Check new PCD case task iteration

The ‘Check new PCD case’ task is created when the police or an Investigative Agency submit a case for either Early Advice or a Pre-Charge Decision (PCD).

This happens when the system receives a Police TWIF PCD Request message (CM01) or when someone manually registers a case.

Casework assistants use this task to triage the request. They decide whether to accept or reject the case.

If they accept, they determine the review task type, identify the case type, and may route it to the appropriate prosecutor or team depending on the review type.

We identified several issues with the current design. For example, there were many non-standard patterns, making it harder to use and inaccessible.

So we redesigned the flow to use standard components and patterns from the GOV.UK Design System.

What we changed

We made the following design changes:

Removed the blue information box as it was unnecessary
Used caption pattern for case reference, defendant name, and task name to provide context in multi-step flows
Removed the link to open the PCD request because users should be able to complete the flow without leaving it
Changed to big radio buttons because they’re easier to use
Changed buttons from ‘Next’ to ‘Continue’ to follow GOV.UK standards
Changed buttons from ‘Done’ to ‘Continue’ because ‘Done’ is misleading as it’s not the end of the flow
Removed cancel links as the flow is short and we think they’re unnecessary
Made content clearer throughout
Removed conditionally revealing inputs after existing inputs as that’s non-standard and causes accessibility issues
Used two-thirds width layout for the flow as standard
Used a standard check answers page
Added the ability to transfer the case as part of the flow
Simplified allocation screens to avoid tabs and tables
Used autocomplete component for task owner as the list is long
Used autocomplete component for prosecutor as the list is long
Used standard success banner instead of toast message as toast messages obscure the screen and disappear automatically.
Made many content changes to follow the style guide and use clear labels
Reduced the number of steps - for example, we no longer force users to decide whether the task owner will be an individual or team, they just select from a single autocomplete

How it works

The flow begins with a decision page:

Initial decision page with Accept and Reject radio buttons

Accept flow

If the user selects ‘Accept’, they’re asked what type of review task this is.

Review task type page with three options: Early advice, Within 5 calendar days, Within 28 calendar days

They then must select case type.

Case type page with options: Magistrate court, Crown court, RASSO, Complex Casework Unit

Next, they’re asked if they want to transfer the case. The page shows the current unit in inset text.

Transfer case page asking 'Do you want to transfer the case?' with Yes/No options and current unit shown in inset

What happens next depends on:

whether they chose to transfer
what review task type they selected.

Transferring the case to another unit

If the user chooses to transfer the case, they’re asked if they want to change the area. The current area is shown in inset text.

Area page asking if they want to change the area, with current area shown

If they select ‘Yes’, an autocomplete field is revealed where they can select a different area.

Area autocomplete conditionally revealed after selecting Yes

The autocomplete shows matching areas as they type.

Next, they select which unit to transfer the case to. The current unit is shown in inset text.

Unit page with autocomplete, showing current unit

The unit autocomplete is filtered by the selected area (either the area they selected or their current area if they chose not to change it).

Unit autocomplete showing filtered results

After the transfer question (whether they transferred or not), what happens next depends on the review task type selected earlier.

If the user selects ‘Within 5 calendar days’ or ‘Within 28 calendar days’, users go straight to check answers. These review types do not need task creation or prosecutor assignment.

If the user selects ‘Early advice’, users are asked to assign the case. What they’re asked depends on the case type:

Early advice - RASSO cases

For RASSO cases, users are asked who they want to assign the ‘early advice manager triage’ task to. This is shown for RASSO cases because an additional manager triage step will be created.

Task owner page with autocomplete field asking who to assign the early advice manager triage task to

The autocomplete shows both individuals with their role in brackets and teams. When they type, matching results are shown.

The list is filtered by the unit - either the transferred unit if they transferred the case, or the current case unit if they didn’t.

After selecting a task owner, they see the check answers page.

Check answers page showing: Decision (Accept), Review task type (Early advice), Case type (RASSO), Transfer case (No), Task owner selection

If they transferred the case, the check answers page shows all transfer details including the area and unit.

Check answers page showing full transfer details

Early advice - non-RASSO cases

For non-RASSO early advice cases (Magistrate court, Crown court, or Complex Casework Unit), users go to the page to select a prosecutor to assign the case to.

The autocomplete filters the list of prosecutors as they type.

Like the task owner page, the prosecutor list is filtered by the unit - either the transferred unit if they transferred the case, or the current case unit if they didn’t.

The check answers page shows the prosecutor assignment.