Explanation of process surrounding the determination of the level of disability following an injury on duty award or review

The request was successful.

Dear Staffordshire Police,

I refer to this FOIA request https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/p..., and a document recently released by Andrew Coley - HR support (ref: AWC/People Services/March 2017) entitled "how to calculate loss of earnings for injury pensioners".

The previous request and document both relate to the calculation of loss of earnings for an officer being granted an injury on duty award or a subsequent review.

What I am interested in is the origin of the method that you use, and also the practical application of the method. As I understand it, the selected medical practitioner 'SMP' makes a determination under the Police Benefit Regulations 2006, and then you complete a job market assessment and then adjust the figure to reflect potential earnings of the ex officer.

Can you answer the following please,

a) When did HR start using this method of adjusting the level of disability? The year will be sufficient.

b) Where did the methodology originate, was it devised in house or was it as a result of a third party person or company. I already know that this not the same as a similar method called PEAM?

c) Can you explain the internal process that is taken to achieve the final result. For example does the SMP make a declaration via a certificate or report stating the level of disablement that they consider appropriate and then pass that report to the Occupational Health or HR department so that they can add their calculation at the end, or is there a different route that that the process takes? i.e. is the SMP aware of the further calculation (which appears on the IODs final report), and do they formally accept or reject it, or are they blind to the fact that a further calculation takes place by the force after their initial determination?

d) Can you please provide a copy of your force policy or guidance, or a process map on how the internal process should work i.e. who is expected to do what and when in order to achieve the final result. e.g. SMP certificate, job search (based on what?), followed by a further calculation to achieve final figure of disability. I would be very surprised if you said that no policy exists considering you are having to comply with primary legislation, and the potential for large sums to come out of the public purse, when an award is made.

Yours faithfully,

Simon Fox

Staffordshire Police

Thank you for your FOI request.  You will receive a response in due
course.
Regards
Tracey Brindley
Freedom of Information Decision Maker
Central Disclosure Unit
Staffordshire Police HQ
PO Box 3167
Stafford
ST16 9JZ
T:  Switchboard 101
E:  [Staffordshire Police request email]

show quoted sections

Freedom of Information, Staffordshire Police

Dear Mr Fox,

 

For us to continue with your Freedom of Information request Staffordshire
Police needs to be satisfied that you are who you say you are. Due to a
significant number of requests received from the whatdotheyknow website
relating to the topic you have submitted Staffordshire Police requires
full identification  from yourself.

Section 8  states that for a request to be valid the requestor should:
·               Make sure the request is in writing.
·               States the name of the applicant and an address for
correspondence.
·               Describes the information requested.

Therefore we ask if you could send either by post or email a copy of
identification that clearly states who you say you are. This can be either
a passport or a driving licence.

The request shall be put on hold until I receive a response from you. If
we do no hear from you in the next 20 working days the request shall be
closed.

 

Regards

Darius Sanghori

 

OFFICIAL

 

Central Disclosure Unit

Staffordshire Police HQ

P.O. Box 3167

Stafford

ST16 9JZ

T:switchboard 101

T:direct dial 01785 232195

E:[Staffordshire Police request email]

 

Dear Freedom of Information,

Thank you for your reply.

You have stated the following,
Section 8 states that for a request to be valid the requestor should:
· Make sure the request is in writing.
· States the name of the applicant and an address for correspondence.
· Describes the information requested.

To answer your points,

My request request is in writing.

My name is Simon Fox.

I have provided an email address to the whatdotheyknow.com website when registering the account. It is a valid email address, because I would not have been able to register otherwise. The ICO has previously taken advice from legal counsel on the definition of a valid "address", and it was deemed that an email address IS a suitable address for the purposes of a Freedom of Information request.

I have clearly described the information that I seek.

If you are considering financially aggregating my requests, then I only have one other request in with you, which you have failed to answer, and therefore spent no time on.

Nowhere in the act does it state that a requester has to supply a passport or driving licence. This type of demand is not within the spirit of the act.

You are public body, and the information I seek is of public interest.

Please supply the information as originally requested.

Yours sincerely,

S Fox

Dear Freedom of Information,

You have not responded to my last correspondence, and have not provided any cogent reason why I needed to provide any additional ID i.e. why you believe a pseudonym is being used, if that was your reason for the demand. You also answered my only other request to you 3 days ago in full. In addition, you have answered others people's requests on different subject matters without any such restriction.

As you have not provided the information requested, or answered my questions, I will now ask for an internal review.

Yours sincerely,

Simon Fox

Freedom of Information, Staffordshire Police

Dear Mr Fox,

Staffordshire Police have concerns that a campaign group may be targeting Mr Coley and applicants may not be who they say they are. We are within our rights to challenge applicants and ask for proof of identification to ensure the requests are valid under Section 8.

Providing a 'Whatdotheyknow' website address does not provide us with proof of your identification.

An internal review will not be carried out because a response to your request has not yet been dealt with.

Regards

Julie Ferrie

OFFICIAL

Central Disclosure Unit
Staffordshire Police HQ
P.O. Box 3167
Stafford
ST16 9JZ

E: [Staffordshire Police request email]

Dear Freedom of Information,

Thank you for clarifying your reasons, this certainly helps the force the maintain its position of openness and honesty. I absolutely assure you, that my request has NOTHING to to do with Mr Coley personally, professionally or otherwise.

You will see that the first question I posed to you was historical before he was even in post. This request, my second, only named him because he recently re-published a paper on the subject matter. I made reference to it in order to show that it is still a policy of yours to use such a method, but the fact that he was named has no bearing on my request.

The question again actually relates to how historically Staffordshire calculate their injury pensions. I am interested only in that. It matters not who may be currently administering them. I believe that as the question is about how a public body spends their money, and also how they treat their injured staff is very much in the public interest.

I have no desire to target or upset Mr Coley, or for him to have to directly answer any of the points raised. If it helps, please exclude him from the request as treat it as to how you have operated historically before he was even in post. If possible please establish if there is anybody else in the force that may have the requisite knowledge and be in a position to answer the question. This way Mr Coley will not be involved in the request.

In light of what I've said, can you please reconsider my request.

Yours sincerely,

Simon Fox

Freedom of Information, Staffordshire Police

Dear Mr Fox,

The person who is dealing with your request is currently away and will return on Tuesday to respond to your query.

Regards
Darius Sanghori

OFFICIAL

Central Disclosure Unit
Staffordshire Police HQ
P.O. Box 3167
Stafford
ST16 9JZ
T:switchboard 101
E:[Staffordshire Police request email]

Freedom of Information, Staffordshire Police

2 Attachments

Dear Mr Fox,

 

Please see attached response to your Freedom of Information request.  I
apologise for the delay in responding.

 

Regards

 

Julie Ferrie

 

OFFICIAL

 

Central Disclosure Unit

Staffordshire Police HQ

P.O. Box 3167

Stafford

ST16 9JZ

 

E: [Staffordshire Police request email]

 

Dear Freedom of Information,

Thank you for supplying the information. Your answer raises a number of further questions, which I will submit in a new request.

Yours sincerely,

S Fox

Looking for an EU Authority?

You can request documents directly from EU Institutions at our sister site AskTheEU.org . Find out more .

AskTheEU.org