Professional Standards Performance Indicators 2009/10

Report: 9
Date: 11 November 2010
By: Director of Professional Standards on behalf of the Commissioner

Summary

This report provides:

• A brief explanation of the definitions and terminology used in the Professional Standards Performance Indicators.
• An update on current performance from the Professional Standards Performance Indicators, including information on trends for complaints and resolutions.
• Identification of and, explanation for, recurrent topics of complaints; officers attracting a high number of complaints, trends, patterns of behaviour, together with details of steps taken to redress any emerging issues.
• Details of any data available on how satisfied complainants are with the complaint process and resolution.
• Details of any equality and diversity issues arising from the data.
• Details of the preparation for and anticipated impact of the introduction of the revised Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) Statutory Guidance.

A. Recommendation

That

1. Members note the current performance indicators as illustrated in Appendix 2 and note any areas of risk, good practice and potential issues as identified in this report.

B. Supporting information

1. Appendix 1 - contains definitions for categories and terminology used in the performance indicators and a diagram illustrating the difference between cases and allegations. Appendix 2 - contains Professional Standards Performance Indicators for period April 1 - June 30 2010. Appendix 3 - contains B/OCU actual and comparative performance for all public complaints.

Explanation of the Professional Standards Performance Indicators

2. The following performance indicators are in place to monitor performance across the DPS. The information is collated on Tribune, the complaints database and the searchable fields enable accurate and timely retrieval of information to gauge performance in key areas. Monthly audits of the system highlight any omissions that are then rectified immediately to ensure an accurate reflection of status and information. Performance indicators for Professional Standards are:

• 65% or more of public complaints to be dealt with locally on B/OCU
• Received to recorded to be undertaken in less than five working days.
• Received to distribution to be undertaken in less than ten working days.
• Reduction in the number of un-finalised cases (Number in the current month should be less than the previous month).
• Average number of days running to be less than 128 working days. (This means from recorded to finalised)
• Average number of days taken to complete to be less than 64 days (Target set by MPA)
• Reduction in the number of appeals upheld. (Target = percentage of upheld appeals in the current FYTD should be less than the average percentage of appeals in the previous year)
• Average days to complete Local Resolution to be less than 43 days.
• 60% of Local resolutions to be achieved by B/OCU

Current performance information from Professional Standards Performance Indicators

3. The Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) report quarterly on public complaints and conduct matters within the Metropolitan Police Service. A copy of the report for the period to June 30th 2010 is contained at Appendix 2. The following points relate to areas of risk, good practice and potential issues requiring further investigation.

Public Complaints 2010/11 (Appendix 2 – Table 1)

• Please note that the figures contained in Appendix 2 contain Direction & Control matters and complaints Not Recorded under the Police Reform Act 2002 and thus they will differ from the figures quoted by the IPCC.
• The number of complaints recorded in the first quarter for 2010 is just under 4000 with a total of 3967 complaints being recorded. This is an increase of 286 for the same period 2009/10 which constitutes an increase of 7.2%.
• Since the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) was established in 2004, the drivers for the general increase in public complaints includes: a widening of the definition of who can complain beyond those directly affected by an incident; a rise in the number of people employed by MPS increasing those subject to complaint; and an increase in reporting portals, such as third-party reporting sites and DPS Customer Service Team on-line reporting.
• Full details of the categories of allegations are attached at Appendix 1. Each category is sub-divided into specific types of allegation.
• The three main categories for public complaint remain failure in duty, oppressive behaviour and incivility. Failures in duty include breaches of the various Codes of Practice and improper disclosure of information (known as ‘leakage’). Oppressive behaviour includes all forms of assault, both sexual and otherwise, and unlawful arrest or detention.
• These three categories account for 83% of all allegations. The breakdown of allegations in this first quarter and proportion of change is:
  • Failure in duty accounts for 1758 allegations (44.3% of total allegations) in the first quarter. (see Appendix 2). This is an increase of 406 allegations on last year equating to an actual increase of 13.1% for the same period.
  • Oppressive behaviour accounts for 923 allegations (23.3% of total allegations). The previous years first quarter figures of 1113 (30.2% of total allegations) demonstrates a reduction of 190 allegations despite the overall increase in complaint allegations for this period. This amounts to an actual percentage reduction of 9.3 % and demonstrates the continued work of the Professional Standards Support Strand (see later paragraphs)
  • Incivility accounts for 614 allegations (15.5% of total allegations) in this first quarter. This figure is a slight increase of 37 allegations on the same period last year, which amounts to an actual increase of 3.1% on the same period last year.

• The highest proportion of complaints relates to Failures in Duty which amounts for 44.3% of all complaints recorded in this period. Traffic Irregularities account for the least number of complaints at just under 1%.

Breakdown of local/DPS resolutions

• The first quarter has seen a reduction in the percentage of allegations being locally resolved and a corresponding increase in allegations investigated. In part, this is due to Borough/Operational Command Units (B/OCUs) choosing to undertake ‘proportionate’ investigations thus supplying the complainant with an outcome to an investigation letter rather than pursuing the local resolution route.
• A total of 772 allegations were locally resolved out of a total of 3967 allegations recorded. Of these 772 local resolutions, 71 % were achieved on BOCU and 29% achieved by DPS. These proportions accord with the expectations under the ‘Taylor’ reforms.
• Since Taylor such changes, coupled with the increase in the number of allegations recorded, have played a part in the increase in time taken to complete all cases, rising from a yearly average of 49 days in 2008/09, against a target of 64 working days, to 55 days average for 2009/10; an increase of 6 days. This first quarter shows a further increase of 8 days in that cases are now taking on average 59 days as opposed to 51 days achieved in the same period last year. However, it is too early to assume that this rise will sustain across the forthcoming year.

Time taken to resolve allegations

• The time taken to locally resolve an allegation on B/OCUs has risen from an average of 38 days in 2008/09, to an average of 41 days for 2009/10. This is against a 43 working day target. Figures for the first quarter demonstrate that local resolution is taking on average, 44 days for cases on OCU and 42 days for cases dealt with by DPS. For cases on OCU, this figure is comparable with last years figure for the same period which was 42 days but for cases locally resolved by DPS there is a significant reduction in the time taken from 78 days last year to 42 days this period.
• B/OCUs are, post-Taylor, now investigating straightforward local complaints in addition to undertaking local resolutions. To support B/OCUs, DPS Borough Support Units (BSU) have a single point of contact (SPOC) for each B/OCU. The SPOC supports Professional Standards Champions (PSC) and individual supervisors in dealing with complaints. They also provide personal briefings and update B/OCU managers as to best practice. Moreover, complaints are ‘flagged’ so that at 25 working days duration the B/OCU is immediately contacted by DPS BSU and support offered. This enables cases to be actioned and resolved by BOCU or returned to DPS to enable a timely conclusion to be achieved.

DPS Intelligence Bureau

• The DPS Intelligence Bureau identifies the areas of the MPS with high levels of public complaints. A full breakdown of complaints per (B)OCU is attached at Appendix 3. The 3 (B)OCUs currently attracting the highest level of complaints per 100 officers are Hackney, Enfield and Tower Hamlets. The 3 (B)OCUs attracting the lowest number of complaints per 100 officers are Westminster, Newham and Waltham Forest. It is worthy of note that the 10 (B)OCUs with the highest levels of public complaints are all in North London.

DPS Prevention and Reduction Team (PaRT)

• The DPS Prevention and Reduction Team (PaRT) uses the available data to identify (B)OCU's and Teams where high levels of complaints are occurring, and what type of complaints are being made. DPS PaRT then delivers an intelligence led, interactive programme of awareness raising to the officers and (B)OCUs identified through the Professional Standards Support Programme (PSSP). This programme includes relevant learning captured through the DPS and IPCC learning lessons, in order to promote best practice in operational policing. The PSSP is specifically adapted and tailored to the needs of each individual (B)OCU with a view to improving professional standards, with a corresponding reduction in the numbers of public complaints. An example of DPS PaRT work across the MPS is around incivility complaints. DPS PaRT has highlighted to officers through the PSSP that swearing is not acceptable in any circumstances, and that using good 'closure' techniques in any policing situation, informing a person what is happening, why it's happening and how matters will proceed will reduce public complaints. From September 2009 to September 2010 the percentage of overall complaints relating to incivility has dropped by 4%, and is currently at the lowest level for several years.
• The 10 (B)OCUs currently attracting the highest levels of public complaints are at present receiving the PSSP.
• In addition to the work of PaRT, the TP Performance Improvement Unit (PIU) identifies individual officers who would benefit from intervention as a result of their complaint and discipline record, performance and / or attendance. These officers are actively targeted and monitored, with personal intervention plans put in place.

Diversity of complainants

• From the data that is available, between October 2009 and September 2010 28% of complainants were white, 15% black, 7% Asian, 1% ‘other’, and 49% unknown. These percentages have remained fairly consistent over the past 5 years. Census data for the same period shows that 69% of the population is white, 12% black, 14% Asian, and 4% ‘other’. Whilst this may suggest that a higher percentage of complainants are members of an ethnic minority, due to the large percentage of unknown ethnicity, the drawing of a meaningful comparison with the Census data is difficult.
• During this period 35% of complainants were female, 64% male, and 1% unknown. This has also been fairly consistent over the last 5 years.
• In relation to age, 16% of complainants are aged 18-29, 17% 30-39 and 19% 40-49. 31% are age unknown, with the older and younger age groups accounting for the remaining percentage.
• Data in relation to the other diversity strands is scant, with around 80% being unknown. As such no reliable picture emerges.
• Where officers and staff have been identified as being subject to a complaint, data in relation to their ethnicity, gender and age is available and fully searchable.
• The breakdown of allegations received against officers by ethnicity is an almost exact reflection of the workforce data.
• A higher percentage of complaints is made against male officers than female officers, when compared to the workforce data, with a ‘swing’ of 5%.
• 30% of complaints are against officers aged between 20-29, as compared to this age group accounting for 18% of the workforce. 43% are against officers aged between 30-39 years, who represent 36% of the workforce, with older officers being subject to the remainder of complaints. This data may be partially attributed to the higher likelihood of younger officers being deployed on confrontational duties.
• The data in relation to Police Staff shows a comparatively high percentage of allegations being made against black staff (19% compared to their representing 12% of the workforce) and a slightly higher percentage against males than females.
• For Police Staff the highest percentage of allegations (33%) is against staff in the 20-29 age group, who form 23% of the workforce.

Conduct Matters 2009/10 (Appendix 2 – Table 2)

4. At the end of 2009/10 completion of conduct matter cases has exceeded the 64 day target, with the average standing at 66 days. This 16 day increase from 2008/09 (50 days) was due to B/OCUs dealing with misconduct under Taylor resulting in an increase in conduct cases being investigated by B/OCUs and the associated administration such as misconduct meetings. The majority of this work would have been previously undertaken by DPS. For the financial year 2009/10 B/OCUs dealt with 42% of conduct matter cases (367 cases) compared to only 28% (254 cases) in 2008/09. The support offered by DPS to B/OCUs is as for public complaints (as outlined in section above). Quarter 1 has seen an increase in the number of conduct matters from 324 for the previous years first quarter, to 375 cases this year and also an increase in the average number of days each case is completed from 56 to 67 in the comparative quarter period. Again, it is too early in the reporting year to assess whether this trend will be sustained but the drive to reduce the number of days to complete cases continues across the DPS.

Recurrent topics of complaints; officers attracting a high number of complaints, trends and patterns of behaviour

5. Failures in duty accounted for 40% of all allegations recorded in 2009/10 (5426 allegations); for the previous three financial years the proportion was around 38%. For the first quarter of 2010/11, failures in duty account for 44.3% of all allegations. (1758 allegations out of a total of 3967) Incivility accounted for 17% of allegations recorded in 2009/10 (2260 allegations); this was a reduction compared to previous financial years where the proportion was between 18-20%. For this first quarter incivility accounts for 15.5% of total allegations with actual figures of 614 allegations. This is a very slight increase of 37 allegations compared with the previous comparative quarter for 2009/10. In addressing incivility, DPS Prevention and Reduction Team (PaRT) have supported B/OCU management teams in reducing incivility through delivering Professional Standards Support Programme (PSSP) presentations in 2008/09 to in excess of 11,173 officers on 464 occasions. These presentations were well received and achieved greater than an 80% satisfaction rating from audiences. The current PSSP cycle of presentations commenced in September 2010. These will encompass failure in duty issues, information misuse, safer driving as well as continuing to combat incivility. BOCU’s with the highest public complaints for Failure in Duty and Incivility will have the first deliveries of this presentation. Presentations will highlight why certain behaviour is unacceptable and attracts complaints as well as providing guidance as to how a professional service is delivered.

6. DPS PaRT has redrafted the Complaints Intervention Scheme (CIS) policy to reflect Taylor reforms. CIS manages police officer’s behaviour and is triggered by an officer having three ‘events’ in a 12 month period. An event is a public complaint or conduct matter. The officer’s behaviour will then be reviewed by their line manager and the B/OCU Professional Standards Champion. The officer will be set a development plan. The emphasis of the plan is learning and behavioural improvement. Any initiatives and objectives set are to support these changes. The officer’s achievements will be monitored. Where the officer’s performance does not improve and remains below what is acceptable then unsatisfactory performance process is to be considered. This process will be supported by the Borough Support SPOC system, The DPS Intelligence Bureau (IB) and the DPS Performance Analysis Unit (PAU) which will enable monitoring of the whole CIS process, capturing of best practice and organisational learning as well as intelligence collation.

7. The number of officers/staff that fall under CIS has seen a 26% reduction, from 480 officers/staff (for the period July 2008-June 2009) to 357 (for the period July 2009 – June 2010). This breaks down to a 53% reduction in officers with 5 or more events, a 39% reduction in officers with 4 events and a 17% decrease in officers with 3 events. TSG have seen the largest reduction from 66 officers to 27 due to proactive management by TSG. TSG management team continue to utilise detailed DPS management information in reducing public complaints.

Satisfaction of complainants within the complaint process and resolution

8. The Public’s satisfaction with the complaints system is not something which can readily be established under the current MPS working procedures. However the DPS Customer Service Team has been being fundamentally reviewed by a Superintendent. Numerous recommendations have been proposed including incorporating a Quality Callback system to gauge public satisfaction. In addition, it is proposed to rebrand the Customer Service Team to a more descriptive title which befits the work to be undertaken. The Service Recovery Team as it will be called is increasing the strength of its uniform/detective sergeants by an additional four posts which will in turn see the potential benefits of

• Reduction in time spent checking and correcting initial report entries.
• Reduction in time spent waiting for cases to be passed to supervisor for a decision.
• Early intervention where appropriate which should increase the local resolution outcome and this also has the potential for complaint withdrawals.
• Identification of cases which are the responsibility of the Confidence Satisfaction & Standards Unit [CCC:CSSU].
• Better working relationship with CSSU.
• A proposed change in the CST name should provide a clear understanding of what business the team are focused on.
• An improved MPS Internet page should provide clear direction to the public where there proposed communication is going to be forwarded to re. public complaints, control and direction issues, misconduct and service delivery. This is in the process of being written. In addition, a new training package is being written to ensure all staff work with consistency.

Current Performance Indicators will be maintained and are subject to review i.e. reception to recording and recording to dissemination. In addition, a new Service Recovery Team Performance Indicator of data quality is being discussed.

IPCC Revised Statutory Guidance on Police Complaints

9. On 1 April 2010, revised IPCC Statutory Guidance on public complaints came into effect. The new guidance will help police forces to respond more effectively to concerns raised by citizens about the contact they have had with police and aims to reduce the amount of bureaucracy associated with complaints. The IPCC and MPS believe the guidance will:

• Enable front line officers and staff to resolve dissatisfaction on the spot where possible and allow minor issues to be addressed immediately before they escalate to the point of becoming a complaint.
• Enable officers and staff to take a proportionate approach to investigations, by setting out factors to assist in judging proportionality and setting minimum expectations of what must be done.
• Help to make the outcome of a complaint more meaningful to the citizen, by replacing the ‘substantiation’ of a complaint based solely on establishing provable misconduct with ‘upholding’ a complaint based on whether in all the circumstances the complaint appears to be justified.
• Widen the range of tools police services and police authorities use to drive improvement, by ensuring they consider and apply a broader range of outcomes including good quality explanations, apologies and learning.

10. DPS has undertaken a training and awareness programme for their staff and B/OCU Professional Standards Champions (PSCs) in the new IPCC changes. Future professional development training will prepare PSCs in how to deal with public complaints, particularly focusing on developing a local resolution system which will make use of current best practice in the investigation and mediation of complaints, to promote an increase in local resolution of complaints at a B/OCU level. A briefing session for MPS stakeholders was also held on 12 April 2010 to explain how the impact of the changes may impact their units.

11. Currently it is too early to measure the impact of revisions and any significant changes in the recording and resulting of complaints. This will be reviewed and reported on six months after implementation. It is anticipated that the number of upheld complaints will be higher than the number of complaints that were substantiated prior to the changes. It is not possible to forecast the level of increase there will be. It is still too early to provide an assessment of the changes made in April. We will be in a much better position for the next quarter. It is anticipated that we will be able to state what changes have occurred in both recording and finalization of public complaints i.e. increase in upheld complaints.

C. Other organisational and community implications

Race and Diversity Impact

1. Whilst there does not appear to be an impact on race and diversity in the current Professional Standards Performance Indicators they will be subject to continuous analysis, monitoring and review. This review process will include the indicators relating to management of conduct cases and public complaints that are consistently reviewed by Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate. This is to ensure that there is no adverse impact on equality target groups and that any potential for adverse impact can be acted upon in a timely manner.

Primarily due to the multitude of methods by which public complaints can now be made the diversity data in relation to complainants is difficult to capture, and is incomplete. Complainants are under no obligation to provide this information. Many complaints made directly to the IPCC and letters of complaint received by (B)OCUs and DPS do not include such details. In consequence, capturing the data is dependent on diversity information being obtained from the complainant subsequent to the recording of the complaint. This is not necessarily practicable, for example where an early local resolution has been achieved over the telephone, or in some cases even possible, as in when the complainant refuses to specify. This issue has been raised within DPS, and the DPS Borough Support Units and Customer Service Team are seeking to increase the levels of data capture.

Consideration of MET Forward

2. Two strands from the Met Forward initiative are applicable- Met Connect and Met Standards.

3. The complaints system needs to be one that inspires confidence both with the Public and with internal partners. The changes proposed for the new Service Recovery Team will work towards increasing public satisfaction in the manner and speed in which their complaints are dealt with. This will be our reactive direction. The Prevention and Reduction Team in conjunction with Borough Support Colleagues and Professional Standards Champions will ensure the key causes of complaints are identified and addressed as part of our proactive direction in reducing the number and causes for complaint in a continuous cycle.

4. The Prevention and Reduction Team, through the DPS Learning Lessons program, contributes to the achievement of standards, as well as allowing the MPS to communicate how it learns from experience, and that it is willing to make necessary changes to delivery a quality service to the community.

Financial Implications

5. The increase staff in Service Recovery Team will amount to £260,504 per year. Due to restructuring within the Command, this has allowed four existing DS/PS posts to be moved across at no additional expense and will be covered from within existing DPS budgets.

Legal Implications

6. The complaints and disciplinary regulatory framework ensures the protection of ECHR convention rights . The information contained in this report is provided as part of the Governance process and allows the MPA to ensure that convention rights are being effectively and efficiently protected through the regulatory framework .

Risk Implications

7. The DPS systematic approach to recording and managing complaints against police ensures regular monitor and review of complaints and the identification of cases that pose a risk to the public, officers or the organisation. Regular quality assurance interventions by managers at various stages of the process, ensure that cases are managed correctly to meet the expectations of the complainant and in accordance with the Police Reform Act.

D. Background papers

None

E. Contact details

Report author: Sharon Heyes, Chief Inspector, Directorate of Professional Standards, MPS

For information contact:

MPA general: 020 7202 0202
Media enquiries: 020 7202 0217/18

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback