Quarterly performance report

Report: 12
Date: 14 December 2000
By: Clerk

Summary

This is the quarterly performance report for the full Authority with a note covering issues arising from the PSPM Committee review of performance during the period.

A. Support information

1. It was agreed at the Chair's Coordination and Urgency Committee meeting held on 23 November 2000 that a performance report should be submitted to the full Authority each quarter. The report consists of the performance report submitted to the PSPM Committee during the previous month with a note covering any issues that the PSPM might wish to bring to the attention of the full Authority. The performance report submitted to the November PSPM Committee meeting is attached at Appendix 1 and a number of issues arising from PSPM review of performance during the period are covered below.

2. During the past six months, the PSPM Committee has monitored MPS performance through the provision of monthly update reports. Members have noted that some targets, particularly on street crime, vehicle crime and recruitment are not being met. They are following this up.

3. PSPM has asked for a couple of small but important changes in the way performance should be monitored. The Committee has asked for the focus to be on Class A drugs as well as reporting performance against drugs in general. It has also asked that the delivery of Community and Race Relations (CRR) training be measured in terms of the percentage of identified staff that have received CRR training rather than the percentage of London boroughs that will have received the training.

4. The PSPM from now on will receive the same reports as MPS management to avoid duplication and achieve greater clarity. It has also just agreed that key issues will be looked at on a quarterly basis through the provision of more detailed reports that consider the business issues that sit behind the performance information provided. For initiatives such as Strongbox, follow-up reports have been requested which assess performance in relevant areas after the initiative in question has been completed.

5. The Committee is keen to compare the Met performance with other forces where this makes sense. However, it has recognised that there are a number of problems associated with doing this through the use of Best Value Performance Indicators. These have been raised with the Home Office when submitting the MPA/MPS response to the Government's recent consultation exercise on BVPIs. The two key areas of concern are:

• ambiguous definitions leading to different interpretation by forces; and
• use of population measures that do not take account of the workload generated for London by non-residents and the different demography pressures associated with the capital city.

6. The Home Office is currently working with APA and ACPO on a new national basis for using population as a denominator. The issue of London is to be addressed separately and MPA/MPS officers will be invited to participate.

B. Recommendation

Members are asked to note the report.

C. Financial implications

There are no financial implications.

D. Review arrangements

None.

E. Background papers

The following is a statutory list of background papers (under the Local Government Act 1972 S.100 D) which disclose facts or matters on which the report is based and which have been relied on to a material extent in preparing this report. They are available on request to either the contact officer listed above or to the Clerk to the Police Authority at the address indicated on the agenda.

F. Contact details

The author of this report is Ian Gaskell, MPA.

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback