Flow chart one draft 3

MITIGATING FACTORS•Are there any mitigating factors/extenuating circumstances•If so, are they persuasive (yes/no?)•For details on possible mitigating factors, click on 8 above


START: Behaviour or Performance Incident Occurs

PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION. Any substance to

the allegation?


the allegation?

Handle it now or later?


1

??Yes

No

??

Are we the right people to

handle it?


handle it? ExplanationAcceptable?ExplanationAcceptable?

NoNow

??

FORMAL INVESTIGATION• Carry out thorough and detailed

investigation into the whole matter• For details on investigation process,

click 4 above• Part of the investigation will be detailed

interviewing of the employee





ConsiderSTAND – DOWN

on Pay?


on Pay?

OTHER OPTIONSIf disciplinary action unwarranted either drop the matter entirely, or consider corrective/remedial action


PAID STAND-DOWNConsider

appropriateness of paid stand-down



ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE

•Allegation•Potential impact•Right to representation•Investigation to occur

ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4 INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE

• Conduct detailed interview(s) with employee

• For details on Interview format and process, click 5 above

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT

Check it out! (Next level manager or HR)

IF IN DOUBTCheck it out! (Next level

manager or HR)

CONSIDER EMPLOYEE EXPLANATION

•It is vital to take the time to consider the employee’s explanation•This will involve adjournment after conclusion of the interview•For details on consideration process, click 6 above



6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME

Is disciplinary action the appropriate action?•If yes, click 9 above for available options•If no, click info button below for alternative options

DECISION ON OUTCOME


IMPLEMENT ALTERNATIVE(S)

If disciplinary action is ruled out, then revisit alternative options and implement the most appropriate alternative option(s)



IF DISCIPLINARY ACTION UNWARRANTED, THEN:

Either drop the matter entirely

Or consider corrective/remedial action

Note: for details on alternative options, click the info button below





9

8

IMPLEMENT DECISION• Set up meeting with

employee• Advise employee of

decision• Complete

documentation and file accordingly





Recommendation to next level

manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END

END

FORMAL DISCIPLINARY ACTION

PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

3

7





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

7

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

Step 1: Preliminary InvestigationIn the event of an allegation of misconduct or unsatisfactory work performance, you must first determine if there is substance to the allegation. This doesn’t mean conduct a full investigation . Just establish if there is good cause to investigate further . The preliminary investigation will involve:•Talk to people who have facts about the allegation (this may or may not include asking the employee themselves about the matter)•If you do talk to the employee you need to advise them that this is a preliminary investigation only BUT that they may have a support person or representative present•Identify the rule or standard alleged to be broken and satisfy yourself you have good cause to investigate further.•The question to be answered is: “Is there sufficient cause here to believe that discipline or dismissal is a reasonable possibility following an investigation.” If the answer is “Yes” proceed with the investigation. If “No” consider whether other options may still be appropriate.

Step 1: Preliminary InvestigationIn the event of an allegation of misconduct or unsatisfactory work performance, you must first determine if there is substance to the allegation. This doesn’t mean conduct a full investigation . Just establish if there is good cause to investigate further . The preliminary investigation will involve:•Talk to people who have facts about the allegation (this may or may not include asking the employee themselves about the matter)•If you do talk to the employee you need to advise them that this is a preliminary investigation only BUT that they may have a support person or representative present•Identify the rule or standard alleged to be broken and satisfy yourself you have good cause to investigate further.•The question to be answered is: “Is there sufficient cause here to believe that discipline or dismissal is a reasonable possibility following an investigation.” If the answer is “Yes” proceed with the investigation. If “No” consider whether other options may still be appropriate. END





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

7

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

Other Options:

Corrective/remedial options include:•Reminder: brief word about what is expected/required•Reprimand: informal caution about minor instance•Redirection: discussion/reminder about job requirements/performance standards•Retraining: discussion/refresher on how to carry out key job tasks•Corrective Coaching: detailed discussion resulting in performance improvement plan•Redeploy: discussion on option of voluntary transfer to another job•Relocate: discussion on option of voluntary transfer to new location•Time Out: discussion on option of taking time away from work (paid or unpaid leave)

Other Options:

Corrective/remedial options include:•Reminder: brief word about what is expected/required•Reprimand: informal caution about minor instance•Redirection: discussion/reminder about job requirements/performance standards•Retraining: discussion/refresher on how to carry out key job tasks•Corrective Coaching: detailed discussion resulting in performance improvement plan•Redeploy: discussion on option of voluntary transfer to another job•Relocate: discussion on option of voluntary transfer to new location•Time Out: discussion on option of taking time away from work (paid or unpaid leave)





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

7

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

Normally best to act sooner rather than later. Relevant factors to consider are:•Availability of support from management / HR•Your competency/experience in dealing with it – if unsure/uncertain is help available now?•Will delay compromise the situation, e.g. could info/evidence be lost? Or is there an H & S risk if the matter is delayed?•If unsure/uncertain of what to do, always best to get advice first

Normally best to act sooner rather than later. Relevant factors to consider are:•Availability of support from management / HR•Your competency/experience in dealing with it – if unsure/uncertain is help available now?•Will delay compromise the situation, e.g. could info/evidence be lost? Or is there an H & S risk if the matter is delayed?•If unsure/uncertain of what to do, always best to get advice first END





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

Paid stand-down during an investigation is appropriate when: •Initial information suggests more than minor misconduct may have occurred•Or for H&S/security reasons the employee would best be removed from site•Or a cooling off period is appropriate•Or the orderly conduct of the investigation would be facilitated by stand downNote: It is essential to follow the organisation’s stand-down procedure

Paid stand-down during an investigation is appropriate when: •Initial information suggests more than minor misconduct may have occurred•Or for H&S/security reasons the employee would best be removed from site•Or a cooling off period is appropriate•Or the orderly conduct of the investigation would be facilitated by stand downNote: It is essential to follow the organisation’s stand-down procedure

END

7





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

Normally the employee’s manager should be aware of and lead the investigation (although where appropriate this responsibility can be delegated to another suitable manager, e.g. an HR advisor).

Note: The key consideration is usually Company Policy, i.e. does existing policy provide the necessary delegated authority for the employee’s team leader or manager to carry out the investigation. If not, it must be referred to a manager who has the necessary authority.

Normally the employee’s manager should be aware of and lead the investigation (although where appropriate this responsibility can be delegated to another suitable manager, e.g. an HR advisor).

Note: The key consideration is usually Company Policy, i.e. does existing policy provide the necessary delegated authority for the employee’s team leader or manager to carry out the investigation. If not, it must be referred to a manager who has the necessary authority.

END

7





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)


•It is vital to take the time to consider the employee’s explanation•This will involve adjournment after conclusion of the interviewee•For details on consideration process, click 6 above



6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

• Check Company policy on who has the delegated authority to deal with such matters

• Normally the employee’s manager is best placed to deal with disciplinary cases, with input from HR

• If still unsure, check with your manager before proceeding

• Check Company policy on who has the delegated authority to deal with such matters

• Normally the employee’s manager is best placed to deal with disciplinary cases, with input from HR

• If still unsure, check with your manager before proceeding

END

7





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

7

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

Step 2: Advice to employee When it is determined that the allegation has substance, it is necessary to advise the employee concerned.Inform the employee of:•the nature of the allegation..(as full an explanation as possible)•the potential impact on their employment if the allegation is sustained. (i.e. risk of discipline, warning, dismissal etc)•the opportunity to be represented. (you do not have to wait more than a reasonable time i.e if no representative is available promptly then you can proceed)•the fact that the matter will be fully investigated.

Step 2: Advice to employee When it is determined that the allegation has substance, it is necessary to advise the employee concerned.Inform the employee of:•the nature of the allegation..(as full an explanation as possible)•the potential impact on their employment if the allegation is sustained. (i.e. risk of discipline, warning, dismissal etc)•the opportunity to be represented. (you do not have to wait more than a reasonable time i.e if no representative is available promptly then you can proceed)•the fact that the matter will be fully investigated.

END





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

ENDStep 3: Paid Stand DownPaid stand-down during an investigation is appropriate when: •Initial information suggests more than minor misconduct may have occurred•Or for H&S/security reasons the employee would best be removed from site•Or a cooling off period is appropriate•Or the orderly conduct of the investigation would be facilitated by stand downNote: It is essential to follow the organisations stand-down procedure

Step 3: Paid Stand DownPaid stand-down during an investigation is appropriate when: •Initial information suggests more than minor misconduct may have occurred•Or for H&S/security reasons the employee would best be removed from site•Or a cooling off period is appropriate•Or the orderly conduct of the investigation would be facilitated by stand downNote: It is essential to follow the organisations stand-down procedure

7





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

Step 4: Formal Investigation• Interview all who may have information• Check facts thoroughly, cross-check with others

involved• Make detailed notes recording all relevant info gathered• Start with others involved (e.g. witnesses) before

interviewing the employee concerned• Write up interview notes and ask interviewees to sign

them

Step 4: Formal Investigation• Interview all who may have information• Check facts thoroughly, cross-check with others

involved• Make detailed notes recording all relevant info gathered• Start with others involved (e.g. witnesses) before

interviewing the employee concerned• Write up interview notes and ask interviewees to sign

them

END

7





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

Step 5: Interview Employee• Contact employee in advance to set up interview time/place• Use template letter to confirm interview arrangements

(see relevant sample doc.)• Two on two interview is best (support or rep with employee and

same for manager)• Probe persistently with questions to uncover the real facts (“ask

why X 5”)• Obtain and consider the employee’s detailed explanation • Make full interview notes

Note: Refer to Interview Process template for more details. (See relevant sample doc.)

Step 5: Interview Employee• Contact employee in advance to set up interview time/place• Use template letter to confirm interview arrangements

(see relevant sample doc.)• Two on two interview is best (support or rep with employee and

same for manager)• Probe persistently with questions to uncover the real facts (“ask

why X 5”)• Obtain and consider the employee’s detailed explanation • Make full interview notes

Note: Refer to Interview Process template for more details. (See relevant sample doc.)

END

7





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME


IMPLEMENT ALTERNATIVES


IMPLEMENT ALTERNATIVES










9

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

Step 6: Consider Explanation• Consider Paid Stand-Down while consideration takes place• Check/verify employee’s explanation (reasons/excuses/alibis)• How reliable/credible/authentic was the explanation• How consistent/inconsistent is explanation vs other info

gathered?• Is further investigation/interviewing necessary?• On the balance of probability does the employee’s explanation

stack up?

Step 6: Consider Explanation• Consider Paid Stand-Down while consideration takes place• Check/verify employee’s explanation (reasons/excuses/alibis)• How reliable/credible/authentic was the explanation• How consistent/inconsistent is explanation vs other info

gathered?• Is further investigation/interviewing necessary?• On the balance of probability does the employee’s explanation

stack up?

END

7





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

OTHER OPTIONSCorrective/remedial options include:• Reminder: brief word about what is expected/required• Reprimand: informal caution about minor instance• Redirection: discussion /reminder about requirement/standards• Retraining: discussion/refresher on how to carry out key job

tasks• Corrective Coaching: detailed discussion resulting in

performance improvement plan• Redeploy: discussion on option of voluntary transfer to new job• Relocate: discussion on option of voluntary transfer to new

location• Time Out: discussion on option of taking time away from work





END

7





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

Step 8: Consider Mitigating Factors• Did employee have knowledge of rules/requirements?• Quality of information/evidence against employee (sound or

shaky?• Seriousness (how bad was the incident or instance?)• History (what is the employee’s work history/disciplinary record

like?• Frequency/timing (how often has employee infringed, when was

last time?)• Past practice (how have such incidents been treated previously?)• Personal circumstances (any hardship issues re health,

wellbeing, relationships etc.?)

Step 8: Consider Mitigating Factors• Did employee have knowledge of rules/requirements?• Quality of information/evidence against employee (sound or

shaky?• Seriousness (how bad was the incident or instance?)• History (what is the employee’s work history/disciplinary record

like?• Frequency/timing (how often has employee infringed, when was

last time?)• Past practice (how have such incidents been treated previously?)• Personal circumstances (any hardship issues re health,

wellbeing, relationships etc.?) END

7





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

Step 9: Consider Disciplinary Options• Verbal warning (for first instance of minor misconduct or

continued poor performance)• Written warning (for repeated misconduct or continued poor

performance or significant first instance)• Final written warning (following earlier warning(s) or first

instance of substantial misconduct)• Termination with notice (for repeated instances following final

written warning)• Summary dismissal (for instances of serious misconduct)

Step 9: Consider Disciplinary Options• Verbal warning (for first instance of minor misconduct or

continued poor performance)• Written warning (for repeated misconduct or continued poor

performance or significant first instance)• Final written warning (following earlier warning(s) or first

instance of substantial misconduct)• Termination with notice (for repeated instances following final

written warning)• Summary dismissal (for instances of serious misconduct)

END

7





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

7

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

END













the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

Step 10: Recommendation• Best practice (and often Company Policy)

requires that the manager making the decision in principle on disciplinary action obtains sign-off from the next level manager

• This adds value to the decision by giving it more weight

• It also means “no surprises” for the next level of management

• Sometimes known as the “one-over-one” principle

Step 10: Recommendation• Best practice (and often Company Policy)

requires that the manager making the decision in principle on disciplinary action obtains sign-off from the next level manager

• This adds value to the decision by giving it more weight

• It also means “no surprises” for the next level of management

• Sometimes known as the “one-over-one” principle

END





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10

Step 11: Implementation• The meeting where the decision is conveyed to

the employee will usually be a re-convening of earlier investigation/interview/explanation meetings

• As at earlier meetings the employee must be given the option of having a support person or representative present

• The purpose of the meeting is to convey the decision on the outcome of the process to the employee – not to re-litigate the matter

• Tell the employee verbally what the decision is• Advise the employee that the decision will be

confirmed in writing

Step 11: Implementation• The meeting where the decision is conveyed to

the employee will usually be a re-convening of earlier investigation/interview/explanation meetings

• As at earlier meetings the employee must be given the option of having a support person or representative present

• The purpose of the meeting is to convey the decision on the outcome of the process to the employee – not to re-litigate the matter

• Tell the employee verbally what the decision is• Advise the employee that the decision will be

confirmed in writing

END

7





the allegation?


the allegation?



1

??Yes

No

??


handle it?



NoNow

??










on Pay?


on Pay?







ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


ADVICE TO EMPLOYEE


2

YesLater

4

3

INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



INTERVIEWEMPLOYEE



5

Yes

UnsureIF IN DOUBT



manager or HR)





6

??

??

Supported

Yes

DECISION ON OUTCOME


DECISION ON OUTCOME














9

8










manager on action


manager on action

Not Supported

END

END

END


PROCESS FLOW


PROCESS FLOW

11 10









7

Flow chart one draft 3

Technology

investigation process

appropriate action

employee explanation

detailed investigation

preliminary investigation

representation investigation

available options

consideration process