Raising Concerns – EA Whistleblowing Policy and Procedure - Section 7 - Whistleblowing Procedure and Investigation

Whistleblowing Procedure

It is essential that a clear process is in place for the management of whistleblowing cases. This provides officers with a guide to the steps and actions required to successfully manage whistleblowing. EA operates a two-stage process for the management of whistleblowing cases outlined below:

HCG* Head of Corporate Governance or a senior member of the Corporate Governance Team

HIAA** Head of Internal Audit and Assurance

EA has a clear process for managing whistleblowing cases, this is essential to provide a quality service, find resolution and learn as an organisation. The below diagram outlines the steps in managing a whistleblowing case. 

Step 1

• Receipt of whistleblowing

Step 2

• Letter of acknowledgement sent from EA HCG*

Step 3

• Stage 1 whistleblowing case discussed with the appropriate directorate

Step 4

• Agreed investigating officer

Step 5

• Investigating officer reports his/her findings to the HCG*

Step 6

• HCG* reports in writing the outcome to the whistleblower

Step 7

• If dissatisfied move to Stage 2

Step 8

• Internal actions may be required if malpractice is found

HCG* Head of Corporate Governance or a senior member of the Corporate Governance Team

Whistleblowing Investigation

When is an Investigation Required?

An investigation is required when concerns are raised in line with the Raising Concerns - EA Whistleblowing Policy and Procedure, and the Head of Corporate Governance is assured that whistleblowing is the correct procedure to address the matter. 

When is an Investigation Not Required?

An investigation under the whistleblowing procedure is not required when it can be managed under a more appropriate policy/procedure, for example, if a complaint is made this is managed under EA’s Complaints Handling Policy and Procedure or, if a staff member is unhappy about working conditions this is managed under the EA Grievance Procedure, or if there is an allegation in relation to the safety of children and young people, this is managed under the Child Protection Policy and Protocol. 

An investigation is not required when a person or correspondence is deemed to be vexatious and will be treated in line with the EA procedure. 

Who Should Conduct the Investigation?

The Head of Corporate Governance will determine how the allegation should be investigated and who is best placed to conduct/oversee the investigation. Occasionally it will be appropriate for the allegation to be fully independently investigated by the EA Internal Audit team, particularly where there is any allegation of fraud or misuse of public money involved. In some instances, it is more appropriate for cases to be allocated and investigated by EA officers depending on the subject of the allegations. Where a whistleblowing concern has multiple components, EA may be required to establish a cross-directorate panel. On such an occasion the panel must have a lead investigating officer. The Corporate Governance Team will advise and assist officers in progressing the investigation. 

The below diagram illustrates the involvement and role of officers when investigating whistleblowing. Please note that further delegation is permitted upon approval from the Head of Corporate Governance and Assistant Director responsible, to a relevant member of staff who is best placed to undertake the investigation. 

• Corporate Governance
  The HCG* will be the central liaison in all cases defined as whistleblowing and will advise on the process at each stage until completion.
• Chief Officer
  The Chief Officer must be informed of any whistleblowing that involves his/her directorate. 
  However, in the interest of confidentiality the specific detail is not required.
• Assistant Director
  An Assistant Director will be responsible for investigating the Whistleblowing case
  Stage 1 - Investigation within own directorate
  Stage 2 - Review of Stage 1 investigation completed by another directorate.
• Head Of Service
  A Head of Service may undertake:
  Stage 1 - Investigation within own directorate
  Stage 2 - Review of Stage 1 investigation completed by another directorate. 
  The delegation of this duty must be agreed by the AD and HCG*.

HCG* Head of Corporate Governance, or a senior member of the Corporate Governance Team 

Conducting the Investigation

When a concern meets the criteria to be considered as whistleblowing and an investigation is required the Head of Corporate Governance (HCG), or Corporate Governance Manager, will arrange for an investigation officer to be appointed. This officer will consider the concern(s) and complete an Investigation Report – see Appendix 2. This will be carried out as expeditiously as possible with priority given to conducting the investigation. All appropriate sources of evidence will be reviewed and any determination of the accuracy of the allegations must be based on consideration of the facts and supporting evidence. 

The outcome of the investigation will be notified to the Head of Corporate Governance (or link Corporate Governance Manager) who will record the outcome and update the whistleblowing register. Where the whistleblower’s contact details are known, the Head of Corporate Governance (or link Corporate Governance Manager) will contact the whistleblower in writing and, if appropriate, advise them of the outcome of the EA investigation into their concerns. 

For cases that are notified to EA via the Department of Education (DE), the Head of Corporate Governance will copy the Chief Executive’s Office into the response to DE to notify them of the outcome. It is normal practice for DE to withhold the identity of a whistleblower who has contacted them, and so DE will be responsible in such cases for notifying the whistleblower of the outcome. In rare cases, the allegations may be deemed to be malicious – that is deliberately and knowingly false. This is distinct from them simply being wrong but made in good faith. In such cases, proving that the allegations were malicious is very difficult, but consideration may be given to disciplinary action (employees only), or reporting to the PSNI if there is clear evidence of malicious intent and the identity of the whistleblower is known. 

Occasionally the exact nature of the concern may be unclear. Provided the whistleblower has provided contact details, then the HCG, or Corporate Governance Manager will acknowledge receipt and inform them that their allegations will be investigated under the Raising Concerns – EA Whistleblowing Policy and Procedure. If required, additional information for clarity may be requested. 

Investigation Reports and Outcome

Whistleblowing investigation reports are considered to be confidential by default. They often contain details of evidence sources and witnesses who were interviewed as part of the investigation. Data Protection considerations are paramount along with the need to preserve the integrity of the investigation process. For these reasons, investigation reports are not shared or provided to the whistleblower. Where Freedom of Information (FOI) requests have been made to release investigation reports that pertain to specific staff or their employment, standard exemptions exist and are applied in such cases by the EA Information Governance service. 

Management of Outcomes

An appropriate officer will be identified to undertake a whistleblowing investigation and will upon considering evidence produce a report that will include their consideration, outcome, recommendations and any lessons learned that require action. For each component of the whistleblowing concern, the investigating officer will determine if the concern is ‘Founded’, ‘Unfounded’, or ‘Partially Founded’ as detailed below:

          *Head of Corporate Governance, or senior member of the Corporate Governance Team

The above categories will assist the investigating officer to consider the evidence and decide on the appropriate outcome. These determinations will indicate if actions are required to be taken as a result of the investigation outcome. 

Given the sensitive nature of whistleblowing cases, and in particular where they pertain to a member of staff and their employment, details will not be shared with the whistleblower. Where this is the case and concerns are ‘founded’ or ‘partially founded’ EA will determine internally the next steps.

The implementation of recommendations and learning actions from a whistleblowing case will be the responsibility of the relevant directorate. The investigating officer will have a role in communicating and assuring that any investigation report recommendations have been appropriately actioned.

Whistleblowing Case Closure

Whistleblowing cases are considered closed when the investigation has been completed and the whistleblower has received a letter of closure, or in the case of an anonymous whistleblower when the investigation has been completed and the Head of Corporate Governance is satisfied that the matter has been addressed. 

When a whistleblowing investigation has concluded and concerns are ‘unfounded’ the whistleblowing case will be closed. When a whistleblowing investigation has concluded and concerns are ‘founded’ or ‘partially founded’, and the recommendation is that a formal process should be invoked, the whistleblowing aspect of this matter will be closed upon confirmation from the relevant EA officer that the appropriate formal process will be implemented. 

Upon investigation recommendations, whistleblowing cases will be closed and/or where there is a more robust policy/procedure for the matter to be expertly addressed. For example: 

• If a whistleblowing case expressed concerns about the behaviour of an employee, the recommendation from the whistleblowing investigation could be the implementation of the EA Disciplinary Policy, at this point the whistleblowing case would be considered closed, and the formal process of the disciplinary policy would begin.  
• If a child protection allegation or concern is raised through whistleblowing this will be referred to EA Child Protection Support Service (CPSS) and the whistleblowing case will be considered closed. 

Closure of Whistleblowing Managed by Schools

Whistleblowing concerns may be raised with EA as the managing authority for controlled schools. In the first instance these concerns are best managed under the school’s own policy and procedures. EA upon receipt of such concerns will forward the matter to the school to be considered under their relevant policy/procedures. EA will liaise with the school and monitor progression of the investigation. Upon confirmation that the concern has been investigated and an outcome reached, EA will then consider the matter closed.

On occasion, EA may receive whistleblowing concerns about practice that is not within the remit or authority of the organisation. This may include Catholic maintained schools, grant maintained integrated schools, voluntary grammar schools and independent schools. Such concerns will be forwarded to the relevant organisation, school, or body to be considered under their policy (except in the case of alleged fraud which may require investigation by EA Audit). Once passed to the relevant organisation or body, EA will consider the matter closed. 

Where whistleblowing concerns are not within the remit of EA and are the responsibility of a third-party organisation, EA will forward the matter to the relevant organisation and consider the matter closed.

Monitoring Progress and Reporting

Progress against outstanding whistleblowing cases is conducted by each of the EA Directorate Management Teams (DMTs). The Corporate Governance Team will issue each directorate a list of live whistleblowing cases on a monthly basis for their consideration and follow up as necessary through the line management structure. Business Services Managers within each DMT will liaise with the Corporate Governance Team to report on progress against outstanding cases. This should be a standing item on each DMT agenda at least once per quarter. 

EA will appoint a non-executive whistleblowing champion from the Governance, Risk and Audit Committee (GRAC). The whistleblowing champion will be responsible for ensuring that appropriate and robust whistleblowing arrangements are in place, communicated, monitored and frequently reported upon.  This will include ensuring that the whistleblowing policy is implemented in full, interactions with the wider sector are considered and lessons learned are acted upon.

The Head of Corporate Governance reports five times per year on progress against whistleblowing cases to GRAC. A report is produced showing trends including the number of cases by type and directorate as well as the length of time taken. Particular focus is given to cases that are more than six months old. This is a standing item on the GRAC agenda. 

“Once a concern is raised formally, it is essential that organisations provide a straightforward system for logging them. This will…facilitate monitoring of trends and themes for organisational learning.”

Source: Freedom to Speak Up

Raising a Concern - Externally

This policy is intended to provide an appropriate mechanism for staff and members of the public to raise their concerns, however, it is also possible to raise a matter externally. 

EA also encourages contact from external sources who have concerns about the use of public funding or other issues. All such notifications will be considered in terms of: 

• the seriousness of the issues raised;
• the creditability of the concern; and
• the likelihood of confirming the allegation from attributable sources. 

External notifications can be made to the following: 

Department of Education 

Head of Internal Audit 

7 Rathgael House 
Balloo Road 
Bangor 
BT19 7PR 

Tel: 028 9127 9669 
Email: DE.DEWebMail@education-ni.gov.uk

Or alternatively: 

Northern Ireland Audit Office 

The Comptroller and Auditor General 

106 University Street 
Belfast 
BT7 1EU 

Tel: 028 9025 1100 
Email: whistleblowing@niaoauditoffice.gov.uk