Independent Custody Visitor Scheme update

Report: 6
Date: 14 February 2011
By: Chief Executive

Summary

This report details developments in relation to the Independent Custody Visiting Scheme (ICV) since the last report in November 2010.

A. Recommendation

That members note the report.

B. Supporting information

Context

1. This report aims to provide Members with an update of developments in the ICV Scheme since November 2010, including Scheme performance, issues and concerns and outcomes. The report will also include plans for the Scheme in the next six month period and beyond.

2. Appendix 1, illustrating visit data and information, includes, at the request of CECF committee members, the current number of members and number of stations visited by each panel.

3. January 2011 saw the one year anniversary of the launch of an amended service delivery model to ICV panels. With the implementation of the new model and the reduction in the number of ICV Coordinators MPA senior managers agreed that the primary focus for the Custody Oversight Team in 2010 was to ensure that the Authority’s statutory responsibility for the provision of a custody visiting service was maintained. Development plans such as the initiative to change the emphasis of custody visiting to a more human rights and dignity focus and raising awareness of custody visiting were only addressed towards the end of 2010 and early 2011 when the team was confident that scheme changes had not adversely affected the service.

4. Resilience concerns for the ICV Team continue. The team continues to carry one ICV Coordinator vacancy, currently filled by an agency temp. Recruitment to this vacancy was delayed pending the publication of the Government plans to abolish police authorities and a lack of certainty over the whether the ICV Scheme would continue. The pending abolition of the MPA and the establishment of the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPC), the organisation replacing the Authority in London have further delayed recruitment.

Panel performance and membership

5. There has been a disappointing dip in performance in the 6-month period from October to March. 15 panels performed less well than in the previous 6-month period and 19 had a performance figure below the high benchmark of 90% of scheduled visits. However, of those 19, only 7 achieved below 75% of scheduled visits and 10 achieved between 80% and 90%.

6. The consistent mitigating factor for those panels performing below the benchmark is membership. Recruitment is ongoing and recent advertising has brought very satisfactory results. However, even in those panels which have full membership, new ICVs take several months to complete an induction and this can overburden existing experienced visitors. Against this, there are some success stories. Greenwich has been a poorly performing panel for a number of years due to membership and leadership issues. With a new chair and new members its performance has improved to 88% of scheduled visits. Successful recent recruitment suggests that this dip in the overall scheme performance is temporary and the trend of improved performance and increased membership should continue in the medium term.

7. Membership – A number of panels continue to operate with membership below the optimum level. In some panels such as Ealing and Hillingdon the existing membership has been able to provide the necessary resilience and performance has not been notably affected. Other panels have members who are unable to extend their commitment beyond that which they signed up to.

8. A number of resignations, requests for sabbaticals and de-accreditations have made membership an issue in 14 panels, the highest number since 2007/08. All of those who resigned stated ‘other commitments’ as their reason for leaving the scheme. Most also stated that they had found their experience of the scheme enjoyable and rewarding and would have continued had their personal circumstances allowed. Other than one member whose vetting was revoked following a police caution, all of the de-accreditations were performance related. Adverts in the Metro and Evening Standard newspapers in December and January have so far produced 130 enquiries. Over 60 applications have been received and are currently being considered. The nature of voluntary schemes is that membership can fall quickly but take many months to rebuild. This is particularly true of custody visiting where vetting and induction can result in a time span of many months between application and full participation on the visit rota

9. Further adverts, along with the awareness raising initiatives planned in the next quarter, are expected to further increase the number of applications. The ICV Team will concentrate on local recruitment in free papers and libraries in those boroughs, often outer London ones, that haven’t benefited from the pan-London recruitment drive.

10. Panel meeting attendance – Has increased slightly as ICV Coordinators have issued reminders and commitment letters emphasising the importance of taking the opportunity to meet directly with police custody managers. However, reasons for non-attendance are varied and in the absence of evidence to suggest a correlation in attendance and visit performance the ICV Team lacks the resources to conduct thorough research on patterns in meeting attendance. This would be reviewed if attendance fell dramatically across the scheme.

12. Police responses to reports. – This has been a very positive development. The system of sending report summaries to the police at roughly 6 week intervals, and seeking their response, is now an integral part of the process in recording issues and reporting back to the visitors. The police in all boroughs engage well with the process and although panels still want to discuss the responses at the panel meetings, such discussions tend to be focussed on context and lessons learned rather than revisiting every visit. The result is that the forensic examination of visit report forms has been replaced by open discussion about how both sides can improve the service they deliver.

Developments

13. The new purpose built custody suite at Fresh Wharf in Barking opened on March 14th. This will be the only custody suite to be visited by the Barking and Dagenham ICV Panel. A new custody suite at Polar Park at Heathrow Airport will open this month. Several ICV Team members will tour the new site, along with Hillingdon ICVs on Friday April 8th. Three further new custody suites at Croydon, Wandsworth (2012) and Wood Green (2013) are at various planning stages. There are also plans to extend several of the larger, more modern existing custody suites. These developments form part of a likely consolidation of custody across London which may see the adoption of area based ICV panels where boroughs lose their existing custody facilities. A new BTP facility has opened at Caledonian road and will be visited by Islington ICV Panel. The contract to visit BTP suites provides a modest income for the scheme without significant resource cost.

14. Over 120 ICVs attended the Christmas Social held at City Hall in December. Commander Nick Bracken spoke of the important contribution custody visiting made to public confidence in the police and presented 10 volunteers with awards for long service. The team hopes to be able to deliver an event like this every year as part of its reward and recognition strategy.

15. The MPS Proposals for the establishment of a Detention Command are to be considered by MPS Management Board in April or May and will be reported to SOP in due course. If endorsed the proposals will see a centrally managed custody system across London, moving away from the existing borough based model. In a presentation to the ICV Chairs Meeting in November, Custody Directorate Lead Officer Supt. David Imroth outlined the potential implications.

16. Sutton and Merton borough police are exploring the idea of a shared services pilot in an exercise aimed at the best use of resources. One of the proposals includes the closure of Merton custody suite with detainees taken to the suite at Sutton. Discussions with stakeholders, including the ICV panels, are yet to take place.

17. As part of Project Herald teams of Custody Nurse Practitioners (CNPs) now cover several custody suites across the MPS including the following boroughs; Westminster, Croydon, Lewisham, Islington, Tower Hamlets, Newham, Barking and Dagenham, Lambeth and Barnet. CNPs are based at one station but are mobile across all the suites in their borough. The roll out of the service will continue throughout 2011 to Waltham Forest, Brent, Hounslow, Southwark and Greenwich. Performance figures also indicate that CNPs are treating 92% of detainee health issues without additional intervention. The aim is to make the delivery of health care services in custody more cost efficient by avoiding the need to call FMEs for the treatment of minor health issues. FMEs remain an integral part of the service but the presence of CNPs has reduced the number of FMEs required.

18. 21 panels now operate, or are about to commence operating self-introduction when conducting visits. This follows two pilots across eight boroughs which showed an increase in the uptake of interviews by detainees when self-introduction is used. All panels have been instructed that they can operate self-introduction provided it has been discussed and agreed at a panel meeting. Guidance has been issued to those panels and copied to the custody staff (Appendices B and C).

19. ICVs in Southwark and Westminster have been invited to apply to join a pool of visitors with enhanced security clearance for the purpose of visiting detainees held under terrorism legislation (TACT) in line with changes to Home Office Codes of Practice. The TACT detention facility at Southwark will be operational from May 2011 and Paddington Green will continue to be available. Four Westminster ICVs with CTC level clearance continue to be available to carry out TACT visits by agreement with the Commissioner until a wider pool is established.

Issues

20. A number of panels have requested information on MPS custody plans for the Olympic Games. Custody Directorate (CD) reported that a TP organisational plan has been established but is not (at present) available to the public. MPS expects an increase in tourist related crime and there is heightened awareness of security risks. CD will report on specific plans which may impact on custody provision and custody visiting.

21. Out of six deaths following police custody (in London) in recent years the IPCC has carried out independent investigations into five. All were cases where no Pre-release Risk Assessment (PRRA) had been carried out. The IPCC returned the sixth case – the only one where a PRRA had been completed – to MPS for local investigation. This illustrates the importance the IPCC places on PRRAs being conducted on all detainees leaving police custody. A meeting of the MPS Safer Detention Working Group in autumn 2010 confirmed the lack of consistency in conducting as an ongoing issue and a process of dip sampling custody records by custody managers was introduced. The ICV Team has asked CD to supply data on the monitoring of compliance on PRRAs.

22. The availability of towels in custody suites is an issue, along with staff resources, which can influence the chances of a shower being facilitated for detainees in custody for more than 24 hours. A contract change has now been introduced with the cleaning companies servicing the custody suites which will now include the supply and laundry of towels. Recent visits indicate that this has not yet resulted in towels being made available in most boroughs. CD is investigating why this is the case and will report its findings, through the ICV Team, to ICV panels.

23. An MPS report to the MPA Equalities and Diversity sub-committee in February outlined the actions taken to ensure communication with London’s diverse communities is made possible. 60% of interpreter requirements are in the provision of custody. The developments MPS has introduced include:

• The introduction of an Interpreter Deployment Team to manage demand.
• The installation of a video conferencing platform to ensure greater access to linguists.
• The creation of language skills training programme to enhance skills of MPS staff and to accredit those skills.
• The development of initial contact software to assist in language identification.

Plans

24. The ICV Team is planning a 2011 London ICV Scheme Conference with a provisional date of Saturday September 24th. The theme of the conference will be the change in emphasis in visiting from observation of PACE to a human rights and dignity focus. Suggested speakers include MPS custody staff trainers, the UK National Prevention Mechanism (NPM) of OPCAT [1], HMIC/HMIP inspection team and the Northern Ireland Police Service where human rights have been a significant aspect of custody visiting for a number of years.

25. The ICV Team will deliver four initial training sessions in 2011 and a minimum of two diversity training sessions. The demand for diversity training is high and the long term aim of the scheme is to offer it to all ICVs. In light of this we have provisionally arranged two additional diversity training sessions. The team is still in discussions with ICVA in an attempt to establish a training module for ICV chairs.

26. When the plans to deliver a modified service to ICV panels were announced in November 2009, the MPA Chief Executive assured ICVs that a review of the impact of the changes would be conducted after a year. In order to fulfil this assurance the ICV Team is working alongside the PPPI Unit to produce a questionnaire which will be sent to all ICVs (Appendix 4). The focus of the review is an attempt to identify how the changes have impacted on the ability of ICVs to carry out their roles (if at all) rather than their personal preferences. Advice from PPPI suggests that the questionnaire should not include a question on the frequency of panel meetings as the scheme would be unable to make any change to the current arrangements whatever the outcome of the question – it’s not considered good practice to ask questions where the questioner can do nothing with the results. However, as the issue of meeting frequency was the biggest change in the new delivery model the ICV Team took the decision that to exclude it would risk the perception that the issue was ignored or avoided. We decided to make it explicit in the pre-amble that the team was unlikely to be given more resources and therefore unable to support more meetings. The review should be complete by the end of April.

27. The ICV Team is engaged in discussions with a number of media outlets in order to raise awareness of custody visiting in London. Discussions are taking place with two radio stations for the use of an advert first commissioned and aired in 2009. A one-page feature article including a quarter page advert is planned in the Evening Standard. Local borough newspapers have been contacted and several have agreed to run articles with interviews from panel chairs. In an attempt to encourage a sense of ownership by volunteers we have offered to supply posters and leaflets to those ICVs who are willing to place them in their local libraries, community centres and GP surgeries.

28. The PPSO Unit has completed a review of the inspection reports released as part of the ongoing programme of custody facility inspections carried out by HMIC/HMIP. A commissioning brief for a report to SOP will be sent to MPS to establish progress on the recommendations contained in the inspections.

29. The first ICV Chairs meeting of 2011 will be held in MR1 on Thursday 14 April. The main presentation will be from the MPS Forensic Healthcare Services Team discussing FME and nursing services in custody suites.

30. The provision of a custody visiting scheme is one of the statutory obligations held by the MPA, this responsibility will pass to the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPC), the organisation replacing the Authority in London under the Police and Social Responsibility bill. The Police Minister Nick Herbert has stated that he would like to see a “seamless transition” of custody visiting to the new organisation. This suggests that the value of the work carried out by custody volunteers is recognised by government and no changes to the way visiting is conducted are anticipated. However, in the absence of an organisation chart for the MOPC it is unclear as yet where the scheme will sit in the new organisation. A communication plan is being developed around the transition from MPA to MOPC and as important stakeholders ICVs will be informed of developments. The ICV Team will keep panels directly informed of any issues that affect custody and custody visiting.

C. Other organisational and community implications

Equality and Diversity Impact

1. Recent recruitment has been achieved primarily through the use of pan-London advertising, (though word of mouth is still an important recruitment mechanism) and as such is targeted at a number of named boroughs rather than specific communities. A diversity monitoring exercise undertaken in 2008, and ongoing monitoring of applications, indicates that although the diversity of the scheme, or individual panels, does not always match the demographic make-up of London or the individual boroughs, no group is adversely affected in recruitment and retention procedures.

Consideration of MET Forward

2. The likelihood that custody visiting will continue following the Police and Social Responsibility bill mean that the ICV Scheme will continue to contribute to the Met Partners and Met People strands of Met Forward.

Financial Implications

3. At the end of February the 2010/2011 budget for the ICV Scheme is currently showed a variance of £66,532 under spent. Many of the original budget figures were estimates as the delivery of a new service model to ICV panels was an unknown quantity. Forecast adjustments made during the year indicate a likely final spend of £341, 000. SMT has agreed that the £10,000 budgeted for marketing and recruitment can be carried over into 2011/2012 in acknowledgement that the team was unable to focus on awareness raising until late in the year and many of the negotiations for awareness raising initiatives are near to completion.

Legal Implications

4. There are no legal implications arising from this report.

Environmental Implications

5. No environmental implications arising from this report.

Risk Implications

6. While a number of panels fail to fulfil the high benchmark the ICV sets for visit performance the team recognises the potential risk to the fulfilment of Authority’s statutory obligation. However, the active recruitment programme indicates that this risk is minimal.

D. Background papers

Appendix 1 – ICV panel performance, membership, concerns and outcomes from October 2010 to March 2011.

Appendix 2 – Self introduction guidance (brief)

Appendix 3 – Self introduction guidance (full)

E. Contact details

Report author: James Tate. Criminal Justice and Custody Oversight Team Leader, MPA

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback