Directorate of Professional Standards - Performance Report

Report: 8
Date: 14 July 2011
By: Director of Professional Standards on behalf of the Commissioner

Summary

This paper summarises and reviews key headline MPS performance data contained in the IPCC quarterly bulletin and discusses upcoming issues and barriers to performance.

A. Recommendation

That Members note the content of this report.

B. Supporting information

Quarterly IPCC performance bulletin and headline changes in MPS performance

1. In March 2008 the Independent Police Complaints Commission set up the Performance Framework Project with the intention of providing consistent and meaningful performance data at force level. The project board included representatives from the Home Office and the Association of Chief Police Officers. The project board worked closely with the IPCC and Police forces to design and implement a performance framework for the Police Complaints system to enable accurate assessment and effective comparison of performance statistics at system, force and IPCC level. The framework covers all 43 forces as well as the British Transport Police and the IPCC

2. Since April 2009 the IPCC Quarterly Performance Bulletin has been produced from data collected from forces at the end of every quarter. The report consists of a range of performance statistics against indicators agreed with forces and other policing organisations. The IPCC Quarterly Performance Bulletin is already provided directly to the MPA by the IPCC and it is now also published on the IPCC website. These statistics were designed to allow the Police forces performance to be reviewed against their most similar family of forces (in the case of the MPS this is West Yorkshire Police, West Midlands Police and Greater Manchester Police) and a national average.

3. Previously all forces had managed their performance data in slightly different ways which did not allow for effective comparison or analysis of performance at a national level.

4. These figures contain headline performance figures in relation to key areas of DPS performance: average number of days to finalise investigations (local, supervised and local resolution), % of appeal types upheld, % of complaint cases recorded within 10 days, appeals to the IPCC as a % of allegations completed (local and supervised investigations and local resolution), average number of days to finalise complaint cases (including and not including sub judice cases).

5. These figures are supported by further diagnostic information which breaks complaint data down into: number of allegations per 1000 employees, % of incivility, impoliteness and intolerance allegations, % of neglect in duty of failure in duty allegations, % of oppressive conduct or harassment allegations, % of other assault allegations, % of unlawful/unnecessary detention allegations, % of allegations discontinued, % of allegations dispensed, % of allegations withdrawn.

6. It must be noted at this point that the figures that the IPCC have produced are not comparable with any previous MPS data product due to the methods used to collate the figures. As the IPCC figures will now form the basis of performance reports to the MPA, a degree of continuity will be established and the quarterly bulletin will allow more effective assessment of MPS performance by means of direct comparison against the most similar force family. At present MPS performance management is set against MPS produced performance figures. During the next reporting period a decision will be made about the methodology used to produce future diagnostic performance products.

Key Performance Issues

7. The figures (contained at Appendix 1) have been provided for April 2010 to March 2011 by the IPCC and the following key areas of Table A (Key indicators in the handling of complaints) have been identified for discussion (improvements or decreasing performance, failing to meet or exceeding targets):

Average number of days to finalise local investigations

8. The IPCC breaks down the ‘number of days to finalise allegations’ category into locally resolved, local investigation and supervised. This is a different way of managing the data from the figure that forms the MPA performance indicator discussed in the next section of this paper. The figure produced for the MPA by the DPS is based on the time that it takes to resolve every single complaint that is dealt with by the MPS, this includes dispensations, discontinuances and non-recording, however the IPCC separates the modes of investigation and also does not consider the resolutions of complaints that have been dispensed, discontinued or not recorded.

9. The IPCC figures show that it takes an average of 74 days to locally investigate a complaint; this figure is not just DPS investigations but also includes misconduct investigations that are managed by Territorial Policing on the boroughs where they were received. This is a significant reduction from the figure recorded in the same period last year which was 86 days. The comparison with the MPS most similar force average and national average is favourable at 133 days and 132 days respectively. There is further work to be done to reduce the average time of investigations to the required level. This is being addressed through the implementation of a performance management framework within the DPS Borough Support Units to intrusively supervise ongoing investigations. A paperless system has also been introduced by the DPS Customer Services team to allow for a quicker progression of cases from first point of contact through recording, severity assessment and allocation.

Average number of days to finalise supervised investigations

10. In terms of the time taken to finalise IPCC supervised allegations the MPS average of 215 days is considerably less than the national average of 324 days. The MPS however is someway behind the most similar force average of 111 days. The fact that the investigations are supervised means that logistically they are more difficult to manage and there has to be effective lines of communication between the DPS and the IPCC. Work has commenced to identify barriers to improving performance in terms of supervised investigations to reduce the 215 day average.

11. The number of supervised investigations which made up this area was 34 for the last quarter and was 109 for the last financial year. By their very nature they tend to be more serious or contentious than the norm so often require a more rigorous investigation and also require IPCC oversight at various stages.

12. In terms of the information contained within Table B (Contextual information on allegations recorded and outcome) of the IPCC performance bulletin the following key areas of performance have been identified.

Average number of days to finalise local resolution

13. Local resolutions are largely carried out by TP on Borough. MPS figures show that 77% complaints that were locally resolved were done so at a local level. Over the past year the average number of days taken to finalise locally resolved complaints has dropped from 59 to 54. This level of performance shows that resolutions within the MPS are being achieved faster than in our most similar forces and against the national average. The ownership of the complaint sits with the borough but monitoring in terms of management of the process is carried out within the DPS Borough Support Unit in order to ensure that there is compliance within time limits.

Incivility, impoliteness and intolerance

14. The number of 'incivility, impoliteness & intolerance' allegations for the purposes of the IPCC data is calculated as the number of relevant allegations recorded within the reporting period, divided by the total number of allegations recorded within the reporting period multiplied by 100. This method is replicated for other allegation types.

15. The IPCC figures show that at the end of the reporting period incivility, impoliteness and rudeness complaints represented 16% of allegations made to the MPS, a figure of 2204 for the last financial year. This is a 2% reduction on the figure from the same time last year. This level of performance has been maintained from the previous quarters figure. The most similar force and national average for incivility allegations is 18%. The fact that the MPS is performing to a higher level represents that amount of work that has been done around incivility. This is in spite of the increase in complaints relating to the demonstrations at the end of 2010.

16. The MPS ACPO lead for incivility is DAC Rose Fitzpatrick. A considerable amount of work has been carried out in terms of reducing incivility complaints. The work highlighted later in this document under the Complaints Intervention Scheme with Territorial Support Group officers shows the advances that have been made in this area.

Neglect or failure in duty

17. Neglect or failure in duty allegations account for the highest proportion of total allegations. The IPCC figure for this element of complaints in relation to the MPS is 32% with a total of 4394 allegations. This represents a 3% increase from the same period last year. The same size increase was noted between the 2008/9 – 2009/10 years. Most similar force average in this area is 21% and the national average is 27%.

18. MPS figures on failures in duty show that in 2010/11 there has been a reduction in terms of allegations concerning failures in duty. As a percentage of actual numbers of complaints, the percentage of failure in duty issues has risen by 0.4% from the same period last year. The reduction in total number of complaints recorded from 14039 to 12981 goes some way to explaining that.

19. Commander Zinzan is the appointed ACPO lead in this area and he works with the ten Boroughs identified as poor performers to produce action plans to improve performance. The Boroughs currently subject of this additional management are Hackney, Westminster, Redbridge, Brent, Ealing, Hammersmith and Fulham, Lambeth, Lewisham, Merton and Wandsorth. The extent of the work was detailed in the last DPS performance paper.

20. TP have taken a great deal of responsibility for managing their performance around complaints and professional standards. The DPS Performance Analysis Unit (PAU) produce a range of headline and diagnostic performance figures which are used by TP to identify Borough performance in terms of complaints. The top ten Boroughs are identified in terms of complaints in relation to oppressive behavior, Failures in duty and incivility are identified and held to account at quarterly meetings. Headline figures also make up part of the Boroughs KPRM.

21. As discussed in the previous paper recurrent topics, trends and patterns of behavior are reported in the DPS Strategic Intelligence Assessment. The control strategy priority areas considered by this analysis are failure in duty, incivility, information misuse, integrity assurance and corrupt officers or those that would seek to corrupt. Each of these control strands has an ACPO lead ensuring activity. The strategic oversight of this work is provided by the Professional Standards Strategic Committee chaired by the Deputy Commissioner.

Review of DPS performance against the MPA performance indicator of the amount of time taken to finalise public complaints

22. The performance indicator that the MPA has set around the management of complaints requires that all complaints are dealt with within an average of 64 days.

23. The average MPS figure for dealing with complaints that are submitted to the MPS is 52 days. This includes all modes of investigation and also allegations by result type. This figure does not directly compare with the IPCC performance data and therefore it is not possible to compare the figure to most similar forces and there is not a national average.

24. As discussed above in relation to the resolution of local investigations this figure will be addressed further by the Borough Support Performance Framework which will demand more intrusive supervision of investigations and an increase in proportionate responses to public complaints.

Key challenges, successes and risks regarding the management of Professional Standards.

25. In the next year there are some major challenges on the horizon and work has already started to address these. The first issue is the likely implication of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill and the second is the 2012 Olympic Games to be held in London. The third issue discussed in this paper and of more immediate concern is the latest raft of demonstrations against government spending cuts.

Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill

26. In terms of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill changes are expected in the way that public complaints are managed. The DPS Commander is sitting on the London Transition Board and the DPS strategic lead for the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill is working closely with the MPA and the IPCC.

27. There may be some considerable changes in day to day business within the DPS as a result of the legislation that is expected to receive Royal Ascent later this year.

2012 Olympics

28. The volume of visitors to London for the 2012 Olympics and the volume of additional policing resources means that there will be a substantial mutual aid influx into London for the period of the games. The nature of the event is not one that automatically lends itself to confrontation or high numbers of public complaints however it must be considered and provision must be made for all eventualities to ensure that additional complaints can be effectively dealt with, without having a detrimental effect on normal business.

29. At present work is ongoing at a national level in order to establish how potential complaints against officers working in London during the Olympics will be dealt with. A decision is imminent with regard to who the appropriate authority for officers on mutual aid at the Olympic venues will be.

Trade Union Demonstrations

30. Since the end of 2010 there has been an increase in public demonstrations in Central London. These have produced an increase in public complaints and resulted in a considered response by the MPS to feedback received.

31. The demonstration on the 24th of November 2010 produced 45 complaints and complaints peaked from the demonstration on the 9th of December with 115 being made and 32 recorded. Numerous measures never used before were put in place for the TUC Demonstration on the 23rd of March 2011, for example representatives from the unions and also from civil rights groups such as Liberty were allowed access to the operation control room during the event. As a result of these actions only 62 were made and only 21 recorded.

32. DPS put considerable resources into dealing with these complaints and as a result there are only 9 cases still under investigation. Provision has been made for dealing with any issues that are raised on the 30th of June and will be made for any other large scale demonstrations.

Complaints Intervention Scheme

33. The Complaints Intervention Scheme (CIS) continues to manage officers who are subject of three complaints, civil actions, or conduct matters within a 12 month period. The scheme was described in detail in the previous paper submitted.

34. During the previous quarter there has been a further reduction in officers who are subject to the scheme. The figure has fallen from 370 to 365. Out of this total the overwhelming majority 75% (275) have 3 events. There are 31 officers with more than 5 events. There has also been a further reduction in the number of Territorial Support Group (TSG) officers from 30 to 27 in the third quarter of 2010/11. This demonstrates the ongoing success of the scheme and the work that has been done by DPS Prevention and Reduction team to provide guidance to supervisors in complaint management.

UPP

35. In line with the recommendations made in the first section of the Winsor report a project is currently being completed to scope the use nationally of Unsatisfactory Performance Regulations for Police officers and identify best practice. The Performance Improvement Unit within Norfolk Constabulary and the attendance management unit with Greater Manchester Police have been visited and some level of success identified. The Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill will not only allow the IPCC to direct that UPP but also place a duty on forces to improve value for money. More effective staff will undoubtedly deliver improved efficiency. The DPS are currently scoping the methods of identifying public complaints that can be easily identified as UPP and are looking at methods of dealing with this.

C. Other organisational and community implications

Equality and Diversity Impact

1. When complaints are taken from members of the public diversity information is collected from them to allow an accurate picture to be built up of the background of people who make complaints to the MPS. The proportions of complainants by ethnicity has remained stable over the past three years. At the end of the reporting period 31% of complainants were white, 15% were black and 7% were Asian. 1% were recorded as other and 46% unknown. Compared to census data this does not highlight any issues. This figure is reviewed on a monthly basis to ensure that any potential for adverse impact can be acted upon.

Consideration of Met Forward

2. Met Forward has been considered and the area of public complaints impacts quite considerably on public confidence. Met Connect, Met governance and accountability, Met standards and Met people are all affected by our ability to effectively resolve complaints against officers.

Financial Implications

3. There are no financial implications in relation to this paper at the present time. When more information is available about work to be done to meet the requirements of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill and the demands of the Olympics it will be reported on and the financial implications considered.

Legal Implications

4. There are no direct legal implications arising from this report which is presented for information only.

Environmental Implications

5. There are no environmental risks associated to this paper.

Risk (including Health and Safety) Implications

6. There is a risk that if public complaints are not dealt with effectively public confidence could be affected. The information produced by the IPCC in the quarterly bulletin is also now available to the public via their website.

D. Background papers

None

D. Contact details

Report author: DS Guy Wilson and Glenn Tunstall (DPS)

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback