Community Engagement and Citizen Focus Sub-committee Annual Report 2010-2011

Report: 8
Date: 13 June 2011
By: Chief Executive

Summary

This report provides an overview of the delivery of the Sub-Committee’s 2010/11 work plan and identifies the future scope of the Authority’s work in community engagement and citizen focus for 2011/12 for discussion.

A. Recommendation

That

1. The annual report is noted;
2. Members note and discuss the future scope of community engagement and citizen focus oversight.

B. Supporting information

1. The Sub-Committee’s work has focused on five main areas (i) the operation of the Independent Custody Visiting Scheme (ICVS), (ii) the operation of the Community Police Engagement Groups and wider community engagement matters, (iii) Oversight of the implementation of stop and search policy, (iv) oversight of the MPA's delivery of its statutory partnership duties and (v) oversight of the MPS' activities in relation to public confidence and public access.

2. The Sub-Committee has received regular reports on the performance of the ICV Scheme against the agreed performance indicators. The last year has seen the embedding of the changes to the delivery of the ICV scheme and despite initial concerns raised by a small number of ICV panels, there has been no adverse impact on the delivery of the scheme as a result of the changes. There are, however, continuing challenges around panel performance in a number of boroughs. This is almost universally linked to panel membership and the recruitment and retention of volunteer custody visitors. ICV Scheme ‘leavers’ are almost always offered the opportunity to complete a leaver’s questionnaire. The overwhelming number of leavers stated ‘other commitments’ as their reason for leaving the scheme and added that they found their experience enjoyable and rewarding. The nature of the work custody volunteers carry out on behalf of the Authority is such that although panels can lose members very quickly, recruitment, vetting and induction can take many months. The ICV team has developed a strategy to maintain and improve performance including raising awareness through regional and local media to assist in recruitment from a range of different backgrounds, and the establishment of a pool of ICVs who have expressed a willingness to cover visits on behalf of panels in neighbouring boroughs. The additional benefit in raising awareness of the scheme is the reassurance it provides to the community about the well being of those detained by the police.

3. In terms of outcomes the picture around custody and detention in London is a positive one. Almost every police custody suite in London (including those operated by British Transport Police) receives an unannounced visit by volunteer ICVs from the local community every week. Their findings consistently show that detainees are treated humanely and their rights and entitlements observed. Those concerns that are raised tend to be linked to environmental factors such as the age and condition of custody facilities. The MPA ICV Scheme continues to lead in providing its volunteers with diversity training, refresher training and the opportunity to engage with custody managers in face to face meetings four times a year.

4. The Sub-Committee has given over much of its time to the development and delivery of borough-based community engagement. In this role, the Sub-Committee has overseen a value for money review of CPEGs - the first ever conducted - and has successfully implemented a 12.5% budget reduction, along with a more comprehensive range of CPEG objectives for 2011/12.

5. The preceding value for money review has ensured that CPEGs have been further challenged to deliver against the Authority's objectives and to deliver greater value for money. The benefits of this more rigorous approach can be seen in the 2011/12 funding applications, which are discussed in another report on this agenda.

6. As well as providing appropriate challenge to CPEGs the Sub-Committee has also sought to provide support. In this respect a London Communities and Policing Partnership (LCP2) representative was co-opted onto the Sub-Committee membership to represent the views of CPEGs and to provide specialist advice from the perspective of those directly delivering community and police engagement. LCP2 also provided an annual report of its work to the committee, which provided information on the range of issues being discussed by communities at CPEG meetings, as well as details of the range of seminars that had been provided by LCP2 and rates of take up by CPEG representatives.

7. In relation to the broader context of community engagement, the Sub-Committee has overseen the development and delivery of the MPA community engagement commitment action plan. Much of the work identified in the plan has been completed or at least initiated. However, it has been unfortunate that the MPS action plan supporting delivery of the Commitment within the MPS has been developed almost a year after the Commitment was signed off by the Communities, Equalities and People Committee in May 2010. Having said that, much of the work contained within both the MPA and MPS action plans have longer-term goals and will continue throughout 2011/12.

8. In addition, the committee has also overseen the development and delivery of the 2011/12 Cross-Border innovations Fund and granted £10,000 to six different community engagement programmes targeting specific under-represented groups. These programmes are ongoing and further reports will be provided at a later date.

9. The co-option of an independent professional has brought benefits to the committee's work, providing appropriate challenge where necessary as well as validation of the committee's approach when warranted. Due to the unfortunate financial climate the Authority is no longer providing any direct funding to LCP2. However, it continues to exist as a charitable organisation working with CPEGs and members may wish, therefore, to give some consideration to LCP2's continued status as a co-opted member of the Sub-Committee.

10. The Sub-Committee's oversight of stop and search has taken the form of a quarterly report, which included borough by borough data on the use of powers of stop and search/stop and account, the levels of disproportionality and of engagement with communities on the use of these powers. This process has ensured that the Authority has been appraised of the MPS' performance within the legislative framework, as well as providing an opportunity for members to challenge the MPS on issues of disproportionality and to ensure the MPS is working to maintain community support for the use of the powers. This has been particularly important in the context of the newly introduced legislation on the recording of stop and search/stop and account, which the committee has discussed on a number of occasions. In addition, the committee has been working with the MPS to ensure the monitoring data is as accessible as possible and has advised the MPS to provide percentage data in future. Recognising the value added to the committee's work through the inclusion of a co-opted member with special expertise and experience in community engagement, the committee has agreed to co-opt the co-chairs of the stop and search community monitoring network.

11. The Sub-Committee's work in respect of the delivery of the MPA's statutory partnership duties has focused on funding and delivery objectives. This work included a review of the MPA Partnership Fund Framework, which has ensured the use of the Fund is aligned with MPA priorities and has made BCU's more accountable for the way in which funds are disbursed. In the longer-term it will also ensure the Authority is able to better target and re-align funds as they become available.

12. One area in which progress has previously been slow is development of the Sub-Committee's oversight of the MPS' citizen focus work. Once again in 2010/12 there have been considerable changes, which have presented challenges for the Sub-Committee's oversight role. However, the committee has received reports on both confidence and satisfaction and on front counter provision. The former was focused on the Government's removal of the Policing Pledge and the development of a new set of MPS-specific confidence and satisfaction measures. This provided a good opportunity for members to be advised of, and to influence the development of, the performance metrics and to ensure relevant aspects of the Authority's work to support the maintenance of public confidence, such as CPEGs, were also reflected in the proposed service statements. Members were also keen that the MPS ensure the information was widely circulated for consultation before implementation.

13. In December 2010, the committee received an update report on front counter provision across the MPS area. Members were advised of current performance and take up of front counter services and were also provided with details of the police and staff providing front counter services and the training they receive. This report preceded the development of a wider review of public access, including front counters, which has now been instigated through the Territorial Policing Development programme.

14. Members will be aware that it is anticipated that in line with the provisions laid out in the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Bill, the Authority will cease to exist on 30 September 2011 and as such, this may be the last meeting of this Sub-Committee. However, the Authority will be replaced with the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime and its responsibilities in respect of community engagement will continue. A draft work plan has not been developed at this time, but the scope of community engagement work beyond September 2011 will be considered by the Communities, Equalities and People Committee in July by which time the timing of the demise of the Authority may be more certain. Should it be evident at that time that there will be further meetings of this Sub-Committee a draft work plan will be proposed and submitted for approval at the next meeting.

15. Although a work plan is not being developed at this time, members may wish to comment on the future scope of community engagement work. Officers anticipate that the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime will maintain monitoring and oversight of the following:

1. Delivery of the ICV Scheme;
2. The use of stop and search and stop and account;
3. Delivery against the community engagement commitment;
4. Delivery against the CPEG objectives; and
5. Delivery of activities funded from Authority resources, such as the MPA cross-border innovations funds.

C. Other organisational and community implications

Equality and Diversity Impact

1. There are significant equality and diversity implications arising from the work of this Sub-Committee and these are addressed in each report that is submitted to it. The Sub-Committee has received training and takes a keen interest in the delivery of equality impact assessments (EIA) for the matters on which it receives reports and ensures these are completed to an acceptable standard. This has delivered real benefits to the community, for example the EIAs conducted on the CPEG funding framework and the Cross-Border Innovations Fund confirmed that there were a number of groups/communities that have generally been under-represented amongst the MPA's engagement activities, including deaf and disabled people, the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community and businesses. As a result, the Sub-Committee agreed to target additional funds to develop engagement opportunities within these communities.

Consideration of Met Forward

2. The work of this committee directly supports the 'Better conversation' strand of Met Forward and this is being delivered through the work to improve and develop the CPEG delivery model through delivery against the community engagement commitment action plan, which is being monitored by this committee.

Financial Implications

3. There are no specific financial implications arising from this report. The proposed work plan will be delivered within existing budgets.

Legal Implications

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

Environmental Implications

5. There are no specific environmental implications arising from this report.

Risk Implications

6. There are no specific risks arising from this report.

D. Background papers

None

E. Contact details

Report author: Natasha Plummer, Engagement and Partnerships Manager, MPA

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback