Our aim was to survey staff of partner agencies, who have dealt with the CDPP over the last two years, about the quality of the CDPP’s service.

Which agencies are partner agencies?

The agencies that investigate and refer cases to the CDPP comprise the largest cohort of partner agencies that the CDPP deals with (eg AFP, state and territory police, Services Australia, ASIC, AFSA). Intelligence agencies that closely assist referring agencies to investigative criminal activity are also partner agencies (eg ASIO) and agencies that work closely with the CDPP in relation to law reform and policy (eg Attorney‑General’s Department (AGD), Department of Home Affairs).

Methodology for surveying partner agencies

The following methodology was used to provide a representative sample and assure a consistent and robust approach:

1. The sample size was 562¹ respondents of partner agencies.
2. The population was divided into two strata.

First Stratum

1. Approximately two thirds (351, or 62 per cent) of the sample respondents were informants (ie case officers from the referring agencies) randomly selected from cases that were open in caseHQ or CRIMS between 1 July 2018 and 1 May 2020.
2. These informants were from referring agencies listed in the 2018–19 CDPP Annual Report as well as additional agencies (identified through caseHQ) that had referred briefs during 2019–20.
3. The population of informants in the randomised sample (the 351 from CRIMS and caseHQ) was stratified by referring agency. The total number of survey respondents per agency was determined through the proportion of files that were open during the 1 July 2018—1 May 2020 period. For example, if an agency contributed 10 per cent of the referrals then they would constitute 35 of the total respondents (10 per cent of 351).
4. Upon determining the number of informants per referring agency the random selection of informants was weighted by number of referrals. That is, informants that had made more referrals and subsequently would have had more interactions with the CDPP, would be more likely to be selected.
5. The population of informants in the randomised sample (the 351 from CRIMS and caseHQ) was stratified by referring agency. The total number of survey respondents per agency was determined through the proportion of files that were open during the 1 July 2018—1 May 2020 period. For example, if an agency contributed 10 per cent of the referrals then they would constitute 35 of the total respondents (10 per cent of 351).
6. Upon determining the number of informants per referring agency the random selection of informants was weighted by number of referrals. That is, informants that had made more referrals and subsequently would have had more interactions with the CDPP, would be more likely to be selected.

Second Stratum

7. Approximately one third (211, or 38 per cent) of the sample respondents were selected from a data set comprising names provided by CDPP prosecutors. This group was provided the same survey questionnaire as the randomised group of 351 respondents. The respondents who were identified by the CDPP prosecutors were staff from partner agencies who were:

• involved in liaison, policy, law reform, training or similar activities
• a lawyer
• a team leader or senior manager
• a member of an intelligence agency, or
• an investigator in a case, who was not the informant, but who was someone who was a key member of the investigative team and who had significant dealings with CDPP prosecutors, between 1 July 2018 to 1 May 2020.

It should be noted that the CDPP does not hold a data set of these sorts of people on its business management systems. The only method of accurately surveying these people, is to ask CDPP staff who they have been dealing with. The reason for also including an investigator (who is not an informant on a particular case) within this group is to ensure that the survey is representative, and includes investigators who have significant, as well as current experience of working with the CDPP. This is particularly relevant in larger, more complex cases, where teams of investigators work on cases, but where there may only be one informant listed on the CDPP’s computer system for each case.

8. There were a number of agencies identified at step seven that are partner agencies, but not referring agencies, such as AGD and ASIO. Every new partner agency identified was added to the master referring agency list, to form an overall master list of 71 partner agencies.

9. Attempts were made to send at least one survey to each of the 71 partner agencies on the master partner agency list. Ultimately, we were successful in sending at least one survey to 67 partner agencies on the master partner agency list.