Tips

Families and
the elders
should go to
visit the RCHEs
especially in
peak period, in
order to
observe the
service quality
of RCHEs and
performances ...more contents

Complaints

• Complainant can be residents and relatives, other organizations or interested personnel; named or unnamed.
• Written or oral.
• Complain accreditation system or residential home services.

• All communications received, written or oral, which signify dissatisfaction with the accreditation scheme, persons involved in implementing the scheme or the quality of service provided by a home accredited by HKAG shall be recorded in a register and passed to the Accreditation Officer. If the dissatisfaction relates to any matter other than the three subjects mentioned in the last sentence, the communication shall be referred to the appropriate division of HKAG. Or, if the matter is outside HKAG’s purview, the author should be informed accordingly;
• The Accreditation Officer, after studying the content of a communication, will determine whether it amounts to an appeal, complaint or simply enquiry. She will record in the register her classification and initiate the necessary follow-up action. In case she sees any conflict of interests (e.g. the dissatisfaction relates to a matter handled by her), she should refer the communication to the Executive Director for classification and determination of the action required;
• If the communication amounts to an appeal (i.e. request to change a decision made by the Accreditation Committee in respect of an organization applying for accreditation), the author should be advised to lodge an appeal, which will be dealt with under the appeal procedure. If an enquiry (a request for information and not for any further action to be taken), the AO will cause a reply to be given. A complaint (to be defined as “an expression of dissatisfaction – against the accreditation scheme, persons involved in implementing the scheme or the quality of service provided by a home accredited by the HKAG – which contains an express or implied request for remedial action to be taken” shall be handled according to the procedure under sub-paragraphs (4) to (7) below;
• Upon receipt of such complaints, whether named or unnamed, orally or in writing, Accreditation Division should handle and confirmed within a week on the complainant has accepted the case and conducting surveys and to investigate reported reply to the complainant within six weeks. If the investigation cannot be completed within six weeks, the complainant should be informed, at the end of the six weeks, of the estimated additional time required and why;
• The Accreditation Officer or Executive Director, as appropriate, shall appoint a person to be the investigating officer of a particular complaint. The person, who may be the AO or ED herself, must have no personal interests, pecuniary or otherwise, in the matter under complaint. The investigating officer shall be the primary person to contact with the complainant, the person or organization being complained against (“the complainee) and other persons or organizations who can assist in the investigation;
• A complainant will be asked whether he / she has any objection to his identify being disclosed to the complainee. He / she should be informed that his / her wish will be respected but non-disclosure may mean that the investigation cannot be as thorough as desired and in some cases, cannot be conducted at all;
• If the complainant agrees to disclosure mentioned in sub-paragraph (6) above, the complaint in its entirety shall be passed to the complainee, unless there is any reason why this should not be done (e.g. to protect a third party’s privacy). In case the complainant objects to disclosure or the disclosure is inappropriate for any reason, a gist of the complaint should be given to the complainee. The gist should, as far as practicable, contain sufficient information for the complainee to know the specific allegation against him/her or it;
• The investigating officer’s report should recommend (i) whether the complaint is substantiated, partially substantiated or unsubstantiated and (ii) what action should be taken in the light of the findings. The action may include suspension, withdrawing or reducing the scope of certification of an organization accredited by HKAG;
• The investigating officer shall send his / her draft report to the complainee, who shall be asked to provide, within one week after receiving the draft, any comment he/she or it may have. The comments, if any, should be recorded or summarized in the final report. If the investigating officer is persuaded by the comments, he / she may revise the recommendations before finalizing the report;
• The investigating officer’s report shall be submitted to the person who appointed him / her to investigate the case. The ED, if appointed by herself to conduct the investigation, shall submit her report to the Chairman of Accreditation Committee. The AO shall, in similar circumstances, submit her report to the ED;
• The person receiving the investing officer’s report, if satisfied with the report, shall cause the necessary follow-up actions to be taken, including informing the complainant and complainee of the results. If the report recommends any revision of the accreditation scheme or suspending, withdrawing or reducing the scope of certification of an accredited home, the approval of the Accreditation Steering Committee or Accreditation Committee, as appropriate, should be obtained before the complainant and complainee are informed of the result. In the case of suspending, withdrawing or reducing the scope of certification, the complainee should be informed of its right to appeal to the Accreditation Appeal Committee; and
• The results of all complaints should be recorded.

• Upon completion of the investigation process, and complainant expressed satisfaction with the reply or follow up on complaints, to end complaints.
• If complainant do not satisfy with the reply or follow up actions, Accreditation Division will refer the case to the Accreditation committee.
• Complaints records will be kept for 3 years confidentially.
• If complainant do not satisfy with the reply and have further complaint, Accreditation division should reply complainant within 4 weeks.