Summary Information provided by the Cabinet Office pursuant to the Consent Order agreed on 19 December 2013 in the case

of Sloan v ICO and Cabinet Office (EA/2012/0039) a) A summary of the problems existing at the date of the Appellants request with the Cabinet Office in dealing with requests under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, as contained in the Internal Audit Report At the date of the request (10 July 2012), none of the issues identified in the Internal Audit Report of November 2011 remained to be addressed. b) A summary of: (i) the planned improvements completed or nearly completed at the time of the Internal Audit Report 1. Responsibility for FOI matters was moved to the Knowledge and Information Management Unit (KIMU); 2. New casework handling processes had been established and were in operation at the time of the Internal Audit Report; 3. A new casework management system had been set up which provided more detailed and timely Management Information performance reports; 4. The KIMU was strengthened to meet its new responsibilities; 5. An FOI lead official had been identified for all management units and measures introduced to ensure the list of FOI leads is kept up to date; and 6. Learning and development material was developed by the KIMU and, at the time of the Internal Audit Report, work had begun on delivering these. (ii) the planned improvements still ongoing at the time of the Internal Audit Report 1. Improved FOI guidance for management units. c) A summary of the findings of the Internal Audit Report and recommended actions, removing any attribution to any individual or unit. General Finding: The departments response to the ICO Undertaking showed it took very seriously the implications for its reputation of not dealing with FOI requests promptly and properly. An improvement plan was put in place. Finding: In some cases, responses were not copied to KIMU and cases that had been dealt with were continuing to show as open, leading to incorrect reporting. Recommended Action: KIMU should send all completed FOI responses on behalf of management units.

Finding: A number of reassigned cases continued to be shown as allocated to the original unit in KIMU records. Recommended Action: KIMU should send an email acknowledging any reassignments. Management units should not reassign requests without involving KIMU. KIMU has authority to make the final decision on allocation of requests. Finding: Some FOI leads did not have access to FOI performance reports and were unaware of problems in meeting deadlines. Recommended Action: KIMU should encourage Heads of Management Units to distribute performance statistics to FOI leads. Finding: Inconsistency in local monitoring of FOI requests by management units may have created delays. Recommended Action: KIMU should consider introducing a standard spreadsheet for the monitoring of FOI by management units.