Data mapping project: Mixed Bunch
Examining the use and utility of administrative data in dispute and complaint resolution bodies in Victoria.
Background
Dispute and complaint resolution bodies are a vital part of the Victorian justice system, providing access to civil justice for thousands of Victorians. Many were established in successive waves of reform dating from the 1970s.
While they have a vibrant political and policy history, their establishment and functions have been organic, piecemeal. This has led to some community confusion about what different dispute and complaint resolution bodies do, and how they may be able to help.
Surprisingly little is known about the actual volume of the matters they handle, and the difference they make. This report is an important first step in exploring how existing administrative data might be able to help to fill these critical knowledge gaps and provide a better understanding of the difference dispute and complaint resolution bodies make to civil justice for Victorians.
Mapping Justice
The Data Mapping Project mapped use and utility of administrative data across a broad range of civil justice bodies, including courts and tribunals, legal assistance organisations and dispute resolution bodies.
This work identified opportunities and challenges in using existing data to improve access to justice through the operations of large players in the sector, and set out some possible new directions.
Stage three: Mixed Bunch
For Mixed Bunch: The use and utility of administrative data in dispute and complaint resolution bodies in Victoria, dispute and complaint handling bodies were invited to participate in an online survey about their data practices. The study included bodies in Victoria which are part of the civil justice system and provide a platform for Victorians to seek justice.
Key findings
Role and volume
Dispute and complaint resolution bodies are a vital part of the Victorian justice system, providing access to civil justice for thousands of Victorians.
Together the dispute and complaint bodies who participated in this study handled more than 230,000 disputes and complaints in 2020-21. There was, however, substantial variation in how dispute and complaint activity was classified, collected, and reported, reflecting differences in terminology, organisational scope and role in dispute and complaint resolution.
Hard to navigate
Dispute and complaint bodies are numerous, they handle various types of matters, but it is not always clear to the public which body is the most appropriate or relevant for them.
Bodies at different stages of data development
Organisations were at different stages of data maturity. Most were striving to improve data function and capability. Participants fell into three categories: those that had improved data systems, processes and practices; those which had begun and were planning to do more; and a minority who were only just beginning to explore their use of data.
Variation in data collection and practice
Dispute and complaint bodies varied in the data they collected and what they used it for. Variation reflects the scope and role each body has in dispute and complaint handling.
There was significant variation and gaps in collection of user characteristics. Bodies also varied in the classification and recording of matter types and outcomes.
Data Use
Data was used for a range of activities. All participants used their data for operational and reporting purposes, and nearly all used it for monitoring and evaluation; performance measurement and benchmarking; organisational research; to understand users; and to analyse the location of disputes or complaints.
Most were using data to improve access to services; to review programs and workloads; to inform planning; for inquiries, reviews and law reform; and to develop business cases.
Data was also widely used for forecasting and demand modelling, research, and to inform policy and legislative change and factors affecting operations and performance.
Data quality and utility
All participants rated their data as being at least of ‘OK quality’, with more than half considering it ‘high quality’ or ‘very high quality’. Most had established data governance frameworks.
Data utility was affected by data systems, the scope of information collected, and data accuracy and consistency. Improving data quality and utility required time, resources, and leadership.
Implications and way forward
What do they want to do with data in the future?
There was a common aspiration to improve quality, consistency and scope of demographic and other information collected. This was widely seen as key to enhancing data utility and insight. Several wished to conduct more sophisticated analysis and automate aspects of data processing.
Agreed data standards for key measures needed
Improved data practice can potentially provide greater insight into what dispute and complaint bodies do and achieve. Lack of established standards and shared practices, however, present challenges. Without agreed data standards for key measures, contribution to access to justice is likely to remain obscured.
Making user cohorts visible
Collection of standardised data may increase data collection burden but would also be transformative in terms of ability to see different user cohorts. Data currently appears more informative for understanding individual dispute and complaint bodies than the system as a whole.
Aggregation requires shared approaches
More consistent and shared approaches to data standards and practices are desirable. Shared approaches to terminology and measures would facilitate easier and more accurate analysis and aggregation.
Coordinated data approaches could facilitate access to justice
Data is key for understanding how people access and navigate dispute and complaint bodies. Improved data could help to reduce access barriers and provide more equitable access to the justice dispute and complaint bodies can provide.
Examining the use and utility of administrative data in dispute and complaint resolution bodies in Victoria.
Publication resources
Related publications
You may be interested in these other research publications.
Examining the use and utility of administrative data in Victoria’s civil justice system.
The use and utility of administrative data in Victorian Courts and Tribunals
Understand better justice
Data and empirical evidence to help understand access to justice and build a better justice system.