Policy and Framework

1

Preamble

1.1

The University of Surrey is committed to the highest standards of openness, probity and accountability. It seeks to conduct its affairs in a responsible manner taking into account the requirements of the funding bodies and the standards in public life set out in the reports of the Nolan Committee.

1.2

The Public Interest Disclosure Act, which came into effect on 1 January 1999, gives legal protection to employees against being dismissed or suffering detriment by their employers as a result of disclosing information which is considered to be in the public interest. A brief summary of the Act is attached as Annex 1.

1.3

Where an individual discovers information that they believe shows malpractice/wrongdoing within the University they should be able to disclose this information without fear of reprisal, and be able to make it independently of line management. It should be emphasised that this policy is intended to assist an individual who believes that they have discovered malpractice or impropriety or information or wrongdoing that may amount to malpractice or impropriety. Once this policy is implemented, it is reasonable to expect members of the University to use it rather than air their grievances outside the Institution.

2

Scope of Policy

2.1

Some examples of misconduct, which may be the subject of a protected public interest disclosure, are:

2.2

The individual will have to demonstrate that he or she has a reasonable belief in their disclosure. A disclosure will not qualify if an offence is committed in making it, for example under the Data Protection Act.

2.3

The public interest disclosure policy is intended to facilitate the bringing to light of matters, which would then be dealt with by existing procedures. However, the Authorised Recipient (see section 5) may decide in a particular case that such procedures are not adequate and accordingly may initiate an ad hoc investigation. Such procedures may be found in the Human Resources Administration Handbook, the University Calendar or the Financial Regulations. Examples of circumstances for which there are existing procedures:

2.4

This framework cannot be used by either the Discloser or the University to reopen complaints or cases already completed under other University procedures, unless new evidence has emerged to the satisfaction of the Authorised Recipient.

3

Who can use this policy

3.1

This policy is open to current employees of the University including casual and agency employees and homeworkers.

3.2

A Discloser need not be personally or professionally affected by the malpractice that is to be disclosed by them.

4

Safeguards

4.1

Protection

4.1.2

This policy is designed to offer protection to those employees or other members of the University who disclose such concerns to an Authorised Recipient provided the disclosure is made in good faith.

4.2

Contractual Liability

4.2.1

It is an implied term of contracts of employment that employees will observe a duty of fidelity, thereby requiring them to refrain from disclosing their employers' confidential information and acting in a way which is likely to destroy the "mutual trust and confidence" on which the employment relationship is based. In addition, the University has required certain categories of staff to sign a confidentiality clause within their contract of employment. Notwithstanding this, a disclosure made in accordance with this policy would not be considered a breach of either an implied or express term of an employee's contract of employment provided it is made in good faith.

4.3

Confidentiality

4.3.1

The Authorised Recipient will treat all such disclosures in a confidential and sensitive manner. The identity of the individual making the allegation may be kept confidential so long as it does not hinder or frustrate any investigation. However, the investigation process may reveal the source of the information.

4.4

Anonymous Allegations

4.4.1

This policy encourages individuals to put their name to any disclosures they make. Concerns expressed anonymously are much less powerful, but they will be considered at the discretion of the Authorised Recipient.

4.4.2

In exercising this discretion, the factors to be taken into account will include:

4.5

Untrue Allegations

If an individual makes an allegation in good faith, which is not confirmed by subsequent investigation, no action will be taken against that individual. If, however, an individual:

disciplinary action may be taken against the individual concerned.

4.6

Retraction of Allegations

Once the disclosure has been made it may be retracted at any time. But the University reserves the right to proceed with the investigation by any other means at its disposal, and to take action in the light of its findings, even if the Discloser does not wish to proceed further.

5

Procedures for Making a Disclosure

5.1

Initial Step

5.1.1

The individual should make a disclosure under this procedure to an "Authorised Recipient", the details of which are outlined below. The individual may make the disclosure to whichever Authorised Recipient they feel is most appropriate however in most cases this is likely to be the Director of Corporate Services.

5.1.2

The following individuals are Authorised Recipients:

5.1.3

It must be made clear in the disclosure that this policy is being invoked.

5.1.4

If the disclosure is made to the Director of Corporate Services, the Vice-Chancellor and the Chairman of Council must be informed immediately unless:

5.1.5

In cases involving financial malpractice, the Director of Corporate Services should act throughout in close consultation with the Vice-Chancellor, as the Accounting Officer for the University's public funding.

5.1.6

If the individual does not wish to raise the matter with either the Director of Corporate Services or the Vice-Chancellor, then he or she may raise it with the Chairman of Council.

5.1.7

If an individual does not wish to make a disclosure to an Authorised Recipient listed in 5.1.2, a disclosure can be made to the following people:

5.1.8

5.1.9

A disclosure to those listed in 5.1.8 will be protected if:

5.1.10

If the Discloser makes the disclosure to a person not listed in 5.1.2 or 5.1.8 they will be protected if:

5.1.11

In order for the Discloser to be protected under 5.1.10 the following conditions must apply:

5.2

Process

5.2.1

The Discloser may make the disclosure either in writing to, or by an informal meeting with, the Authorised Recipient, or bothThe Authorised Recipient will consider the information made available to him/her and decide on the form of investigation to be undertaken. This may be

5.2.2

Where the matter can be dealt with through existing internal procedures such as those listed in paragraph 2.3 the Authorised Recipient will pass the query to the appropriate University officer for action. Where the matter cannot be dealt with through existing internal procedures, the Authorised Recipient will then consider how to conclude whether there is a prima facie case to answer. This consideration will include determining

5.3

Investigation

5.3.1

Normally an independent officer of the University, such as the Chief Internal Auditor or the University Safety Adviser, will undertake this investigation. Investigations should not be carried out by the person who will have to reach a decision on the matter. Any investigation will be conducted as sensitively and speedily as possible. The University will endeavour to conclude the investigation within 6 weeks of the disclosure being made. If this is not possible the Discloser will be informed of the reason.

5.3.2

Any employee under investigation will be advised as soon as is reasonably practicable, and having regard to the nature of the disclosure. If they are to be questioned about the disclosure, they will be entitled to be accompanied by a trade union official, staff representative or work colleague.

5.3.3

The employee under investigation may be suspended if it is not considered appropriate for him/her to remain at work whilst the investigation is carried out. Suspension does not imply that the employee had committed the offence, and should be on full pay. If the investigation shows that the disclosure is without foundation, the employee should be allowed to return to work immediately. A decision to suspend may only be taken by the Vice-Chancellor or the Chairman of Council.

5.3.4

The report of the investigation, inquiry or police action will be considered by the Vice-Chancellor, or Authorised Recipient, and a decision taken in consultation with any advisers deemed appropriate on what, if any, further action is required. Such action may include

5.3.5

In some instances it might be necessary to refer the matter to an external authority for further investigation.

5.4

Feedback

5.4.1

The Authorised Recipient will inform the Discloser of what action, if any, is to be taken. If no action is to be taken then the Discloser concerned should be informed of the reason for this and allowed the opportunity to remake the disclosure to another appropriate person as specified in paragraphs 5.1.2 and 5.5. For example, if the initial disclosure was made to an officer of the University then the subsequent disclosure might be made to the Chairman of Council. This other person will consider all the information presented, the procedures that were followed and the reasons for not taking any further action. The outcome of this will be either to confirm that no further action is required or that further investigation is required and will follow the procedures referred to in 5.2 above. If the Discloser has made a protected disclosure to one of the recipients listed in 5.1.2 above and the Discloser is of the opinion that it has been concealed they may, if the conditions in 5.1.10 are fulfilled, make the disclosure to one of the parties listed in 5.1.8.

5.5

External Review

If the Discloser is dissatisfied with the outcome of a disclosure made in accordance with this procedure, he or she may remake the disclosure to the external Visitor or one of the Authorised Recipients listed in 5.1.8. The external Visitor or the Authorised Recipient for these purposes shall investigate the matter and the determination of the Visitor or Authorised Recipient shall be the final decision on the disclosure according to the University's procedures.

5.6

Reporting of Outcomes

5.6.1

A report of all disclosures and any subsequent actions taken will be made by the Director of Corporate Services who will retain such reports for a specified period of time (eg three years).

5.6.2

In all cases a report of the outcomes of any investigation will be made to the Audit Committee in detail where the issue falls within its purview, and in summary in other cases as a means of allowing the Committee to monitor the effectiveness of the procedure.