PRISM / Independent scrutiny
A clearer process
for independent review.
PRISM is being developed to help scrutiny organisers prepare reviews, support independent panel discussion and keep findings distinct from the organisation’s response. Initial work concerns stop-search scrutiny.
In development · Open to discovery conversations
For scrutiny organisers and reviewers
The work around the meeting matters.
Independent scrutiny involves more than a discussion. Material needs to be selected and prepared, reviewers need a clear record of their findings, and the organisation needs a way to respond and follow through.
PRISM’s intended role is to organise that process without deciding the outcome. Panel members bring their judgement; the organisation remains responsible for its response and actions.
The intended PRISM workflow
From selection
to a reviewable record.
Five stages describe the intended workflow. A fictional example illustrates how panel findings and organisational responses could remain distinct.
- 01 / SELECT
Define the review
Identify material for scrutiny within the review’s agreed purpose and scope.
- 02 / PRESERVE
Identify what is needed
Record the relevant evidence references and preservation requirements through the organisation’s authorised processes.
- 03 / REVIEW
Support panel discussion
Bring the appropriate review material and context into an organised human review.
- 04 / RECORD
Keep findings clear
Record the panel’s findings and reasoning separately from any organisational response.
- 05 / REPORT
Follow through
Bring findings, responses and action progress into a record that can be revisited.
A synthetic example
A panel asks for a clearer explanation of the grounds recorded in a fictional stop-search review. Its finding remains the panel’s finding. The organisation’s explanation and any proposed learning are recorded as its response.
Software organises the process.
“Preserve” describes an intended workflow stage. It is not a claim that PRISM copies or stores evidence, guarantees its preservation or has an operational connection to an evidence system.
Two distinct responsibilities
A finding and a response
should remain recognisable.
Independent panel findings
The intended record captures what the reviewers concluded and the reasoning they chose to record. The panel’s judgement belongs to the panel; software does not score people, determine findings or replace discussion.
Organisational response
The organisation can explain its position and identify any follow-through. Keeping this separate is intended to make it easier to see what was found, how it was answered and what remains to be considered.
Stage and scope
Focused development.
Clear expectations.
PRISM is in development, with initial work focused on stop-search scrutiny. Other scrutiny uses are intended scope for exploration, rather than advertised as available capabilities.
The intended benefits are an easier-to-follow review process, clearer separation of findings and responses, and a record that supports later examination. These aims need evaluation with intended users.
PRISM is separate from SEEN HERE. Their presentation together does not imply shared operational data or a combined system. This website does not provide review access, account creation or a route for uploading evidence.
Read our approach to developmentDiscuss PRISM
Where does the review process get difficult?
Tell us how reviews are prepared today, how findings and responses are recorded, and what your organisers or panel members need to follow through.
Email links open your mail application. Please do not send personal case information or operational records through this enquiry route.