All grievance procedures start with filing—some way for the person to formally state that there’s a problem. Filing procedures should be posted widely and made clear to participants, especially when they are introduced to the space or service, since this is the first step towards getting their concerns addressed.
Depending on the concern, folks who file grievances should also be offered support of an appropriate kind—this may be anything from material to emotional support.
Acknowledgment
Next, you must have some way to acknowledge the participant’s concerns. Make sure that this is consistent and that you communicate by as many community channels as possible. Let people know the process: next steps, potential outcomes, their rights and responsibilities, as well as potential timelines.
The entire process, including the complaint, investigation, restoration plan, appeal, and any follow-up actions, must be fully documented for record-keeping and future reference.
If the participant is not satisfied with the outcome, they should have the option to appeal, depending on the process established by the program or organization.
Instructions for appeal should be clear and explained in detail to the participant at the time that the action plan is engaged.
In addition to individual restorative action, it may be necessary to restore the community or, where possible, transform it in such a way that similar issues are avoided in the future.
This can look like a lot of things, and really depends on the community and the issues at hand. No matter what, it’s important to think about how the community may be impacted by escalated situations, to try to make room for those impacts to be addressed, and to document any decisions regarding community restorative action.
Based on the investigation and any hearings, a decision is made regarding how individuals can take restorative action. For those who have been harmed, this may include support or other services, and for the person who has done harm, it may include a range of repercussions, depending on the concern and severity.
Potential consequences at harm reduction organizations for people who violate the social contract by doing things like being violent, bullying people, threatening people, stealing from people, etc., can include:
Temporary Bans—Harm reduction leaders are clear that people should never be permanently banned from harm reduction services. Even when bans are in place, measures should be taken to ensure that people continue to get supplies they need in order to use drugs more safely. For example, this may include providing bags of supplies offsite to people who are otherwise banned from services. Harm reduction leaders were universal in their condemnation of lifetime bans, saying that such a practice is antithetical to harm reduction, which is fundamentally predicated on the idea that people can and do change, and have value and deserve care, even if they never change.
Story Telling/Listening—Central to the heart of restorative and transformative justice is storytelling. It’s essential for people who have been harmed to have their stories heard by the people who have harmed them. This produces an important kind of healing. Unless it would be inappropriate because of unusual circumstances, it’s essential to establish a mechanism for people who’ve been harmed to tell their stories.
Community Service or Restorative Labor—Restorative labor is literal labor to restore the conditions to what they were before, or to provide labor as a means of restoration for the person that has been harmed. The great example of this would be a participant who had vandalized property repairing it.
Restitution—The goal of restitution is to restore the conditions to what they were before the harm was done. This can be done either monetarily (by paying to recover the loss) or non-monetarily: by return of goods, restorative labor, or other creative ways to recover the loss. In the case of theft, restitution could be the return of the stolen property, the return of similar property or the return of the value of the property.
Continuing Support of Victim—Ongoing support for the person who was harmed may be needed for a period of time.
Continuing Support of Doer—It may also be that the person who did harm or violated the social contract needs support. For example, they may have done harm out of anxiety, depression, or a number of different negative emotions that they could use help with to avoid causing similar harm in the future.
Reflective Journaling—This is another exercise that someone who has done harm might agree to, to help them reflect on their behavior, thoughts, and feelings, and strategies for the future.
Accountability Buddies—Accountability buddies are people that help remind someone of their goals and can be an excellent resource for people trying to change their behavior to do so.
There are no absolutes, but it’s important to ensure that the action plan includes listening to the person who has been harmed.
Once an investigation has been completed and you’re ready to have a formal meeting or hearing about it, it is time to call the stakeholders and their representatives in to discuss the findings.
Ideally, this meeting should allow all parties to be heard and to tell their story and/or take responsibility for their part in the issue at hand. These gatherings should be facilitated by neutral parties to ensure that they remain respectful and productive. Many experienced harm reduction leaders shared stories of participant-involved processes being the fairest and most respected by community members.
Under all circumstances, the person or people whose behavior is the topic of the meeting should have someone with them to represent their interests. This should be someone of their choosing; it may be a staff member or another appropriate outside party. All parties should receive an explanation of the process, any related logistics, and their rights and responsibilities.
Plans for individual restoration, and possibly community restoration, should be developed during or directly after this meeting that supports change and repair, in as much as possible, for all involved. These plans should be specific, clear, and actionable.
All parties should receive written records of what took place, what decisions were made, and what they can do if they are not satisfied with the outcome.
Once you have acknowledged the concern, it’s important to move forward with as impartial an investigation as possible, as soon as possible, in order to gather facts and evidence related to the incident. This may be a short process—reviewing an internal video record, for example—or it may be longer and involve interviews, document reviews, and other fact-finding activities. It is important to ensure that all parties to the incident are heard, in order to establish fairness and impartiality, and to restore the community to relative harmony. This includes the complainant(s), the person(s) being complained about, and any bystanders or witnesses. This may be quite formal, or it may be as easy as a conversation or two.
You may choose to involve any of your boards or committees in your investigation at your discretion, so long as it is consistent with your established policies. As discussed, investigations into participant behavior issues will vary wildly based on the gravity of the accusations, so follow the relevant protocol as developed by any governing body(s).
Also, look at the context of concerns—: Who are the people involved? What systemic issues, power imbalances, or cultural differences between the parties might impact their interactions? These can help all parties understand the situation, resolve it peaceably, and create a stronger community.
The process for responding to a complaint that’s been made and an incident that has happened are slightly different. But the process is more or less the same. Most escalated situations will actually result from incidents that take place, so we will focus on incidents rather than complaints.
If a participant does lodge a complaint with a staff member, their concern should be taken seriously and followed up in the same manner as an incident that staff is present for, however, there should be greater emphasis on investigation. Once a participant has filed a complaint against another participant, let them know the process: next steps, potential outcomes, their rights and responsibilities, as well as potential timelines, and follow up with the person being accused.
In the more likely event that an escalated incident takes place in front of staff, first take immediate steps to remove anyone who might be a danger to themselves or others. This may mean an immediate ban. If you must ban someone, explain to them the process, potential outcomes, and their rights and responsibilities. Have a protocol for the time frame between when a critical incident happens and when you must respond to the person with consequences or other outcomes. Most harm reduction leaders recommend no more than one week.
Often, we understandably feel violated when somebody has erred and harmed us or violated the social contract. That reaction is totally normal. At the same time, that feeling often leads us to vilify people without taking into consideration other factors, such as people’s trauma and how that affects their emotional reactivity for example. For this reason, it’s a great idea to take a step back and try and figure out what exactly is going on and what variables may be at play before deciding on consequences.
Once the immediate issue has been dealt with, and you’ve considered all the perspectives involved, including any other variables outside of the control of the participant that might’ve played a role in the incident, it’s time to do an investigation.
It can be difficult or impossible to manage services during an escalated event. Therefore, it is important for everyone on the team to understand that they have a role when there is an escalated event, and sometimes that role is maintaining services or, alternatively, depending on the extremity of the event, shutting down services in an orderly manner.
There are no real hacks here other than to discuss, discuss, discuss—have a plan in place for what will happen in the event that various kinds of escalated situations occur, and make sure that part of those plans include how to manage services during such an event.