Timeliness of complaints

Report: 6
Date: 17 October 2002
By: Commissioner

Summary

The MPS monitors the time taken to investigate complaints against police. The average time taken to investigate public complaints in the MPS has increased over the last five years. This report documents some of the issues impacting on timeliness of complaint investigations and outlines steps taken to improve performance in this area. 

A. Recommendations

That Members are asked to note this report and feed into the discussion on improving performance.

B. Supporting information

Introduction

1. This report examines a range of issues that impact upon the time it takes to investigate public complaints and internal investigations. The system is defined through a legal framework of legislation and police regulations, and is often perceived as lengthy and bureaucratic. MPA members will already appreciate some of the complexities and variety of issues impacting on timeliness.

2. The report outlines the current performance picture in the MPS, which has been declining in recent years, and has not achieved the 120-day completion target since 1999. The MPS has been monitoring this situation closely and has introduced a variety of measures in an attempt to reduce the time to investigate complaints. The result of these interventions has only been to slow down rather than reverse the trend.

3. The report then reviews some of the possible causes for the downward trend and outlines initiatives to improve performance. It is a possibility, however, that the limited success of these initiatives suggests that the 120 day performance target for complaint investigation is not achievable in London. The Police Complaints Authority (PCA) acknowledged these complexities and difficulties and has proposed adopting the MPS complexity matrix to form the basis of a sliding scale for performance targets.

4. Timeliness performance appears to have improved recently, but the number of critical incident investigations has increased dramatically in the first half of this year (14 major investigations from April to September 2002 compared to four in the same period last year). This change in the pattern of demand has initiated a diversion of resources from standard complaint investigation to support the critical incident enquiries. The shift in resources helps ensure a high quality of investigation is maintained. The result, however, is an inherent tension between maintaining the quality of investigations whilst addressing timeliness issues. The quality versus quantity debate is expanded in the report.

The current position

5. The police service has adopted a 120-day benchmark for the length of time a complaint investigation should take from receipt to submission of the final report. The MPS reports complaints figures to the Home Office on an annual basis. The figures in Table 1 shows the decreasing MPS performance against the 120-day target over the last 5 years. Table 2 compares the MPS position with its family of similar forces.

• Table 1: MPS average 1997 – 2002 and graph
• Table 2 and 3: MPS performance compared with family of forces [1]
• Table 3: 2000/2001

N.B. See Supporting material for tables and graphs.

6. The MPS average has increased from 96 days in 1997/98 to 166 days in 2001/2 (Table 1). This does not compare favourably against other similar metropolitan forces. The number of cases over 120 days, however, has been falling over the last 12 months (Graph 1 below). The scale of complaint investigation in London is unique with the MPS investigating two to three times more complaints than Greater Manchester, three times more than West Midlands Police, and four times more than Merseyside (Tables 2 and 3). The volume of complaints in the MPS adds a level of complexity to resolving timeliness issues.

7. The MPS average is often skewed by a few lengthy complaints. In 2000/01 the maximum time for a single case was 1,119 days compared to Merseyside at 797 days and GMP at 537(Table 3). Overtime is being prioritised and targeted at the older cases to reduce the backlog. Other methods are being sought to assist Investigating Officers to reduce the number of cases over 120 days. Outsourcing the writing of the final report to a retired police officer is a Kent Police system currently being assessed by the DPS.

8. Regular performance review meetings are held between the Chief Inspectors and Investigating Officers to provide support to IOs and focus on timeliness. A review by the two IIC Superintendents is currently underway to identify and disseminate best practice in managing performance between the four geographic units. The aim is to reduce still further the number of cases over 120 days. This will pull down the overall average figure and provide a better service to officers and complainants.

Issues impacting on timeliness

9. Efforts have been made to understand the factors affecting the trend in timeliness performance. The issues are expanded on below:

• Complexity: The 120 day target applies to all public complaints, regardless of complexity. The PCA have recently recognised that there should be a sliding scale for timeliness targets to recognise differences between the types of complaint. A method of categorising complaints has been devised. The simplest, least complex complaints should be completed more quickly than 120 days. Those classed as being the most complex will be allowed more time to complete up to 180 days. If adopted, the performance data against timeliness will be more meaningful recognising the true complexity of complaint investigation.
• Quality verses quantity: The 46% reduction in the number of complaints in the last five years has not led to a similar improvement in timeliness. There are two possible reasons to explain the decrease in performance. Firstly, the bulk of complaints that account for the reduction in numbers are of a minor nature. Incivility cases, for example, have reduced by 50% or 943 allegations over the last 5 years. Such complaints being the least complex require less investigation and are quicker to resolve. A reduction in the number of such complaints as a proportion will impact on the average timeliness figures. At the same time, the quality of investigations has increased since the publication of the Macpherson report. The DPS response to critical incidents has improved with the introduction of decision logs, FLOs and more detective officers. Quality investigations, however, are more expensive in terms of resources. Critical incidents are allocated a high priority, giving first call on scarce resources. Improving quality and improving timeliness with the same resources are not always mutually compatible. The Internal Investigations Command has seen a growth in the number of serious and protracted investigations it has undertaken. Operation Romeo into the disturbances in Brixton last summer required significant resources to ensure public confidence by providing a professional and thorough investigation. The Specialist Investigations unit has seen an unprecedented demand on its time and resources investigating deaths following contact with police and other high profile investigations such as the Hendon swimming pool tragedy. Resources are pulled away from the more routine matters to investigate the high profile enquiries. The direct consequence is that overall performance against timeliness declines.
• The complaints system: The complexity and bureaucracy of the complaints system can add delay to complaint investigation. The process varies considerably from a standard criminal investigation with complexity factors such as: arranging interviews with officers on shifts, allowing time to obtain legal advice, accommodating the needs of officers on sick leave; complaints becoming sub judice where criminal allegations exist. All these issues impact the timeliness investigation. The motivation of a witness or victim in a criminal investigation often contrasts with that of a complainant or witness in a complaint investigation. Complaint IOs often spend much energy obtaining statements slowing down the investigation. The legal framework within which Investigating Officers must operate, adds further complexity to their investigations. Public confidence is enhanced by supervision from the PCA and independent decision making by the CPS in criminal allegations against the police. The time taken for both organisations to deal with their obligations relating to police complaints has increased recently. The PCA are facing the challenge of a transition to the Independent Police Complaints Commission and the impact of a recent legal stated case has extended the time for a final certificate of satisfaction to be issued. The CPS have well documented resourcing issues, which increased the time for a decision. Although timeliness is discussed at the Learning Labs with these partners, the influence police have on their performance is limited.
• Changes in staff profile: As previously reported to the MPA, the Directorate of Professional Standards has undertaken a best value review of complaints. One impact of the review was to replace Chief Inspectors with a more flexible Inspector led team structure. Although the review produced substantial efficiency savings, there was an inevitable period of readjustment with a high turn over of experienced staff. As new staff build skills and experience, performance against timeliness is expected to improve for less cost.
• Complaint Receipt: When police receive a complaint, the Borough has 21 days to forward the original papers to the IIC. This allows the Borough time to attempt an Informal Resolution, a useful tool to deal quickly with minor complaints. Increasing the number of informally resolved cases reduces the number of full investigations and assists the MPS performance against timeliness. A pilot has been conducted in North London to encourage better use of informal resolution. Two Boroughs took part in the pilot with one Borough extending the time to attempt the informal resolution from 21 to 28 days. The results demonstrated that additional time and commitment can achieve more informal resolutions. Cases informally resolved are not, however, included in the 120 day figures. Increasing the number of Informal Resolutions improves customer satisfaction but does not improve performance against the timeliness targets. The MPS is also participating in a national study of Informal Resolution conducted by Southbank University. The researchers will interview fifty officers and complainants, who have been through the IR process. The study will report next year and the MPA will be kept updated on the findings and recommendations of the report.
• Internal Investigations: Internal Investigations are referred to the IIC by OCU Commanders or come to light through reporting of wrongdoing. These investigations are often lengthy and time consuming tying up IIC resources. Boroughs have responsibility for their own discipline, many cases having their roots in management issues or system failures. The Internal Investigations Command are encouraging OCUs to reduce the number of internal referrals through:
  • Written warning procedure: simplified to enable Borough managers to deal with internal matters more effectively.
  • Unsatisfactory performance procedure: still under used as a management tool but they present a quicker and more appropriate alternative to formal discipline.
  • Single point of contact to the IIC through geographically aligned Investigating Officers to improve communication.
  • Provision of management information on complaints to Boroughs.
  • DPS seminar for OCU Commanders held in September.

Improving Timeliness during Investigations

10. As with most complex processes, there are areas, which can be streamlined, or redesigned to reduce the time it takes to move through the system. The DPS has taken steps to improve timeliness within the complaint investigation process. Some of these measures are outlined below:

• 60 and 100 Day Reviews: To improve the management of investigations, a systematic approach has built in reviews at 60 and 100 days into the complaint investigation (Appendix 1). Timeliness is a major consideration in the review conducted by the Chief Inspector allowing positive management action to address timeliness issues at the appropriate stage in the investigation.
• Management Tools: IOWA and IOTA provide the information for regular performance meetings for IIC management to monitor workloads and throughput. Timeliness issues are addressed on a regular basis.
• Streamlining of File Movements: During the Best Value review of complaints, processes mapping techniques were used to identify ways to streamline file movements.
• Corporate Standards: Timeliness has been built into DPS policies and procedures. Timescales have been built into the Service Level Agreement with Boroughs and into IIC Corporate Standards which are inspected during the Quality Assurance programme.
• Electronic service of Regulation 9 Notices: Better use of technology is being piloted on Southwark Borough in an effort to speed up the service of regulation 9 notices. The forms are being emailed to the Borough Commander thus removing the delay of by using internal despatch. The results are being evaluated with MPS wide roll out expected later this year. Although the time savings may only be small, a better audit trail is created through the computer technology.
• Proportionate Investigation Pilot: Timeliness issues have been discussed at the Learning Lab (chaired by the Cabinet Office and bringing together practitioners from the PCA, CPS and MPS). Although the quality of investigations has increased recently, there may be occasions when more work is completed than is proportionate to the allegation. A pilot has been launched in partnership with the PCA on 3 London Boroughs. The idea is to not interview officers when certain criteria are met. If a case is unlikely to result in a major sanction - even if proven, there are independent witnesses or CCTV, then consideration will be given to seek an explanation from the officer through a statement under caution. In some instances, the reply the officer makes on their regulation 9 notice could be used. A number of safeguards have been built into the project, and the Police Federation have been consulted on the idea. A more proportionate use of interviews may substantially reduce the time taken to investigate less complex cases. A review of the pilot is scheduled in January, and the MPA will be updated in due course.
• PCA Surgeries: In order to reduce debate with the PCA during the later stages of an investigation, ‘surgeries’ with the PCA misconduct member and the Investigating Officers have been arranged. Issues can be discussed and appropriate action can be taken at an earlier point in the investigation reducing time delays later.
• Restorative Justice: Thames Valley Police have been using restorative conferencing for complaints for some time. The MPS has been in consultation with TVP and work has begun to assess the transferability of restorative justice methods to the MPS. The quality of complaint resolution is good, and early resolution of complaints will reduce the need for lengthy complex investigations. It is too early to state how these techniques may be used in the MPS, but progress will be reported back to the MPA in due course.
• Complaint Reduction: Reducing complaints is a strategy that should improve performance against complaint investigation targets. Investigating Officers hold 45 live cases each on average. With a statutory duty to investigate public complaints, such a high caseload will impact on the ability of the IO to deal with cases in a timely manner. The strategic DPS assumption is to transfer resources from reactive investigation towards reducing complaints. To support this work, the IIC have recruited two sergeants to address learning lessons from complaint investigations and help reduce complaints in the future. The officers will support the partnership work currently being undertaken by IIC Investigating Officers with Borough colleagues. Action plans will be developed to tackle emerging trends and issues impacting on complaints. Bespoke training packages, review of systems, and programmes for individual officers are new products to be produced through this new initiative.
• Thematic Inspection of complaints: There has been a year on year reduction in reported public complaints of 11% over the last 5 years. A Quality Assurance Check of complaint recording was conducted using a ‘mystery shopper’ approach. The results appeared to identify under-reporting of complaints at the front counter of police stations. The Directorate of Professional Standards has commissioned a thematic inspection of the complaint system to identify relevant issues. The report is due in October 2002 and the findings will be reported to the MPA. Reducing under-reporting may also impact on timeliness of complaint investigation, although further opportunities to improve timeliness may result from the inspection.

Timeliness in misconduct hearings

11. The Discipline Support Unit (DSU) within the Directorate of Professional Standards is responsible for the decision making process when allegations of misconduct are substantiated by an investigating officer. The unit manages subsequent misconduct hearings.

12. The average number of days from decision to misconduct hearing has ranged from 239 days in January 2002 to 310 days in March. The shortest time for a hearing was 43 days and the longest 810 days. One of the main influences on timeliness is the involvement of outside agencies such as the PCA and officers’ solicitors. Where the MPS does have influence on the process, measures have been introduced to improve performance against timeliness targets:

• Management intervention: In the six months from October 2001 the number of live cases awaiting a misconduct hearing has fallen by 40%. This is due to a more robust approach by DSU management to prevent delays in the process. One recent case was fast-tracked to a full hearing within 5 weeks.
• Preliminary meeting scheme: Currently administrative or legal issues are not discussed until the first day of the misconduct board. Delays can then occur whilst these issues are resolved. Similar to a plea and directions hearing in a criminal court, a preliminary meeting is arranged eight weeks from the service of the papers on the officer with a board date set 5 weeks later. The Home Office is monitoring this pilot and if successful the system will be adopted for all misconduct cases.
• Service of papers: Appointments are now made with officers for them to attend the DSU for service of misconduct papers. This improves timeliness by introducing a more streamlined system.
• Policy library: A library of existing legal advice on a range of issues has been set up to reduce the need to seek legal advice on similar legal issues. Time is saved by Legal Services and in the preparation of the case.
• Written Warnings: The process provides a proportionate response to minor discipline matters. The policy has been simplified to encourage wider use. Fewer misconduct boards are required and the written warning process takes less time.

Conclusions

13. A range of complexities within the complaints system compounds attempts to improve timeliness in police complaint investigation. The DPS are striving to deliver improved performance against timeliness targets, despite the continued downward trend in performance. Management of timeliness issues remains a primary focus within the DPS. New initiatives are being developed across the various elements of the complaints system.

C. Equality and diversity implications

A number of initiatives are in place to ensure fairness and proportionality in decision making and within the complaint process and these continue to be evolved to comply with the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000.

D. Financial implications

There are no additional financial implications directly associated with the contents of this report.

The MPS monitors the situation in regard to complaints and ethnicity and reports this data to the MPA. Proportionally in complaints has been reported to the former Professional Standards and Performance Monitoring Committee. 

E. Background papers

None.

F. Contact details

Report author: D/Supt Chris Bourlet, MPS.

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback