Guidance

Detention case progression panels (accessible)

Updated 28 July 2025

Version 9.0

1. About this guidance

This guidance outlines the purpose and processes for Case Progression Panels (CPP). This guidance can be a point of reference for CPP members and chairs as well as those Home Office staff that work in detained casework and receive CPP recommendations.

1.1 Contacts

If you have any questions about the guidance and your line manager or senior caseworker cannot help you or you think that the guidance has factual errors, then email the Case Progression Panel team.

If you notice any formatting errors in this guidance (broken links, spelling mistakes and so on) or have any comments about the layout or navigability of the guidance then you can email the Guidance Review, Atlas and Forms team.

1.2 Publication

Below is information on when this version of the guidance was published:

• version 9.0
• published for Home Office staff on 24 July 2025

1.3 Changes from last version of this guidance

Amendments have been made to the following sections of this guidance:

• Pre-Panel Preparation – includes a reminder to delete any downloaded documents used for pre-panel preparation after the CPP, in line with current KIMU guidance
• Rejecting a Recommendation - includes wording to specify Grade approval for the purpose of rejecting a CPP recommendation
• Case Progression Panel Chair and Member Performance Goals - updated with latest personal performance goals
• reference to CID removed
• reference to Atlas Calander Events removed

2. Case Progression Panel background

Case Progression Panels (CPP) have been in operation since February 2017, providing a second line assurance function by reviewing the appropriateness of ongoing detention for all individuals detained at 3-month intervals. Each CPP consists of a chair, CPP team members and Business experts, who review the appropriateness of continued detention, adherence to the Adults at risk in immigration detention policy, case progression actions and provide recommendations to the team responsible for the ownership of the cases concerned.

CPPs review detention for all detained individuals at 3-month intervals, beginning with the week following the third 28-day Detention and Case Progression (DCPR) review. However, cases can also be referred by units such as the Detention Gatekeeper, Detention Services, Detention Engagement Teams and the Detained Vulnerability Assurance and Advice Team when it is felt that additional scrutiny might be useful outside of the 3 monthly cycle. Cases from all detained commands are reviewed together with the aim of ensuring consistency in the use of detention powers across different case types, increasing the speed of case progression and reducing the length of time any individual spends in detention.

CPPs are an internal safeguard providing additional scrutiny to further minimise the likelihood of inappropriate or unduly prolonged detention, and the consequent risk of unlawful detention.

2.1 Related content

Adults at risk in immigration detention policy

3. Purpose of the Case Progression Panels

The Case Progression Panels (CPP) have 2 primary objectives:

• to review continued detention
• to evaluate case progression

The functions of the CPP are to:

• ensure a consistency of process and approach to reviewing detention and case progression across the immigration system
• drive case progression and casework diligence to effect departure from the UK, whether by administrative removal or deportation
• provide additional oversight for the identification and management of potentially vulnerable people in detention

In ensuring consistency of process and approach across the immigration system the CPP will:

• provide a forum to review all cases where individuals have been detained for more than a prescribed period
• standardise the review methodology: balancing application of Hardial Singh principles (Section 12 of Illegal Migration Act 2023) and, where applicable, any associated risks attached to release
• provide clearly evidenced and fully justified reasoning behind recommendations for continued detention or consideration of release

In placing vulnerability considerations about individuals who are detained at the heart of detention management the CPP will:

• provide established, robust safeguards to prevent detention continuing for longer than is absolutely necessary
• afford an additional opportunity to identify and highlight potential vulnerability in line with the Adults at risk in immigration detention policy and relevant Detention Service Orders:
  • Detention Services Order 3/2017 Care and management of detainees refusing food and / or fluid
  • Detention Services Order 6/2008 - Assessment care in detention and teamwork
• consideration should also be given to the:
  • Vulnerable Adult Release Standard Operating Procedure
  • Release of detainees from Immigration Detention

In looking to identify immigration system efficiency, the CPP will drive value for the public purse by assisting to:

• reduce the overall number of people in detention for prolonged periods, reducing the associated costs of detention
• prevent unlawful detention and any subsequent financial penalties
• clearly evidence decisions to maintain detention to assist in defending legal challenges and claims for unlawful detention

3.1 Related external links

R (Hardial Singh) v Governor of Durham Prison [1983] EWHC 1 (QB).

4. Case selection

Case Progression Panels (CPP) will review all cases after an individual has been detained for 3 months and every 3 months of detention thereafter, beginning with the week following the third 28-day detention and case progression review. These are not measured in calendar months, but rather on a 28-day basis in line with the current detention policies.

Cases can be referred to the CPP on an ad hoc basis where an independent review of a case is required outside of the 3-monthly schedule. This can be at the request of teams such as the Detention Gatekeeper, Detention Services, the Detention Engagement Team, the Detained Vulnerability Assurance and Advice Team, the caseworker, the Returns Director, or at the recommendation of a previous CPP.

5. Timing and scheduling of Case Progression Panels

Cases will initially be presented to a Case Progression Panel (CPP) after an individual has been detained for 3 months and every 3 months of detention thereafter. The timings of these reviews are because:

• it provides a timely, sensible intervention point to promptly drive case progression and to review the reasonableness and appropriateness of detention, including highlighting any safeguarding concerns
• it provides effective, internally independent assurance at a reasonable timeframe
• a high proportion of those detained under immigration powers leave detention before the 3-month point, allowing an additional assurance measure to be focussed on the potentially more complex cases in which detention continues beyond that point

The number of CPP held each week will vary.

Cases are allocated to a CPP according to the length of the individuals detention. Those individuals detained for just over 3 months will be reviewed in a 3-month CPP. Those individuals detained between 6-9 months will be reviewed in a 6-9 month CPP. Those individuals detained for 12 months + will be reviewed in a 12-month CPP.

A CPP can contain a mixture of 3, 6-9 and 12+ month cases, however the grade of the Chair must be appropriate for cases with the longest periods of detention.  For example, they must be at least a Grade 7 if the panel are going to be discussing individuals who have been detained for 6 months or more. 

CPP are normally intended to last 2 hours and 30 minutes. The number of cases considered in each CPP will be tailored to fit within this timeframe, ensuring that meaningful discussion can take place, and to ensure that the potentially more complex cases are given sufficient time for proper consideration and discussion. There is no requirement to consider all cases within a CPP; those not reviewed will be allocated for review at a subsequent CPP. There will always be a CPP team member present acting as secretariat.

As a minimum requirement for a CPP to proceed, representation is required from CPP members from the following business areas: the Foreign National Offenders Returns Command (FNORC), National Returns Progression Command (NRPC), Returns Logistics (RL), Litigation Operations (LO) and an Independent Panel Member.

If there is not a representative available from each of these core areas, then a CPP is unlikely to proceed. In these circumstances, the CPP chair will decide if it is appropriate to continue with the CPP. The CPP chair should consider whether the objective of the CPP can be met and if the CPP is suitably independent, based on the available CPP members.

When resources allow, the core CPP members will be supplemented by CPP trained business experts and additional representatives from other detained casework business areas, such as the Detained Vulnerability Assurance and Advice Team, the Operational Support & Certification Unit, the Detention Gatekeeper and the Presenting Officers Unit. Relevant policy colleagues from Removals Enforcement and Detention Policy or Asylum Policy may also be in attendance.

With CPPs held virtually using Microsoft Teams, all members attending are encouraged to turn on their cameras for introductions to increase inclusivity.

6. Pre-panel preparation

At least a week in advance of a Case Progression Panel (CPP), the relevant cases for consideration are identified by the CPP team, based on length of detention. A report is then collated and communicated to all CPP members to allow sufficient time for necessary preparatory activities, including a review of cases to be considered within the CPP to be carried out. The report contains the following information:

• case information (including ownership)
• removal directions date (where applicable)
• any ‘Adult at Risk’ information
• criminal casework specific information (for example Multi-Agency Public Protection (MAPPA) and sentence) - note that regarding sentence, the Serious Crime Act 2007 lists the following crimes as constituting serious crimes:
  • drug trafficking
  • human trafficking
  • arms trafficking
  • prostitution and child sex
  • armed robbery
  • money laundering
  • fraud
  • tax evasion and revenue offences
  • corruption and bribery
  • blackmail
  • intellectual property offences
  • environmental crimes
  • attempting, conspiring, encouraging or assisting, or aiding or abetting such an offence
• previous CPP recommendations and whether accepted by casework (where applicable)
• reasons for a release recommendation not being completed (where applicable)
• whether SOS or IJ bail has been granted in principle

This report is re-run immediately prior to the CPP to ensure up to date information is available on the day.

CPP invitations are expected to be sent out a minimum of 2 weeks before a scheduled CPP. CPP members, from the core areas (Foreign National Offenders Returns Command (FNO RC), National Returns Progression Command (NRPC), Lit Ops (LO), Returns Logistics (RL)) who are unable to attend the CPP should respond to the invitation promptly. They should inform the nominated reserve representative and business area SPOCs that they cannot attend a CPP and for the reserve representative to attend in their place. This allows for the CPP to operate with the required mandatory panel members.  

CPP members must confirm attendance for each CPP they are invited to, and this must be done a minimum of 3 days before the scheduled panel. This allows the reserve panellist enough notice to prep and attend the CPP if required.

It is the responsibility of CPP SPOCs from core areas (FNO RC, NRPC, Lit Ops and RL) to identify and provide names of panel members, including reserve panel members, to the CPP team. SPOCs must, ensure panel members from their area have undergone CPP training and been given sufficient time to prepare for the CPP.

7. Minimum standards for Case Progression Panel review

For the Case Progression Panel (CPP) to make an informed, justified, proportionate and lawful recommendation, they will require accurate up to date information. All recommendations must be based on facts and speculation on individual cases must be avoided. Every CPP must consider the presumption of liberty throughout all individual case discussions, ensuring that alternatives to detention (such as Secretary of State (SoS) bail including any mitigating factors) are considered in all cases and if alternatives to detention are deemed not appropriate, this is summarised by the CPP. It is also important that every CPP ensure avoidance of a presumption that applications and appeals will be refused or dismissed. Each CPP should review the following documents on Atlas for each case, where applicable:

• the Detention and Case Progression Review document – containing detailed information on:
  • case progression steps taken and planned
  • barriers to removal, including steps taken to overcome or mitigate them and the estimated timescales for doing so
  • documentation status, including any steps taken / planned to obtain travel documents and the estimated timescales for doing so
  • any vulnerabilities, including the adults at risk level
  • clear reason/justification for continued detention
  • any public protection concerns
  • and clear estimation of likely removal timescales
• Atlas screens:
  • Atlas case notes for taken and planned case progression steps
  • Atlas Person Alerts for any relevant information, including adults at risk and vulnerability information
  • Atlas Detention Overview for detention details. Detention Engagement Activity records and previous CPP recommendations
  • Atlas Compliance & Enforcement for Immigration Judge / Secretary of State bail details (Immigration Judge bail decisions and comments should be considered alongside the facts of the individual case, regardless of how recent they are), individual case types for status of applications and further representations and removal details for any current or previous removal directions
  • Appeal Details for any appeal details
  • Atlas Judicial Review Details for any Judicial Review details
  • details of travel documents submitted
  • breaches of any conditions of release and absconder details
  • offence details

This is not an exhaustive list and further documents on Atlas screens can be reviewed on individual cases where necessary. A CPP Information Reference Guide is available to all CPP members and will be attached to every CPP invite to assist in case preparation and discussion.

The CPP should in all individual cases, check if a previous CPP has reviewed the case, what their recommendations were and if any case progression actions were made. This will avoid the same recommendations being made and ensures that the case progresses appropriately, particularly considering any previous case progression actions.

It is the responsibility for all areas of the business to regularly update Atlas, even if just to confirm that an outstanding action remains open. This is not a new or additional requirement for any part of the business. This simply confirms what is expected of all caseworking units at all times.

8. Case Progression Panel roles and responsibilities

Case Progression Panel (CPP) members consist of a mix of grades from EO and above. The structure of CPP and individual responsibilities are set out below.

8.1 Case Progression Panel chairs

The chair has overall responsibility for the management and oversight of the CPP, including:

• introducing and setting out the function of the CPP using the chair minimum checklist
• consistent application of detention policies and procedures
• ensuring a coherent review of each case
• ensuring decisions are consistent, appropriate and proportionate, and are recorded accurately
• where necessary, recommend progression steps
• where identified, highlight safeguarding concerns
• encouraging an open and honest discussion on case progression and detention
• ensure the panel is conducted with professionalism and with reference to appropriate behaviours, challenging any inappropriate behaviours and flagging to the CPP lead within 24 hours of the CPP
• ensuring appropriate time is given for each case to be discussed fully
• engaging with all members and experts during a CPP to ensure that recommendations reflect the collective views of the CPP
• complete and return the CPP Minimum Review Checklist to the CPP Team
• making a final decision on the recommendation being made by the CPP if CPP members are split and a majority decision cannot be reached
• summarising panel recommendations and mandated actions for each case following discussions
• participating in a post panel ‘wash up’ session alongside the independent panel member to provide feedback on cases needing escalation and / or panel member performance (if applicable)
• providing post panel feedback on the Independent Panel Member’s performance to the CPP lead

A CPP chair checklist is available to all CPP chairs and must be followed to ensure consistency in how CPPs are run and individual cases reviewed.  

The seniority of the CPP Chair will escalate as the length of detention increases for the cases under consideration. As a minimum a 3-month CPP will be chaired by an SEO. 6-9 month and 12+ month CPP’s will be chaired as a minimum by a Grade 7 or Grade 6

8.2 Case Progression Panel members

All CPP members, including those dialling into the meeting, must participate actively in CPP discussions. They are responsible for reviewing individual cases to ensure:

• consistent application of policies and procedures
• decisions are consistent, appropriate and proportionate
• where necessary, progression actions are recommended
• where identified, potential adults at risk concerns are highlighted

8.3 Business experts

As well as contributing as a CPP member, a business expert will provide detailed, expert advice on the status of individual cases and a broader awareness of removability and case progression. Teams which provide these experts may include the Detention Gatekeeper, Detention Engagement Teams, the Detained Vulnerability Assurance and Advice Team, Operational Support & Certification Unit and FNO RC Investigation & Pending prosecution, Documentation and POCA Team.

8.4 Independent panel members

To provide independent oversight of detained casework operations and provide an element of transparency, an independent panel member will be included in all CPPs, with independent panel members having been permanently recruited for this purpose.  

Our approach to an independent presence in CPPs has been modelled on similar independent panels operating across the Home Office. This includes the Independent Family Returns Panels (IFRPs), which provide effective scrutiny and safeguarding advice on the handling of these sensitive removals; and the Modern Slavery Multi-Agency Assurance Panel (MAAP), which previously provided a similar function for potential modern slavery cases.

Independent panel members will have knowledge of public protection issues and management of potentially vulnerable people as well as experience working in a multi-disciplinary environment. 

As well as having the same role as any CPP member, independent panel members will also record and report back following CPPs, highlighting significant discussion points, providing feedback and sharing best practice to inform the continued development of the process and raise standards.

Independent panel members will receive feedback from the CPP operational lead and CPP strategic lead on their contribution to panels.

8.5 Case Progression Panel officer

A member of the CPP Team will introduce cases within the CPP. This introduction will be structured to make the panel aware of the barriers to removal and any known timescales to resolve these, the individuals AaR level and reason for this level, followed by the caseworker’s assessment of any public protection concerns. A CPP officer will record the key points of the CPP discussion, as well as the recommendation or recommendations made in each case, including the reasoning given by the CPP. Given the experience of the CPP officer, they will be expected to guide and assist CPP chairs.

8.6 Frequency of attendance

CPP members and chairs are required to be released by their business areas to attend 10 to 12 CPP over a 12-month period. This number may vary depending on business unit and must be agreed by the member’s or chair’s line manager before they accept the role of a CPP member or chair.

8.7 Pre-panel preparation

A report is collated by the CPP Team and communicated to all CPP members prior to the scheduled CPP. It is expected that all CPP members will carry out necessary preparatory activities, including a review of cases that are to be considered within the CPP. Depending on the experience of the CPP member and the complexity of the cases to be discussed at the CPP, up to 2 hours is expected as reasonable preparation time.

To aid panel preparations, CPP members may refer to documents such as DCPRs, stored on Atlas. Any documents viewed from Atlas will be automatically downloaded to the individual’s personal download folder and should be deleted following the CPP to comply with current Knowledge and Information Management Unit (KIMU) guidance. For further information see: Digital Heap Quick Guide.

8.8 Professional standards

It is expected that all CPP chairs, members, experts and CPP officers will carry out and conduct CPP with professionalism and with the use of expected and appropriate behaviours in line with The Civil Service Code. This means it is expected the role will be carried out with dedication and with a commitment to the Civil Service and its core values of integrity, honesty, objectivity and impartiality. It is important that all those involved in CPPs ensure they always act in a way that is professional, retaining the confidence of all panel members while working fairly, efficiently, promptly, effectively and sensitively. It is also important to ensure panel members endeavour to set out the facts and relevant issues truthfully to the best of their ability, correcting any errors as soon as possible. This is to ensure decisions are taken on the merits of each case.

If there are any concerns around the behaviour of a CPP chair, panel member and/or observer these must be addressed and challenged during the panel to retain the professionalism expected at a CPP. They should also be raised directly with the CPP lead within 24 hours for relevant actions to be taken. Inappropriate behaviours or comments at CPPs will not be tolerated and will be fed back to an individual’s management chain. Action may also include limiting or ceasing individual involvement in CPPs until further training is provided and the CPP Team are satisfied there will be no risk to the professional conduct of CPPs going forward.

8.9 Related content

Pre-panel preparation

8.10 Related external links

The Civil Service Code

9. Case Progression Panel training

All Case Progression Panel (CPP) chairs and members must undertake formal CPP training. This training will inform the chairs and members of the purpose, function and process of the CPP, as well as the roles and responsibilities of both chairs and members and the minimum standard of consideration required within a CPP. This training is delivered by the CPP Team. Any updates to the training are communicated to all chairs and members. Refresher training is given to chairs and members when the need is identified by the CPP team or where this is requested from CPP chairs or members.

The training involves an overview of the CPP process and covers the detention policies that are considered within the CPP.

10. Case Progression Panel recommendations

The recommendations of Case Progression Panels (CPP) must be fully documented and disclosable. All recommendations must be based on facts and speculation on individual cases must be avoided. All CPPs must discuss a long-stop timeframe (which is the longest anticipated time an individual will remain in detention for the purposes of removal) when assessing removal timescales. The CPP should make a recommendation on all individual cases. If it is felt that there are significant reasons why the CPP are unable to reach a recommendation, this must be fully reasoned, and a timeframe given for these to be resolved to allow a subsequent CPP to make a recommendation. The CPP will review each case and recommend one of 3 actions.

10.1 Recommend a grant of Secretary of State bail

The CPP believes there may be a barrier, or barriers, which may impact on the prospect of removing the individual who is detained within a reasonable time, or that detention may no longer be the most appropriate option, for example vulnerability issues are identified.

Based on the information available to the CPP on that day, the CPP considers that maintaining detention may not be appropriate because:

• there are barriers that may impact on realistic timescales to remove/deport the individual who is detained from the UK within a reasonable timeframe and/or
• there may be a deterioration in the health or wellbeing, emerging vulnerability issues or safeguarding concerns of the individual who is detained

If a grant of Secretary of State bail is recommended, the reasons for this recommendation will be provided to the casework team by email by the CPP Team. Any decision to release an individual from detention following a CPP recommendation is still required to go through any release authorisation process that is in place in the individual casework command. The case will be audited for progress 2 weeks after the CPP by the CPP Team, and, if the recommendation has not been followed, the CPP Team will decide whether the case should be re-referred to a CPP.

10.2 Recommend maintain detention but with case progression actions

The CPP is satisfied that continued detention is justified and proportionate. However, there may be imminent, anticipated or planned events or actions which, if they do not occur, or are not likely to occur within the expected timescales, would require detention to be re-assessed. There is a risk that detention may not remain justified and proportionate without any such actions being carried out promptly, or if the events in question do not occur.

The recommendation by the CPP to maintain detention but with case progression actions will be made only if the CPP is satisfied at that point that detention remains justified and proportionate although the CPP believes that, without prompt action or progress, detention may become unjustified. Any recommended case progression actions that require a level of authorisation, whether this has been agreed locally in casework commands or is set out in policy, such as the setting of removal directions, still requires that authorisation process to be followed.

Examples of when it is appropriate for a CPP to set case progression actions would be to progress an application (such as an asylum claim or further representations), the obtaining of a travel document and the setting of removal directions where the CPP can see no clear and recent progress on these barriers to removal. 

If continued detention is being recommended with case progression actions, these will be provided to the casework team by email by the CPP Team. The actions will be audited by the CPP Team for progress 2 weeks after the CPP and a decision made by the CPP Team on whether the case should be re-referred to a CPP sooner than the next 3-month point.

10.3 Recommended to maintain detention

The CPP is satisfied that continued detention is justified and proportionate. The CPP believes there is sufficient justification to maintain detention based on the information available at the time of the review. The caseworker should continue to undertake regular reviews of detention as per normal. The CPP recommendation does not supersede any earlier decision to release an individual from detention, nor does it prevent such a decision from being taken.

10.4 Cases where Secretary of State (SOS) bail and/or Immigration Judge bail has been granted in principle.

Cases with SOS or Immigration Judge bail granted in principle should continue to be reviewed at a CPP. However, as a decision on release has already been made, the default CPP recommendation is likely to be release in line with the bail grant. Panel discussions should therefore be focused on whether there has been any change in circumstances since bail was granted - with discussions focused on advancing case progression, removing barriers to release, and ensuring individuals who are identified as having vulnerabilities are receiving the appropriate support. If required, cases can also be escalated to the relevant casework teams to help drive case progression and mitigate litigation.

Changes of circumstances can include but are not limited to:

• changes in casework / removal barriers – such as, outstanding application concluded, removal barriers such as travel documents / routes now available
• changes in release barriers – such as sourcing of accommodation
• changes to vulnerability and AAR levels

Cases where SOS bail or Immigration Judge bail has been granted will be flagged on case lists to make chairs and panel members aware that they would only require a light touch review.

11. Post-panel casework actions

Following a CPP recommendation, the responsible casework team and case owner will be informed of the recommendation by the CPP Team via email.

The casework team retains responsibility for reviewing and maintaining detention. The team should carefully consider and give significant weight to CPP recommendations. Where the casework team decides not to accept the CPP’s recommendation, they must provide clear reasoning for this, which must be recorded on Atlas and in the next Detention and Case Progression Review (DCPR) form. Reasons may include, but are not limited to, consideration of material evidence in relation to the individual’s detention that was not available to the CPP, or any material change since the recommendation was made.

11.1 Atlas action

The CPP Team will enter the recommendation of the panel for each case on Atlas via the manage detention function – record a case progression panel recommendation, this will include the date of the CPP, and the recommendation made. For those cases where a case progression action or a release has been recommended, the CPP Team will specify the details of the recommendation and reasons for this.

The casework team are then required to carry out the post CPP casework action on Atlas via the manage detention function. The casework team are required to select the type of case progression panel recommendation that is being actioned and input the date of that recommendation. The casework team are then required to select if they agree or disagree with that recommendation. If the recommendation is to be rejected, a free text box will allow reasoning for this rejection to be given. This action should be completed within 2 weeks of the recommendation being made, unless specified otherwise by the CPP Team.

11.2 Detention and Case Progression Review (DCPR)

Acknowledgment that the case has been presented to a CPP and any recommendations made must be reflected within the next DCPR. This must give details of any recommendation, if it has been agreed with and if it will or has been taken forward, as well as when and by whom.

11.3 Rejecting a recommendation

Atlas

When a CPP recommendation is disagreed with or rejected, this must be recorded clearly and fully reasoned. All reasoning for the disagreement or rejection must be entered on Atlas and within the next DCPR. A free text box allows this reasoning to be given when a recommendation is rejected on Atlas. There needs to be a clear and auditable account on Atlas and within DCPRs setting out the reasons why the recommendation or case progression actions have not been followed (for example, there has been a change in circumstances/new information). This will not only help when the next DCPR is conducted, or when cases return to the CPP, but will also assist if a claim for unlawful detention is made.

To ensure there is additional oversight and assurance when a responsible casework team rejects a CPP recommendation, this must be approved by a colleague of the same or higher grade of the CPP chair where the initial recommendation was made. The grade of the person rejecting will depend on the type of panel and varies as the length of detention increases, in line with detention authority decisions: For example, 3 month (SEO+), 6-9 months and 12 months + (Grade 7+).

Any decision to release an individual following a CPP recommendation must be referred to and be agreed by the appropriate grade within the casework command.

12. Case Progression Panel reporting

Casework teams are measured on timely acknowledgement of CPP recommendations on Atlas following each panel.

Compliance with post panel casework actions will be measured through monthly Vantage reporting containing case compliance rates and those teams who have not met expected standards. For those non-compliant cases, a DQ report will be provided on SharePoint for the relevant business areas to review, rectify and monitor performance. It is therefore important for casework teams to carry out post post-panel casework actions as set out above.

13. Case Progression Panel: single point of contact (SPOC)

Each casework command is required to have a single point of contact (SPOC) within their business area to ensure that all Case Progression Panel (CPP) recommendations are considered, that detention and casework progression are reviewed following receipt of a CPP recommendation, and to ensure there is a clear audit trial on Atlas and within the Detention and Case Progression Review (DCPR) of these actions.

This will allow the CPP to have a consistent approach across detained casework on how post-panel actions are considered and addressed. It will also help to ensure greater accountability as to how teams review CPP recommendations. The SPOC in each business area will have the following responsibilities (and should have a personal performance goal to reflect their role):

• ensure that all CPP recommendations are fed back to individual casework areas and case owners
• ensure that Atlas is clearly updated, acknowledging a CPP recommendation for all cases where the CPP has recommended release or case progression actions
• ensure that Atlas and the next DCPR are clearly updated, with reasons given, if the casework team reject a CPP recommendation
• ensure that the next DCPR is updated to recognise that the case was presented to a CPP
• ensure post case progression panel casework actions are completed on Atlas by the case owner
• be a point of contact for the CPP Team to discuss any changes to the CPP and their processes
• to receive the monthly compliance report and actively drive forward any compliance issues in their individual business areas

There is a suggested performance goal for the role of the single point of contact.

14. Single point of contact (SPOC) personal performance goal

Goal name: Case Progression Panel Single Point of Contact (SPOC)

Start date:

End date:

Goal Description: Case Progression Panels were introduced in February 2017, to provide an internal assessment of cases in detention every 3 months. They strengthen the legal safeguards against excessive length of detention

As a business area Single Point of Contact (SPOC) for Case Progression Panels, I have responsibility to:

• ensure that all CPP recommendations are fed back to individual casework areas and case owners
• ensure that Atlas is clearly updated, acknowledging a CPP recommendation for all cases where the CPP has recommended release or case progression actions
• ensure that Atlas and the next Detention Case Progression Review (DCPR) is clearly updated, with reasons given if the casework team are to reject a CPP recommendation
• ensure that the next DCPR is updated to recognise that a case was presented to a CPP
• ensure post case progression panel casework actions are completed on Atlas by the case owner
• be a point of contact for the CPP Team to discuss any changes to the CPP and their processes
• provide names of panel members (and reserve members) attending panels when requested by the CPP Team, if applicable
• actively drive forward any compliance issues in my business area

14.1 Success criteria

Suggested success criteria against this goal includes:

• to adhere to and actively participate in the panel process / guidance
• to ensure punctual attendance of nominated panel members and their reserve
• reviewing cases following a CPP recommendation and ensuring all post panel processes are followed by relevant casework teams / case owner
• actively drive forward compliance with CPP processes

Comments:

15. Case Progression Panel chair and member personal performance goal

Goal name: Case Progression Panel Chair and Member

CPPs were introduced in February 2017, to independently assess cases in detention every 3 months. They strengthen the legal safeguards against excessive lengths of detention. As a panel member or chair, you will support the effective operation of case progression panels. Delivery includes:

• conducting panels with professionalism and commitment to the One Home Office principles of Compassion, Respect, Collaboration & Courageousness
• acting in accordance with the Civil Service core values of integrity, honesty, objectivity, and impartiality
• ensuring the consistent application of policies and procedures
• making sure decisions are consistent, appropriate, and proportionate
• where necessary, recommending progress steps to drive case progression
• where appropriate, highlighting safeguarding and vulnerability concerns.
• working collaboratively to enhance public services and delivering tough or unpopular messages
• being punctual by attending CPPs on time
• informing the relevant business unit SPOC’s and CPP team at least 3 days in advance of a CPP if unable to attend and ensuring appropriate cover is provided

As CPP Chair additional responsibilities include:

• introducing and setting out the function of the CPP’s using the provided Chair Checklist
• ensuring all panel members actively contribute, encouraging an open and honest discussion on case progression and detention on cases within the panel
• ensuring appropriate time is given for each case to be discussed
• making a decision on a CPP recommendation where a majority view cannot be reached
• ensure the panel is conducted with professionalism and with reference to appropriate behaviours, challenging any inappropriate behaviours and flagging to the CPP lead within 24 hours of the CPP
• ensuring a summary of panel recommendations and mandated actions are provided on each case for the CPP Team to capture accurately
• participating in a post panel ‘wash up’ session alongside the independent panel member to provide feedback on cases needing escalation and / or panel member performance (if applicable)
• providing feedback on Independent Panel Member performance following a CPP using the provided feedback forms
• it is recommended that chairs shadow other chairs periodically, at least 2/3 panels, to further enhance chairing abilities and skills

15.1 Success criteria

Suggested success criteria against this goal for all panel members and chairs includes:

• to adhere to and actively participate in the Panel Process / guidance.
• to ensure punctual attendance to panels
• reviewing individual cases following proper levels of preparation and actively contributing to CPP discussions
• attending the minimum number of panels as set out in the chairing expectations for your business area

Attending the minimum number of panels as set out in the chairing expectations for your business area.