Data mapping project: Mixed Bunch

Dispute and complaint resolution bodies are a vital part of the Victorian justice system, providing access to civil justice for thousands of Victorians. Many were established in successive waves of reform dating from the 1970s.

While they have a vibrant political and policy history, their establishment and functions have been organic, piecemeal. This has led to some community confusion about what different dispute and complaint resolution bodies do, and how they may be able to help.

Surprisingly little is known about the actual volume of the matters they handle, and the difference they make. This report is an important first step in exploring how existing administrative data might be able to help to fill these critical knowledge gaps and provide a better understanding of the difference dispute and complaint resolution bodies make to civil justice for Victorians.

Mapping Justice

Victoria Law Foundation’s Data Mapping Project examines how administrative data is collected and used in the Victorian civil justice system. The project investigates what data is available, its accuracy and consistency, how data is used and what needs to be done to improve its utility for addressing access to justice questions.

The project is in three stages. The first explores administrative data collected in the legal assistance sector. The second covers courts and tribunals, and the third examines other dispute resolution and complaint bodies.

Stage three: Mixed Bunch

For Mixed Bunch: The use and utility of administrative data in dispute and complaint resolution bodies in Victoria, dispute and complaint handling bodies were invited to participate in an online survey about their data practices. The study included bodies in Victoria which are part of the civil justice system and provide a platform for Victorians to seek justice.

Implications and way forward

What do they want to do with data in the future?

There was a common aspiration to improve quality, consistency and scope of demographic and other information collected. This was widely seen as key to enhancing data utility and insight. Several wished to conduct more sophisticated analysis and automate aspects of data processing.

Agreed data standards for key measures needed

Improved data practice can potentially provide greater insight into what dispute and complaint bodies do and achieve. Lack of established standards and shared practices, however, present challenges. Without agreed data standards for key measures, contribution to access to justice is likely to remain obscured.

Making user cohorts visible

Collection of standardised data may increase data collection burden but would also be transformative in terms of ability to see different user cohorts. Data currently appears more informative for understanding individual dispute and complaint bodies than the system as a whole.

Aggregation requires shared approaches

More consistent and shared approaches to data standards and practices are desirable. Shared approaches to terminology and measures would facilitate easier and more accurate analysis and aggregation.

Coordinated data approaches could facilitate access to justice

Data is key for understanding how people access and navigate dispute and complaint bodies. Improved data could help to reduce access barriers and provide more equitable access to the justice dispute and complaint bodies can provide.