Freedom of information requests

On & Off Framework Nursing agency usage

Questions

1. Please can you confirm how many shifts have been released/allocated to ON framework agencies within the last 90 days?

2. In the last 90 days which wards, or departments were these ON framework requests for?

3. Please can you confirm how many nursing shifts have been filled by ON framework agencies within the last 90 days?

4. How many long term lines of work or block bookings are currently being supplied by ON framework agencies?

5. Which ON framework agencies is the trust currently utilising for Nursing vacancies and what is the spend on these agencies year to date?

6. Please can you confirm how many shifts have been released/allocated to OFF framework agencies within the last 90 days?

7. What is the average charge for both RMN’s and RGN’s from ON framework agencies?

8. Who at Temporary Staffing is responsible for onboarding new agencies and could you provide their email address and contact number?

9. What is the generic Nurse bank email address for staff bank?

10. How many shifts were cascaded to Thornbury Nursing within the last 90 days?

Response

The Trust does hold the information requested but we are withholding some of it for the following reason:

 

Refusal Notice – Section 14(1) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000

 

The right of access to information is not without exception and is subject to a number of exemptions and other provisions under the Act, including section 14(1) of the FOIA which provides:

 

"14. Vexatious and repeated requests

(1) Section 1(1) does not oblige a public authority to comply with a request for information if the request is vexatious."

 

In ICO Decision Notice FS50493150, the ICO clarified that the term vexatious is not defined in the FOIA.  The Upper Tribunal also considered the issue of vexatious requests in the case of the Information Commissioner v Devon County Council & Dransfield (Upper Tribunal Case No. GIA/3037/2011).  The Tribunal commented that vexatious could be defined as the 'manifestly unjustified, in appropriate or improper use of a formal procedure'. The Tribunal's definition clearly establishes that the concepts of proportionality and justification are relevant to any consideration of whether a request is vexatious.

 

We believe that the current request is vexatious because it will be burdensome to the Trust, by virtue of S14(1) of the FOIA. There is no public interest test, so we have not gone on to consider the same.

 

The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has provided guidance on dealing with

vexatious requests and states 'the Freedom of Information Act was designed to give individuals a greater right of access to official information with the intention of making public bodies more transparent and accountable’. The ICO further recognises that 'dealing with unreasonable requests can place a strain on resources and get in the way of delivering mainstream services or answering legitimate requests. Furthermore, these requests can also damage the reputation of the legislation itself.

 

ICO guidance reminds public authorities that S14(1) is designed to protect public authorities by allowing them to refuse any requests which have the potential to cause a disproportionate or unjustified level of disruption. The ICO also states the emphasis on protecting public authorities' resources from unreasonable requests was acknowledged by the Upper Tribunal when it defined the purpose of S14 as 'section 14.....is concerned with the nature of the request and has the effect of disapplying the citizen's right under section 1(1).....the purpose of section 14......must be to protect the resources (in the broadest sense of that word) of the public authority from being squandered on disproportionate use of FOIA.....'

 

To assist public authorities, the ICO guidance has provided a number of indicators as typical key features of a vexatious request. These are:

• Burden on the authority
• Disproportionate effort
• Abusive or aggressive language
• Personal grudges
• Unreasonable persistence
• Unfounded accusations
• Intransigence
• Frequent or overlapping requests
• Deliberate intention to cause annoyance
• Scattergun approach
• No obvious intent to obtain information
• Futile requests
• Frivolous requests

 

Having reviewed your request, the information requested repeats a previous request of FOI 3791 (responded in January 2024) changing only the period, however, this change in period is negligible when considering a long-term human resources planning.  An annual or a longer period request would be more appropriate in this case, and less needlessly burdensome on already stretched NHS resources.  Although we understand that you may believe there to be serious purpose and value behind your request, we must consider whether the impact on the Trust is justified.

 

We have therefore determined that the following three factors are relevant in deeming your request vexatious:

• Burden on the authority
• Disproportionate effort
• Frequent or overlapping requests