most of the 49 sherift cowls in Scotland date from the 19th Century and many are listed buildings

Sheriff Court of Glasgow and Strathkelvin Since 1975, Scottish Cowls Administration have built seven new reolacement courts

31 CROWNOFFICEANDTHEPROCURATORFlSCALSER"ICE: SCOTTISHCOURTSADMINISTRATlONRESOURCES1NSHERIFFCOURTS

Administration have built seven new replacement sheriff court-houses, completed major refurbishments and extensions in a further 12 court-houses and have plans to construct or undertake major refurbishment of another six courts (see Figure 11). Refurbishment of some 13 smaller courts is also planned under the Scottish Courts Administration minor works programme.

Figure 11: Sheriff court building improvement works

Replacement Dunfermline Glasgow Falkirk Edinburgh court houses Peterhead Kilmarnock

Years I I I I 1982-84 1985-87 1988-90 1991-93 1994

Major Stranraer Stirling Forfar Aberdeen Dumfries refurbishments/ Inverness Arbroath Greenock extensions Kirkcaldy Hamilton Lanark Perth

Source: Scottish CourtsAdministration. The replacementAirdrie Sheriff Court was completedin 1975, building works having started prior to Scottish Courts Administration assuming responsibility for the provision and maintenanceof court houses.Construction or major refurbishmentis plannedfor a further 6 sheriff courts whilst a further 13 smaller sized courts will be refurbished under Scottish Courts Administration’s minor works programmeto meetthe building objective.

By the end of 1994 Scottish CourtsAdministration replacedor completely refurbished 18 sheriff courts.

3.26 In developing plans for new buildings and major refurbishments Scotdsh Courts Administration refer to the recommendations of a 1973 Joint Scottish Courts Administration/Property Services Agency Working Party on court design and accommodation standards. This report helps them to determine the number and type of courtrooms, office and ancillary space and the requirements of other court users such as the police, social workers, solicitors and the press. Theyalso take account of Departmentof the Environmentaccommodation guidance as a base measure for office space in court-houses. In March 1992 Scottish Courts Administration appointed Property Services Agency Projects to produce a court design guide providing standard floor plans for various types of courtroom. The results have yet to be discussed with court staff and the judiciary. The Scottish Courts Administration intend extending the guide to cover other important issues including court furniture and fittings, specific building requirements, building services, security etc. In the meantime Scottish Courts Administration draw on the Courts Standards and Design guide prepared by the Lord Chancellors Department in preparing briefing requirements for building work. In addition, in October 1992 Scottish Courts Administration commissioned external consultants to undertake a post occupation study of a newly-built court which has provided useful information to further improve the briefing process.

32 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Court condition and facilities 3.27 When Scottish Courts Administration took over the estate management function from Property Services Agency they were provided with the building plans, title deeds and other relevant information including maintenance records and building condition surveys held by the Agency. However, such information did not fully meet their requirements as newly responsible estate managers and they are consequently developing their own estate database consistent with the recommendations of the Treasury Capital Asset Information System which recommended the introduction of capital assets databases into all departments by 1 April 1993. Essential information for the database is to be provided from a special exercise to update drawings, and other related information for which consultants have been commissioned at a cost of Z200,OOO.Scottish Courts Administration expect the database to be substantially complete by the end of 1994. Routine condition surveys are undertaken biennially (with special four year surveys of listed buildings) as part of the general estate management contracts awarded to chartered surveyors by Scottish Courts Administration at a cost of g70,OOOa year. By September 1994 condition survey reports has been completed on 46 of the 49 sheriff court houses. The remaining reports will be received by November 1994.

3.28 The absence of a complete set of building condition surveys made it more difficult for Scottish Courts Administration to quantify the full extent or cost of essential maintenance work required. They have concentrated resources on making their buildings water-tight and on major restorative maintenance of those court-houses which suffer from water ingress, wood rot and other interior damage. Until the scale of essential repairs is identiiied, costed and rectified it will not be possible to introduce a full cyclical programme of planned preventative maintenance. Scottish Courts Administration have, however, introduced a programme covering mechanical and electrical plant throughout the estate and intend to extend this to cover internal and external painting work.

Court room usage 3.29 During 1993-94 Scottish Courts Administration made 144 courtrooms available in the sheriff courts and in that period sheriff court hearings were mounted on a total of 27,411 days. Assuming it was possible for each courtroom in every sheriff court to be used for 249 court sitting days (the theoretical maximum number of working days other than weekends and statutory holidays) these sittings could be accommodated in the equivalent of 111 courtrooms. However, because courthouses require to be reasonably accessible to the public, particularly those serving as witnesses and jurors, the distribution of population and the nature of court business require more than the theoretical minimum accommodation. Twenty-three courthouses, serving rural areas, do not have a full-time sheriff. Jury trials require specific accommodation not available in every courtroom; cases involving children may require special accommodation; courtrooms may be used by the local district court or by the High Court on circuit. CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

3.30 Actual usage of courtrooms in individual courts ranged from 21 per cent to 108 per cent of available court room sitting days and court sittings averaged between 2.8 to 5.8 hours. This reflects the Department’s policy that, where practicable, justice should be provided locally even in areas where the volume of business does not require the full-time use of court accommodation.

3.31 No targets or performance indicators have been established for the use of court buildings and courtrooms, but Scottish Courts Administration collect information on court sitting days and court hours on which to calculate other indicators. In preparation for the proposed Courts Services Agency, the Scottish Courts Administration are in the process of devising a series of indicators which will enable a comparative assessment to be made of the relative efficiency of court buildings including, Inter alia, space utilisation.

Use of office and ancillary space 3.32 The devolution of responsibility for estate management allows Departments to establish their own standards to reflect their operational circumstances. The nature of the estate managed by Scottish Courts Administration, with a wide variation in the scale, age and design of courthouses, together with the wide range of individuals and agencies who use space in courthouses, presents particular diiliculties in assessing standards and establishing conditions of use. Detailed records of office accommodation will be available by the end of 1994 when the estate database is expected to be substantially completed.

Facilities at court-houses 3.33 The eight sheriff courts visited by the National Audit Office included a mixture of recently constructed and refurbished courts, others awaiting refurbishment and one court housed in temporary accommodation. The National Audit Office noted that, while courtrooms generally followed standard layouts and were well maintained, the facilities provided for court users varied considerably. Those courts which had not been refurbished had limited space outside courtrooms for waiting areas and intervlew rooms whereas new and recently refurbished court-houses contained much better facilities.

3.34 Sheriifs Principal and court staff told the National Audit Office that they rarely received complaints about court facilities. The Law Society of Scotland told the National Audit Office that their members saw scope to improve facilities for solicitors to interview clients in private, and for the separation of witnesses in both criminal and in civil cases. In accordance with commitments in the 1991 Justice Charter for Scotland, Scottish Courts Administration have commissioned customer surveys to assess the adequacy of information provided on the progress of court business, accessibility and sign posting in court buildings, arrangements for the reimbursement of jurors, payment of fines and building cleanliness.

34 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Court staff 3.35 Between 1988 and 1993 the number of staff employed at sheriff courts rose from 603 to 638 (5.8 per cent). In the same period the number of cases handled by the courts rose from 325,000 to 373,000 (14.8 per cent) and court staff handled more other business (eg registration of clubs, confirmation of small estates) and administrative matters (eg recruitment of support staff and local accommodation matters). The different types of court business require varying amounts of staff input. Staff resources are therefore determined according to the amount of work required for each type of business,

Work measurement 3.36 Scottish Courts Administration require courts to provide monthly and quarterly returns of the work processed by their staff. Courts employ a workload measurement system which assigns weightings, broadly based on estimates of staff time to process various types of court business, to quantify staff productivity in terms of units of work per staff member. The use of units of work as a basis of measurement in sheriff courts originated in the 1920s although the system has undergone a number of significant revisions over the years. In 1982 Scottish Courts Administration commissioned a review of the system by Scottish Office Management SetvIces which concluded that not all of the work of sheriff court staff was included in the system and that some of the weightings were inaccurate. They recommended that the workload measurement system then in place should be discontinued, that a databank of statistics of court activity should be created along with an Organisational Review Team within Scottish Courts Administration capable of adopting two specific roles - staff inspection and systems review.

3.37 Scottish Courts Administration responded by establishing the Operational Review Team and referring consideration of the revisions to the work measurement system to a standing committee. No comprehensive review of the underlying assumptions and methodology of the workload measurement system was undertaken, although a number of revisions have taken place including the introduction of a new workload measurement return to cover a range of business not previously included. Scottish Courts Administration no longer use the workload measurement system as the sole indicator of staff resource requirements; instead they use the information it generates in conjunction with other indicators to assess the efficiency of court operations and the need for changes to staff complement.

3.38 In August 1992 Scottish Courts Administration established a working party to assess the feasibility of using a synthetic time measurement system to replace the units of work system. A similar system was being considered by the ’s Department for introduction to county courts in England and Wales for use in some areas of civil business. Scottish Courts Administration have considered the working party’s feasibility report and the costs of a synthetic time measurement system covering business in the sheriff courts, the and the High Court. Subsequently, they have established a working group and quality assurance teams to develop the synthetic time measurement system with a view to introducing its first stages by January 1995.

35 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINlSTRATlON RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Staff inspection 3.39 In 1982 Scottish Courts Administration introduced one half-time staff inspector post to supplement staff inspection work carried out by the (then) Civil Service Department. Staff inspections examine each sheriff court’s organisational structure, and the number and grade of court staff posts. The Administration originally envisaged that their staff inspections could cover all sheriff courts on a four year cycle. However, because the staff inspector also had to assess demands for increases in complement, the estimate of coverage proved over optimistic. In 1986 a full-time inspector was appointed and the full survey of courts was completed in 1993 when the largest court (Glasgow and Strathkelvln - with 25 per cent of total sheriff court staff) was inspected.

3.40 The full-time staff inspector is an experienced sheriff clerk who has attended Treasury staff inspection training courses. As a result of staff inspection reviews of 25 courts between 1986 and 1992 four posts were added to complement, 12.5 posts were removed, one post was upgraded and 13 were downgraded. For the 1993 inspection of Glasgow and Strathkelvin sheriff court, the Scottish Courts Administration inspector was assisted by two Treasury staff inspectors and a member of the Scottish Office staff inspection team. Their report, in October 1993, recommended a reduction of 28 out of the 163 posts.

Performance indicators 3.41 Three of Scottish Courts Administration’s twelve performance indicators (Appendix 41 relate to staff cost: staff cost per unit of work; staff cost per court sitting day and staff cost per court hour The National Audit Office noted that none of these performance measures provided a complete indicator of economy or efficiency in the use of staff resources as the units of work were inaccurate; because most staff time was spent outside courts; and because variables such as the number of court sitting days and hours were matters of judicial discretion.

The direct costs of legal proceedings 3.42 Scottish Courts Administration meet certain direct court costs associated with court proceedings. These include the costs of temporary sheriffs and jurors’ expenses. A National Audit Office examination of these costs found:

(i) Temporary sheriffs Between April and December 1993 Scottish Courts Administration provided courts with temporary sheriff days equivalent to 24 full-time sheriffs to cover increases in workload, sick leave and other absences, whilst consistently achieving their target to meet 99 per cent of requests from Sheriffs Principal for temporary sheriffs.

(ii) Jurors In 1990 The Scottish Office Internal Audit Unit found variations in the payment of jurors’ expenses. Scottish Courts Administration implemented most of the Audit Unit’s recommendations by revising accounting regulations and claim forms and issuing new instructions to sheriff clerks. A review of jury citation practices was commissioned in July 1994 and was completed in October 1994.

36 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

All courts studied were found to be using good practice and efficient approaches to citation within statutory requirements. In 1993-94 total expenditure on jury costs in sheriff courts was E2.1 million and average expenditure in individual courts ranged from X.295 to El,783 per court sitting day. The review by Scottish Courts Administration confirmed that this range reflects variations in the propensity ofjurors to submit claims and differences in travelling times and costs between the urban areas and more rural courts.

Information technology

3.43 Scottish Courts Administration and all but the smallest sheriff courts have made use of information technology for word processing and computer based administrative systems. In March 1989 a Criminal Operations Project was introduced to manage the range of functions relating to criminal business in the court-house from input of initial details to final disposal of the case including accounting for the collection of fines. By December 1992 the system had been implemented in all 49 sheriff courts. A post implementation review to examine the costs and benefits achieved from the system was commissioned by Scottish Courts Administration in February 1994. In June 1994 the Central Computing and Telecommunications Agency reported that the system had been implemented on time, within its 23 million budget and had achieved the planned benefits.

3.44 The Criminal Operations Project was designed to be open to links with other computer systems. In February 1994 a pilot scheme linking the sheriff court with the Procurator Fiscal Service in Airdrie was launched. Scottish Courts Administration have also held discussions with other agencies, such as the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency, on the feasibility of data transfer. Scottish Courts Administration also plan to use the Criminal Operations Project database, and other information input by courts, to introduce a Management Information System during 1994.

3.45 In 1988 Scottish Courts Administration established an Information Technology Strategy Committee with representatives from Scottish Courts Administration, the Central Computing and Telecommunications Agency, and the Scottish Office to provide an overview of the implementation of the Criminal Operations Project and subsequently the Management Information System. Following completion of the Project, the Committee considered development of a wider Information Technology Strategy for the Department. In April 1992 the Committee considered a paper prepared by Scott&h Courts Administration setting out their proposed Information Technology developments. CCTA advised that a formal strategy document should be prepared by consultants and that the first stage in that process should be a scoping study, also to be undertaken by consultants, to establish the parameters for the full strategy study. In October 1993 Scottish Courts Administration commissioned the Central Computing and Telecommunications Agency to undertake a scoping study taking account of the proposed creation of the Scottish Court Services Agency. The subsequent report was presented to the Information Technology Strategy Committee in March

37 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATTON RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

1994 and Scottish Courts Administration have since agreed to commission a full strategy study. Following preparation of a specification for the full study, invitations to tender for work were issued in August 1994.

3.46 In January 1993 Scottish Courts Administration appointed consultants to undertake a study of the use of small personal computer systems which had been introduced on an ad hoc basis. Their report (March 19931 Indicated that the diversity of hardware and software and the lack of central control, particularly professional computer advice, had resulted in varying degrees of success from installing small systems. The consultants recommended standardised systems and enhanced central control. Scottish Courts Administration have since introduced service-wide standards for hardware and software and have appointed a manager to oversee developments in small systems.

38 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF C”URTS

Appendix 1 The Committee of Public Accounts report recommendations on the Prosecution of Crime in Scotland: Review of the Procurator Fiscal Service and government response

‘PAC Recoinmendation Treasury Minute Response Current NAG’s Report References

ISSW Managementof lnfarmationand PerformanceMonitoring

PACconclusion (i): We expectthe Crown Office Responseto PACconclusion (i): CrownOffice Para 2.8 The ManagementInformation Unit to give priority to the arrangementsneeded to confirms that is has developedand implemented collates monthly statistical information on fiscal encouragebetter management,help to identify improved managementinformation systems performance,workloads and outstandingcases. operationalpriorities and target resources,and through the setting up of a Management They are further developing performanceindicators facilitate their monitoring of performanceand Information Unit to analyse and monitor individual in relation to cost and activity which are reported effectiveness. office workloads and outputs along with regular monthly locally and to Crown Office senior monitoring of performanceindicators and targets rnanagerj. to identify areas where special action is required. The objectives and nature of the work of the Para 2.9-2.13 A f6.78 million programme to Oepaiiment do not readily lend themselvesto the improve efficiencyand the accuracy of records developmentof indicators of performancecovering trackcases and improve communicationthrough quality as distinct from quantity and speed of work computerisationis being implementedin each performed. Nevertheless,Crown Officeis fiscal office between1992 and 1996. Crown Office continuing to addressthis issue. Meantime, cost benefit analysis indicatesbenefits of f9.46 monitoring of quality of work has been improved million should accrue from the system over a ten by extending the system of visits and reviews year period and they are reviewing progress while a carded out by regional ProcuratorsFiscal and link with sheriff courts is developed. RegionalAdministrative Managers,who subsequentlyreport to Crown Office.

PACconclusion (vii): We expect the Crown Office Responseto PACconclusion (vii): Crown Office Para 2.14-2.15 Since 1990 Crown Officehave regularlyto monitor the position of fiscals’ confirms that the monitoring of targets for timeous been developing unit costs to provide a sound achievementsin meeting statutory time limfts once processingof the work has enabled it to identify comparative basefor variations in unit costs which records are available. problem areas.This has reduceddelays, Crown exist betweenfiscal offices. In 1993 a Working Office is monitoring the achievementof statutory Party was establishedwhose first task is to review time limits by ProcuratorsFiscal on a monthly the accuracy of the unit cost system and ensure basis. A joint Crown Office/Associationof Chief that all fiscal work is included. Police Officers (Scotland)Working Group (the Joint Group) has also addressedthe problems of delays in reporting by the police and made Pare 2.16-2.17 Summary criminal cases account recommendationswhich are currently under for 90 per cent of fiscal case numbers and 50 per consideration. cent of staff time. Crown Office have set atarget that officesshould havea complaint ready to serve on an accusedwithin six weeks (local offices) or nine weeks (regional offices) of the receipt of a police report Since 1989the number of offices failing to meet the target has fallen. Crown Office have identified reasonswhy targets are not met. They consider that they do not need to analyse why some offices operate significantly within the target.

39 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINIS’IRATtON RESOURCESIN SHERIFF COURTS

PAC Recommendation Treasury Minute Response Current WAG’s Report References bsue: ManagementInformation and PerformanceMonitoring

PACconclusion (xiii): We believe that streamlined Responseto PACconclusion (xiii): Crown Office Para 2.19 Quality of fiscal office work is monitored procedures,better work practicesand improved endorsesthe finding of the Committeeas to the through six monthly visits to local offices by efficiencyare necessaryand would help overcome importance of ensuring public confidencein the regional procuratorfiscals. This is supported by pressureson staff. but additional rasourcesmay be prosecutionand judicial systems: its departmental Crown Office reviews of fiscal offtce resource neededto ensurethat confidencein the aims and objectivesare directedto that end. allocationand utilisation.The first review in prosecutionof crime and the judicial system is not July/August 1993 concludedscope existed for undermined. Beforethe NationalAudit OfficeReview, Crown better utilisationof staff and information Officehad embarkedon a number of projectsto technologyand improved office management streamlineand improve working practicesand though the quality of work was high and staff were managementawareness. As a result of the National committed. Audit Office review,further managementinkiatives were introduced.All changesand proposed changesin procedureare gearedto ensuringthe proper application of the professionaljudgement of the ProcuratorFiscal at all appropriate stages.

Almost two years have elapsedsince the review was started and in that time Crown Office has embarkedon a revised managementplan based on unit cost and output performancemeasurements, further developmentin service-widefinancial awareness,and the intmduction of a management informationunit. It is presentfyin the process of developinga pilot project to introduce innovative informationtechnology systems which will allow electronic exchangeof information between ProcuratorFiscal offices and the police. Funding forthe new initiatives has been and will continueto be a matter of discussionwith Treasury.

Issue: Reportssubmitted to Fiscals

PACconclusion (ii): We expect the Crown Officeto Responseto PACconclusion (ii): Crown Office Para 2.19 Astandardformat for police reports continuetheir efforts to ensure substantial confirms that it is continuing its efforts to ensure was introducedin 1990 and has been adopted by improvementsin the standardof substantial improvementsin the standard of all police forces. Fiscalsare satisfiedthat reports policeand other reports submitted to fiscals. reportssubmitted by the policeand other agencies. have improved and the efficiencyof These include discussionswith the police on communicationbetween fiscals and police will be relevant recommendationsofthe Joint Group. further enhancedthrough informationtechnology and electronic data exchange. CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCO’ITISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

PAC ReCommendtitian Current WAG’s Report References

BSW Casesmarked “no proceedings”

PACconclusion (iii): The Crown Officewere not Responseto PACconclusion (iii) and (vi): The Para 2.20-2.22 The number of cases marked ‘“no informed of the reasons(why police reports were reasonsfor ‘“no proceedings”are now reportedto proceedings” has fallen from 20 per cent (1986) to markedfor ‘“no proceedings”)with the result that Crown Officeand analysed.However, there will 11 per cent (1993) of repotts received.The they had not undertakenany analysis of the causes always be variations betweenfiscal offices due to proportion of ‘“no proceedings”continues to vary of the increases(between 1979 and 1971) and the standardof police repotiing differing from area between individual fiscal offices although some 30 could not offer any explanationfor the variation to area and also the fact that the ProcuratorFiscal of the 49 officesare within three per cent of the (betweenfiscal offices). in the exerciseof his professionaljudgement has to national average. ensurethat cases are only marked ‘“no PACconclusion (vi): We welcome the Crown proceedings”after he has consideredall relevant The incidenceof “no proceedings” has fallen in a Office’sassurance that they will take steps to obtain factors including the results of any fulther period of increasedusage of alternativesto informationand explanationsabout the categories investigationswhich he considerednecessary. prosecutionand few cases are not proceededwith of cases marked “no proceedings”.We expect Visits carried out by the Regional ProcuratorFiscal becauseof a shortage of fiscal resources. such information to be used as a basis for deciding to district offices includefurther examinationof what action needsto be taken in particular areas or cases marked“no proceedings”. It continuesto be the policy of the Lord Advocate in individual fiscal offices. to generally keep confidentialthe reasonswhy casesare marked ‘“no proceedings”. Exceptions PACconclusion (iv): We were surprised to learn Responseto PACconclusion (iv): It is the policy of are made when the decision not to proceed is that the police were not notified of the reasonsfor the Lord Advocate,as of past Lord Advocates,that attributable to the reporting agency’sprocedures or a case not being pursued.The improved liaison will reasonsfor “no proceedings” decisionstaken by perception of evidential requirementsin order to needto extend to a much greater exchange of ProcuratorsFiscal are in genera kept confidential. ensurethe Situationdid not recur. information on the reasonsfor ‘“no proceedings” However,exceptions are made in cases where decisions. ProcuratorsFiscal require to provide feedbackto the police so that necessarylessons can be learned.

PACconclusion (v): We find it unacceptablethat Response to PACconclusion (v): Crown Office many casesare not being pursued because of staff agreesthe importance of the principle that shortages in fiscals offices or in the courts. We decisionswhether or notto proceedare basedon a emphasisethe importance of the principle that careful legal judgement of the me& of the case. decisions whether or not to proceedare based on a There may be many aood reasonswhy “no careful legal judgement of the merits of the case. proceedings”are taken in individual cases. Crown Office does not accept that the evidence beforethe Committeeshowed that many caseswere not being pursued solely becauseof staff shortages. Subsequentmonitoring has bornethis out.

Issue: Reviewof the Fiscal Service

PACcenclusion (xiv): We recommendthat a high Response to PACconclusion (xiv): The Lord Para 2.23-2.26 Consultantswere appointed in leV.9 IeVieW of the procurator fiscal service should Advocate intendsthat such a review be undertaken October 1990 and repolted 10 months later.Their be undertakenas a matter of urgency.This review as soon as possible. main recommendation,a delegatedfiscal should be wide enoughto consider in conjunction managementstructure, was introduced in with the other palties involved how the problems April 1993 and fiscals considerthis has increased faced by the prosecutionsystem as a whole can staff flexibility and improved decision making. best be tackled. Changesto working practicesare regarded palt of the managementrestructuring but Crown Office expect efficiencygains to arise from these changes and from the introduction of new technology.They are monitoring progress.

41 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTXH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCESIN SHERIFF COURTS

PAC Recommendation Treasury Minute Response Current C&AR’s Report References

kcue: Staffing

PACccnclcsicn (x): In viewof the CrownOffice’s Responseto PACconclusion (x): The Committee’s Para 2.27-2.29 In 1989 the Crown Office diiicuities in recruiting and retaining legal staff, we recommendationsand caveatare noted and are concludedthat there was little scope to transfer recommendthat considerationbe given to making being actively considered.Crown Office has work from legal staff to non-legaltyqualified staff use of local solicitors to act in appropriate cases as evolved new initiatives including remun8ratiOn and the scopefor this has been further reduced prosecutors,subject to necessarymeasures to packagesand personnel policies in an effort to with the introductionof policefixed penalty offers safeguardthe position of the procurator fiscal. retain and attract legal staff e.g. revised promotion in 1993. Since 1987the number of legal staff has proceduresfor legal assistants. risen by 11 per cent and staff retention is no longer a problem.

Issue: Delaysin Courts

PACconclusion (viii): There are extensive delays, Responseto PACccnclusicn (viii) and (ix): Para3.10-3.16 Scottish Courts Administration some of up to 45 weeks, betweena plea being Crown Officeshares the Committee’sconcern have set a 12 week target between plea and trial heardand the case coming to trial in district or about delays betweenpleas being heard and cases dates in summary criminal cases in sheriff courts sheriff summary courts comparedwith the 14 coming to trial. As the Committee recognises, and asimilartarget in ordinaly civil actions. In weeks normally expected. however,the statutory responsibility for speedy 1993-94 they reported 72 per cent of courts met disposal of work in the sheriff and district courts is the summary criminal target and 81 per cent the PACconclusion (ix): Werecommend urgent action not a Crown Office responsibility.Crown Officehas ordinaly civil target. Scottish CourtsAdministration to establish the causesof the delays in each of the been discussingthe problems with Scottish Courts monitor reasonswhy targets are not met. Action is courts where they OCCUI. Administrationand the Secretary of State’sCentral taken to bring outturn into line with targets, Advisory Committeeon Justices of the Peace,and through increasedcourt sittings where Scottish can repolt that through staffing additionalcourts Courts Administration may be asked to provide by Advocatesand retired fiscals a steady decrease additional,temporary resources.Since 1989 the in delays has been achieved.For example, as at 1 averagewatiing period across all courts has November1989, the longest delay period in the consistently been between14 and 15 weeks sheriff courts was 21 weeks (comparedwith 31 although all sheriff courts recordedwaking periods weeks at 30 September1988), and in the district at 01below the target at some stage during the court?,17 weeks (comparedwith 43 weeks at period. 30 September 1988). Similarly, the averagedelays in the sheriff and district courts have each been A large proportion of criminal cases are not reducedby one week to 11 and 10 weeks disposedof at the trial date.Many are adjourned respectively.The extensivedelays highlighted by for reasons beyondthe availability and distribution the Committeehave been substantiallyreduced, of rasources.The Secretary of State has accepted and Crown Officewill continueto co-operatewith recommendationsof Groupson court the other agenciesinvolved in maintainingthis programming which include new waiting period improvement. targets.

:..~;.~_ CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMiNISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

PAC Recommendation Treasury Minute Response Current C&AG’s Report References

Issue: CourtUtilisation

PACconclusion (xi): The position disclosed(on Responseto PACconclusion (xi) and (xii): The Para 3.9-3.10 Sheriffs Principal are responsiblefor court utilisation) emphasisesthe importanceof programming of business in asheriff court is the programming cowl business.The programme will identifying ways to improve the situation and we responsibility of the sheriff principal for the take account of the differenttypes of business trust that this matter will be kept under careful sheriffdom in which that court is located.Scottish being processedand be capable of adjustment at review. CourtsAdministration reports that sheriffs short notice. In atypical summary criminal trial principal havethe difficult task of identifying and court the sheriff clerk may set down nine casesfor PACconclusion (xii): We trustthat discussions maintainingthe correct balancebetween hearing but expect only two to go ahead. planned betweenthe Lord Advocateand the overloading court diaries, with the result that trials Overbookingcourts is discouragedby a target set judiciary will lead to prompt action being taken to have to be adjournedthrough lack of court time, by Scottish Courts Administration in conjunction remedy an unsatisfactoryand deteriorating and under-loadingcouri diaries, which may result with the judiciary that the number of trials situation (over extensivedelays in bringing cases in increasingthe delays between preliminary and adjournedthrough lack of court time should not to trial and the over-bookingof coults). trial diets. It is noteworthythat over the year ended /exceed five per cent of those set down. In 1993.94 31 March 1989, in 93 per cent of the sheriff courts, 83 percent of sheriff courts met the target. the propordon of trials which had to be adjourned due to lackof courttimewas less than five percenlt Pam 3.29-3.30 Sheriffs principal are responsible of the trials programmed. It is particularly for determining on which days courts sit. Some 23 encouragingthat these results were achieved over of the 49 sheriff courts do not have sufficient a period where, as notedabove, the average delay businessto utilise the full-time services of a sheriff between preliminary and trial diet was significantly so that courts are under-utilised.In 1993.94 reduced.Scottish CourtsAdministration has plans theoretical maximum utilisation could have meant shortly to introduce computers in at least the the requirementof 111 courtrooms. 144 were largest 19 sheriff courts in order to facilitate the provided and usage in sheriff couris ranged from handlingof criminal cases by coortstaff. 21 per cent to 108 per cent of potential sitting days. The duration of sheriff cowl sitting days The Joint Group concludedthat the sitting system averagedbetween 2.8 to 5.8 hours. This reflects for solemn casesis unavoidableto ensurethe the Oepartmenrspolicy that, where practicable, timeous trial of such cases even though it causes justice should be provided locally even in areas problems forthe managementof witnesses’ where the volume of businessdoes not require the attendanceat court. It further recognisedthat at all full-time use of cowl accommodation. coults the attendanceof witnesseswho are not actually calledto give evidence is not necessarily wasted since it may benefitthe overall administration of justice in that the witnesses’ presencemay assist in securing a plea of guilty. CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL. SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINKSTRATTON RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Appendix 2 Jurisdiction and powers of courts in Scotland

Criminal Courts High Court of Justiciary: The High Court of Justiciary is Scotland’s supreme criminal court and there is no appeal from it to the House of Lords. The head of the Court is the Lord Justice-General. The High Court sits in a number of towns with Edinburgh as the Court’s principal base.

The jurisdiction of the High Court extends throughout Scotland and covers all categories of crime not specifically reserved to another court. It has concurrent jurisdiction with the sheriff court over most crimes, but it has exclusive jurisdiction over treason, murder, and rape.

The prosecution of cases in the High Court is the responsibility of advocate deputes and all trials are heard before a judge and jury of 15 persons. Sentencing powers are unlimited. When sitting on appeal in Edinburgh against sentence or conviction from lower courts, the bench consists of at least three .

Sheriff Courts: The Sheriff Courts deal with less serious cases than the High Court. Crown Counsel may instruct Procurators Fiscal to prosecute before a sheriff and jury of 15 or a sheriff sitting alone. Under sheriff and jury procedures a sheriff may impose prison sentences up to three years or an unlimited fine. In summary cases, he can impose up to three months imprisonment, 12 months in some cases, or fines up to 23,000. Appeal against sentence or conviction lies fi-om the Sheriff Court to the High Court.

Each sheriff court hears all cases where an offence is alleged to have been committed in that sheriff court district, The number and boundaries of sheriffdoms and sheriff courts may be altered by the Secretary of State for Scotland under the Sheriff Courts (Scotland) Act 1971.

District Courts: The 55 District Courts are administered by local authority district and island councils. They are manned by lay justices of the peace and deal summarily with breaches of the peace and other minor statutory offences. The longest prison sentence they can impose is generally 60 days and the maximum fine they can impose is .+X2,500.When the district court is constituted by a , it has the same criminal jurisdiction and powers as a sheriff court. This facility is currently unique to the District Court of Glasgow. Appeal lies from the District Court to the High Court.

44 CROWNOFFICEANDTHEPROCURATORFISCALSERVICE: SCOlTISHCOURTSADMlNISTRATIONRESOLJRCESINSHERIFFCOURTS

Civil Courts Court of Session: The Court of Session, sitting in Edinburgh, is the supreme civil court in Scotland, stiject to appeal Only to the House of Lords. The of the Court of Session may entertain cases arising in any part of Scotland and has exclusive jurisdiction over certain classes of action. The Court of Session alone can entertain actions to alter or determine personal status eg declarator of marriage; annul judicial decrees; In petitions to vary private or public trusts or to wind up companies having at least X10,000 paid up capital.

Decisions of the Outer House are made by a judge sitting singly but appeals against them can be made to a quo- of three judges of the of the Court of Session. The Inner House also hears civil appeals from the Sheriff Courts. Further appeal may be made to the House of Lords.

Sheriff Courts: The Sheriff Court deals with the main bulk of civil litigation in Scotland, although a wide range of actions may be brought either in the Court of Session or Sheriff Court. Actions can be entertained for, amongst other things, debt, contracts, reparation, rent restrictions, possessory actions, and actions affecting the use of property and for custody of children. Sheriff Courts also deal with actions between husband and wife and actions for divorce.

The value of the subject matter which the Sheriff Court can deal with has, with very few exceptions, no upper limit and a wide range of remedies may be granted. Cases whose value falls below El,500 must be beard in the sheriff summary cause court. Separate small claims procedures eldst for cases not exceeding f750 in value.

Sheriff Court civil cases are heard before a sheriff sitting singly. Appeals against decisions can be made to the sheriff principal and thereafter the Inner House of the Court of Session or, alternatively, direct to the Inner House.

45 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCALSERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Appendix 3 Fiscal Office information collated by Crown Office Management Information Unit

Targets Lower Level Upper Level Fiscal Offices Fiscal Offices (Weeks) (Weeks)

l averagenumber of weeksbetween receipt of report and service of complaint - sheriff courts 6 9 - district courts 6 9

l averagenumber of weeksfor summary citation of witnessesbefore trial - non-custodycases 6 6 - custody cases 3 3

. time betweenreceipt of Crown Counsels’instruction and indictment ready 1 2 for service

l time betweendate of death and report or being sent to 12 16 Crown Office . time betweenreceipt of Crown Counsels’instruction and being held - mandatory 12 16 - discretionary 12 12

l complaintsagainst police-time betweenreceipt of papersand reportto 16 Crown Office or regionalfiscal office instruction . complaintsagainst police-time betweenreceipt of papersfrom regional 6 fiscal office and return Outturn againsttargets is calculatedmonthly for eachfiscal office.

Costbased Performance Indicators:

l monthly cost per casereported by fiscal office . unit cost is calculatedfor each of legal staff, precognition staff, typing staff, administrativestaff and general administrationexpenditure

l monthly cost per weighted unit of output by fiscal office l unit cost is calculatedfor each of legal staff, precognition staff, typing staff and administrativestaff (seebelow)

l monthly cost per disposal avenueby fiscal region . overall unit cost is calculatedfor eachof 23 disposal avenuesweighted according to estimatesof time takento disooseeach case

46 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FlSCAL SERVICE: SCO’ITISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Activity based Performance Indicators: vping Staff:

. numberof pagestyped l classifiedinto 14 categoriesweighted to reflect estimates of time taken PrecognitionStaff: l numberof precognitions l weightedto reflect estimatesof time taken l numberof death and miscellaneousreoorts made . asabove

. time spent in court l calculatedfor High Court, Sheriff and Jury Court and FAI court sittings plus travel time . number of interviews conducted

LegalStaff:

. number of trials prepared l calculatedfor sheriff and jury, sheriff summary and district court sittings . number of complaints marked l time spent at court Activity basedperformance indicators are calculatedmonthly, per staff memberfor each fiscal office.

Other ManagementInformation Produced

. numberof reports receivedfrom reporting agencies l numberof casesdisposed of at court l 16 categoriesaccording to type of disposal and level of court l number of non-court disposals l sixcategories l number of casesnot proceededwith l 13 categories l number of judicial examinationsconducted . number of police tapes receivedand transcribed Calculatedmonthly for eachfiscal office.

47 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMINISTRATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

Appendix 4 Targets and performance indicators for Sheriff Courts

‘Targets

(0 Waitingperiods of 12 weeksor less betweendate of pleahearing and dateof trial hearingin summarycriminal cases. (ii) Waitingperiods of 12 weeksor lessbetween request for hearingand the hearingof proofs/debatesin ordinarycivil cases. (iii) Numberof trials startedand adjourneddue to lackof court time not to exceedfive per cent of the total numberof trials set down. W) Issuethe first deliverancein all ordinarywrits. or returnto sender,within two working daysof receipt. (4 Issuethe first deliverancein all summarycause actions, or returnto sender,within threeworking daysof receipt. (vi) Draft,in prepamtionfor judicial signature,all final ordinarydecrees in absence(excluding divorce) within one working day of receiptof the minutecraving decree. (vii) Draft,in preparationfor judicial signature,all final decreesin undefendedordinaly actionsof divorcewithin sevenworking daysof receipt of theaffidavits or returnaffidavits to the sender. (viii) Draft,in preparationfor judicial signature,all decreesin actionsof divorceunder simplified procedure within one working day ofthe expiry of the periodof notice. (iW Issueextract decrees in all ordinaryactions (excluding divorce) within threeworking daysof the dateof orderingorthe exphy of the days of appeal-whicheveris the later. Issuesummary cause/small claim extractdecrees within one working day of the due date. ;; Issueextract decrees in all ordinaryactions of divorcewithin oneworking day of the due date. (xii) Issueextract decrees of divorceunder simplified procedure within oneworking day of the due date. (xiii) Issuethe first deliverancein all petitionsfor sequestrationniquidation.or returnto sender,within two working daysof receipt. (XW Preparefor signaturethe first deliverancein all adoptionpetitions within one working day of a correctpetition being received. Scrutiniseand acceptor rejectcommissary petitions and inventorieswithin two working daysof receipt ;, Issueconfirmation within threeworking daysof acceptanceand inventory. (xvii) Conductsmall estateinterviews within sevendays from the time an intemiewwas requested. (xviii) Processjuror claimsfor payment or returnto sender,within two working daysof receipt. (XN Processpostal fines (otherthan unidentifiedpayments) on day of receipt (W Issuewarning letters,means enquiry citations,warrants, extracts etc and transferfines within sevendays of the trawl. (w Remitall non-Exchequerreceipts to entitledparties within 14 daysfrom the end of the last accountancyperiod. (xxii) Effecta card reconciliationof all outstandingfinancial penaities on a monthlybasis. (xxiii) Replyto letter pleaswithin one working day of the court. (xxiv) Ordersocial enquiryand other reportswithin oneworking day of the court. m4 Completeprobation, community service, compensation and fines supervisionorders within two working daysof the court. (xxvi) Issuejuror citationsin the first instanceat least21 daysprior to a jury sitting/trial. @vii) Replyto all letterinquiries except those requiring extensiveinvestigation within two working daysof receipt.

48 CROWN OFFICE AND THE PROCURATOR FISCAL SERVICE: SCOTTISH COURTS ADMLNISTFIATION RESOURCES IN SHERIFF COURTS

‘Pkifirniai~ce indicators

(i) Juror costs per sheriff and jury sitting day (ii) Shorthandwriter costs per sheriff and jury sitting day. (iii) Staff pay costs per court sitting day. (iv) Courtfees (otherthan commissary)per civil court sitting day. (4 Telephonecosts per staff member. (vi) Telephonecosts per court sitting day. (vii) Stationerycosts per staff member. (viii) Stationerycosts per court sitting day. 64 Overtimecosts per staff member. (4 Heatingand lighting costs percourt sitting day. (xi) Staffpay costs per unit of work. (xii) Staffpay costs per court sining hour.

49