Service review terms of reference

Report: 8
Date: 31 March 2005
By: Clerk and Commissioner

Summary

This report sets out a terms of reference for the MPS service review. It outlines the context for the review, the key objectives and the methodology. It also proposes a governance structure, including the reporting lines to the MPA.

A. Recommendation

1. That Members endorse the content of this report
2. That Members agree the governance structure

B. Supporting information

Introduction

1. The future holds a widening mission for the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS). The need to respond to specialist crime, terrorist threats, challenging performance targets and a move into reassurance policing presents a continually growing demand for the MPS. A review across the whole service is required to ensure that the MPS is able to respond effectively to these demands.

2. The service review must support the responsibilities of both the Commissioner and the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA). The overriding common interest of both parties is to work towards making London the safest major city. A significant contributory factor towards delivering our shared strategic aims is the ability to manage police resources as effectively and efficiently as possible. The need for the review is based on the current state of development of the MPS and an analysis of future pressures and funding prospects and other developing requirements, as set out in the following paragraphs.

Current position

3. The Metropolitan Police Service has seen unprecedented investment over the last five years:

• Police officer numbers have increased by 20.7% from 25,500 to 30,790
• Police community support officers (PCSOs) have been introduced for the first time and currently number some 2,000
• Resources dedicated to security have increased particularly since September 2001
• The introduction of neighbourhood policing teams commenced in 2004

4. Following this substantial increase in resources, performance has improved with significant reduction in crime rates across a broad spectrum of crime categories. However there remain concerns around the rates of detection and successful prosecution of offenders, whilst falling crime rates are not yet accompanied by any commensurate reduction in the fear of crime.

Future service pressures

5. A number of challenges will be experienced alongside the achievement of this widening mission. Whilst the recent performance improvements need to be sustained and taken further, there is pressure to expand the service in key directions. These include:

• Neighbourhood policing has to be extended across London (Plans for this are encapsulated in the Step Change programme)
• There is continuing pressure on security and counter-terrorism policing
• Further action is required to improve detection rates and secure successful outcomes through the criminal justice system.
• The police reform agenda is driving a new emphasis on workforce modernisation and citizen focus
• As a response to the Gershon review the police service has had to adopt a new efficiency strategy. This includes a higher annual target for efficiency gains of 3%, of which at least 1.5% must be cashable.
• The MPA through its statutory duty and the Commissioner with his operational responsibility have a strong interest in securing effective management of the available resources. This requires a clearer linkage between service inputs and outputs, and ultimately outcomes. Nationally this is being pursued through the police performance assessment framework (PPAF) and activity based costing.

Funding prospects

6. In order for the MPS to meet the increased challenge of a widening mission whilst delivering on current requirements, it must undergo fundamental change. Future service pressures will have to be met, in part, from redeployment of existing resources. Any change must see the MPS build on past successes whilst re-shaping for the future. The change will require a ‘working smarter’ ethos through redirecting people and money to deliver frontline policing. This can be achieved through identifying efficiency gains across the MPS to release resources for re-investment.

7. The Mayor’s precept funding for policing may be more constrained than in the recent past because of pressures from other services such as Transport. The MPA's grant prospects are also uncertain over the medium term. They will depend on:

• The overall level of annual grant settlements
• The rate at which constraints imposed by grant floors and ceilings can be removed
• The outcome of the latest review of the grant distribution formula.

Whatever the difficulties, it will be essential to secure as favourable a financial situation as possible, if the widening mission is to be fully achieved.

8. The MPS will perform a review that will identify the efficiencies and business principles necessary to enable the MPS to achieve the vision as set out by the Commissioner. To be successful it will need the engagement and support of the whole of the MPS, MPA and extended policing family.

9. The service review should not be seen as a one-off exercise but must also help to create the conditions for continuous reassessment and adaptation as demands develop and change in the future. This would involve processes that facilitate challenge and questioning whether we are still doing the right things in the right way. There needs to be confidence that resources will be managed effectively to meet demands and respond to changing demands.

Scope

10. The Review will be a time for taking stock and will create the conditions to build on the successes of the past and identify areas for improvement. It will need to understand this starting point as a base from which the opportunities of the next few years can be grasped to improve performance and efficiency. The Review stands as a separate entity from, but closely aligned with, the planning process (see Linkages). The Service Review team is made up of operational managers from across the MPS. They will provide a fundamental review of the organisation. This review is intended to provoke a transformational jump and build an understanding of the key issues that the MPS must address.

11. It is outside the scope of Service Review to implement the recommendations. However the Review will ensure that a process for implementation is in place to deliver the changes suggested. It is also outside the scope of the Service Review to produce the corporate strategy or the corporate strategic assessment. Management Board and the MPA will identify the most appropriate approach for implementation of recommendations. The timings of this review are intended to influence the Corporate Strategy. The recommendations from Service Review will be considered and incorporated into the MPS through the Corporate Strategy. The Service Review will generate the desire and impetus for that change to happen.

12. All parts of the MPS are subject to Service Review. Two key business principles that must remain at the centre of the Review are:

• Boroughs are the main point of service delivery
• Providing reassurance policing through Safer Neighbourhoods

Objectives

13. The objectives of the Service Review are:

• To make recommendations that will drive improved service and performance.
• To identify ways in which the MPS can deliver its widening mission.
• To identify resources to fund reform and policing the widening mission.

14. In doing this the MPS will provide:

• Confidence that current and future resources are being deployed efficiently so as to maximise capacity, and effectively to meet policing objectives and requirements including the Commissioner’s widening mission.
• The basis for a rolling three-year strategy and financial plan consistent with projected future funding.

Linkages

15. The MPS and MPA understand the need to be more coordinated in how services are planned, resources allocated and financial and operational plans integrated. Further progress must therefore be made towards the development of integrated, rolling medium term strategic and financial plans. This will also be consistent with a move towards three-year grant settlements nationally and support broad medium term funding agreements with the Mayor. Whilst this is outside of the scope of the Review it is expected the review will link with the corporate strategy to consider:

• Linkages between service inputs, outputs and strategic outcomes, thereby demonstrating the return from investment or the redeployment of resources.
• Processes to facilitate continuous improvement and adaptability through challenge.
• Transparency in the way in which policing resources are allocated
• Links have also been identified between Service Review and the following work:
• Corporate Strategic Assessment (CSA)
• Together
• Roles and responsibilities of Management Board
• Initial discussions have taken place with the leads for each of the above identified pieces of work.

Governance Suggested Structure

16. This governance structure allows for a mixture of researching, analysing, consulting, challenging and decision-making. It maintains final accountability and ultimate decision-making regarding any acceptance of recommendations within Management Board, and the MPA as appropriate.

Solid arrows define decision-making direction.

Purpose of each part of the Governance Structure

MPA Governance

17. Co-ordination and Policing Committee (COP) will be the have oversight of the service review on behalf of the MPA. Any decisions that require MPA approval will be submitted to this committee. The Committee will also

• To receive regular reports on the outputs of the reviews and the recommendations for change
• To provide advice and support to the MPS and the MPA on the MPA perspective in relation to the review

18. It is proposed that the Director of Finance and Performance at the GLA is invited to join the Committee as an advisor.

MPS Governance

19. The Project Board will have decision-making responsibility throughout the Service Review and will meet on a monthly basis to ensure that the project is delivering according to its plans and to make any decisions required by the project team.

20. The Challenge Panel will be appointed in order to ensure the review process is robust, inject innovative thinking, and challenge the status quo and established practices. Suggested membership is at Appendix A. It will offer advice to and challenge the processes and the content of the Service Review. Advice or points of challenge made by the panel would be considered and documented, however, the decision-making authority and immediate accountability for Service Review lies with the Service Review Project Board. In order to ensure independence, the Challenge Panel will have the opportunity to raise issues directly with MPS Management Board or COP as indicated by the ‘dotted line’ links on the diagram above. A framework will be established to reflect this process.

21. The core Project Team will provide a co-ordination and information gathering role. They will provide project management support and advice in addition to developing the generic structure and methodology, guidance and criteria to allow the business group teams and process leads to progress their work. They will address consultation and communication from the centre and assess the products coming from the review work. They will set the direction of the service review.

22. The core project team will consist of a project leadership, management and coordination function and an analytical team.

23. The Project Leadership team will:

• Ensure the review is focussed upon deliverables within set timescales
• Reviews are focussed and that areas or processes are not overlooked
• Co-ordinate all reviews to ensure review leads, themed leads and necessary experts share information consider the inter-dependencies of their review work and do not duplicate work
• Be responsible for ensuring that Diversity is core to the work carried out, that risks are managed and that the stakeholder support is provided to the Project board

24. The analytical teams will:

• Carry out the analysis in the overview phase that identifies Key Business Principles and areas for further detailed review
• Support the Review leads in the second phase to carry out the detailed reviews

25. Within the project team will be a tasking element. The tasking group will meet on a weekly basis to allocate work to specific groups / individuals. They will identify the most suitable skill set for the roles and allocate tasks accordingly. They will also comment on whether additional support is needed for particular tasks.

26. The Working Group is an extension to the Service Review project team and will be in place to:

• Represent all business groups at a director level
• Deliver and ensure a fair, suitable and robust methodology is employed throughout the review
• Deliver messages from and to their business groups regarding project issues
• Lead the reviews during the second ‘detailed analysis’ phase.

Working Group and Challenge Panel

27. Each member of the working group, together with a senior member of each business group, will perform the role of review lead during the second ‘detailed analysis’ phase of service review. They will head the review within their own business group. The review teams will comprise representatives from across business groups (number dependent on scale of the business group review) to inject independence into the process. The team will also have representation from Internal Consultancy Group (ICG) in order that each review has the appropriate level of project management principles running through it to ensure robustness and add to the independence and objectivity.

28. The challenge panel will be wide reaching. It will include representation from across internal and external bodies inclusive of MPA, staff associations and the Independent Advisory Group (IAG). The challenge element will be on a flexible and frequent basis with reporting to the challenge panel occurring in different formats and frequencies dependent on the stage of the review.

Methodology

29. The Review is being considered in two phases. The first, referred to as the Overview Phase, will be identifying the template against which the detailed reviews will be carried out. It will do this by:

1. Identifying where the organisation is by using best value criteria (Compare, Challenge, Consult, Compete) to analyse current:
   1. Performance - All aspects of service delivery
   2. Partnerships – CDRP, formal delivery and service provision partnerships.
   3. Structure – Business structures, Devolution and Management.
   4. Projects – Major Change and local
   5. Costs - Reviewing the costs base of the organisation and identifying anomalies, trends and duplications for further review.
2. These pieces of work will be influenced by what key stakeholders identify as issues in need of review (these include the MPA, Management Board, etc.).
3. The Team will then work on where the organisation wants to be by:
   1. Looking to the future and identifying what the widening mission of the MPS is
   2. Determining the key results that will need to be achieved to fulfil this mission.
   3. Identifying the key ‘enablers’ that will ensure that this is achieved.
4. The key ‘enablers’ will then be compared and analysed to identify a number of business principles that would need to be applied for the organisation to be able to deliver the results for the widening mission. The business principles are further described in the attached paper.
5. Prioritisation will be done using an ‘impact’ and ‘achievability’ framework ensuring that work is focussed on those areas that will have maximum impact and are most likely to be achievable.

30. The second part of the review will use these business principles to assess each Business Group and each business process. There will be a strong focus on cross-organisational process to work across business group boundaries. This process is still under development but is likely to include:

• A senior person from within the Business Group, who is part of the Service Review working group, leading the relevant review.
• The Service Review Team
• Internal Consultancy Group, MPS Inspectorate and Quality Assurance Officers within each OCU to support them in the work.

31. The outcome from these reviews will then be presented to the challenge panel, which will comprise a range of people including MPA, internal and external stakeholders. The exact details have yet to be finalised.

Deliverables

32. The deliverables for Service Review will include the following:

Overview phase

• Guidance for how to conduct the reviews of core processes and Business Group functions during the second phase of detailed analytical work
• A template detailing the desired product required from each of the team leaders during the second phase of work
• A set of business principles against which the leads can challenge their areas of business and which also form the direction in which we want to be heading
• Areas identified for further analysis through research conducted during the overview
• A set of key processes identified for review
• Overview phase report documenting the findings of the research
• A methodology for the next phase of Service Review.

Detailed analytical phase

• This section is deliberately brief at the current time, as the Overview Phase will inform the detailed analytical reviews. However the tasking and co-ordination process will remain in place in order to ensure that each review is fully co-ordinated to ensure it is considered from the perspective of each theme in a cohesive and joined up approach to prevent duplication.
• Reports documenting the findings of each Business Group and process review
• A final report making recommendations for directing resources to the frontline and creating a service that responds to the challenges of the widening mission.

Communication and Consultation

33. A Communication and Consultation manager has been appointed. The Communication and Consultation Manager is working closely with the Stakeholder Manager coordinating the similar work currently being carried out in the organisation including the Corporate Strategy development. A full communication strategy is being developed and an information sheet is attached at Appendix B.

Timescales

The table below indicates the approximate timescales for delivery.

View a larger image of the timescale table

C. Equality and diversity implications

This is an opportunity to evaluate and address how the organisation is focused towards providing the best service for the people of London and also improve the management and leadership of our staff. There is significant opportunity to positively impact on the MPS and to improve our service and our working arrangements. The analysis being carried out will ensure that diversity impacts are considered at all stages.

D. Financial implications

Whilst it is anticipated that the review will be cost neutral in the longer term, there will be some short-term financial implications to the review including costs for core staff, consultancy, workshops, equipment and other expenses. The Authority is being asked, in the 2005/06 Revenue Budget report elsewhere on this agenda, to agree that the Efficiency and Effectiveness Reserve of about £500k be earmarked to meet service review costs. Any bids against this reserve will be submitted to the MPA oversight group.

E. Background papers

• None

F. Contact details

Report author: Siobhan Coldwell [MPA]; Clare Delaney [MPS] and Commander Rod Jarman [MPS]

For more information contact:

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

Appendix A: Suggested Membership within Governance Structure

Please note that this may be subject to change

Project Board

• Deputy Commissioner Paul Stephenson – Chair of Project Board
• AC Alan Brown
• Keith Luck – Director of Resources
• Catherine Crawford - MPA
• Peter Martin – MPA
• Business Assurance role

Challenge Panel

• Business Group owner e.g. ACTP
• Think Tank e.g. Work Foundation
• MPA Members
• Chief Executive of Local Authority
• Representation across both internal and external groups of stakeholders including staff associations and IAG.

It is proposed that the GLA is invited to participate in this group. Suggested representation is:

• Lee Jasper, Mayor’s policy advisor
• Siwan Lloyd-Hayward, Community Safety Manager

Detail about the membership of the Working Group and Tasking Group can be supplied on request.

Appendix B: Service Review

What is the Service Review?

It is a comprehensive, structured review of the Service intended to better organise the MPS to support front line service delivery. It will examine functions, activities and processes within the Metropolitan Police Service over the forthcoming months and make recommendations to the MPS Management Board in the autumn.

Why is a Service Review necessary?

Challenges face us around a widening mission for Specialist Crime, Terrorism and the need to support reassurance policing. Our aim is to deliver a more citizen focused service, meet increasing performance targets, and provide the environment that allows our staff to work to even better effect. The Service Review is NOT about saving money; it is about re-shaping the organisation in such a way that we can work smarter to most effectively meet the challenges ahead. This will be achieved through re-directing resources obtained through efficiency savings to front line policing.

What are the aims of the Service Review?

• To present options to Management Board that will drive improved service delivery and performance
• To identify ways in which the MPS can deliver its widening mission
• To identify resources to fund reform and police the widening mission

Who are the Service Review Team?

The Service Review is being led by Assistant Commissioner Alan Brown (AC Service Improvement). Commander Rod Jarman is Project Director and is assisted by a dedicated project team.

How will the reviews be carried out?

The Service Review will be overseen, and directed, by the Service Review Team and is divided into two phases:

Phase 1 – Overview

To be completed by May 05.

From the overview we will identify business principles which if applied to the MPS would focus us on the challenges. Business principles are concepts that drive how the MPS will deliver business to meet the needs of its customers in the future. The sum of the business principles will set the organisational parameters and broadly shape the MPS. Each business principle will be expressed as a one line statement of intent. Beneath each principle will be points for consideration in seeking to achieve the principle.

A toolkit will be available to facilitate a consistent approach to achieving each business principle.

Phase II – Detailed reviews

The principles will then be applied to business groups (and their Operational Command Units (OCUs)) and organisational processes across the MPS. Within the framework set by the overview the OCUs themselves will determine how the principles can most effectively be applied locally to processes to maximise benefit. Staff within the business group will be supported by the core team in implementing the principles, ensuring both an ability to respond to OCU needs, capitalise on the knowledge of OCU staff, yet retain some objectivity to the process.

Analysis of the outcomes of phase II will form the core of recommendations to MB to be considered at the end of 2005.

How will the Service Review be structured

The review will be organised along 5 separate strands which will run through both Phase I and Phase II:

1. Structure

This will focus on issues of how the MPS is structured, the impact of and on devolution, and how our business is delivered.

2. Performance

This will focus on how we deliver operations and what key headline processes underpin our ability to police London. The Review will further identify core processes for service delivery. It will identify leads, processes in place, review compliance and look for effectiveness, improvements and efficiency savings.

3. Partnerships

The MPS is involved in a range of partnerships through which a significant proportion of performance is delivered. This review needs to look at what these partnerships do, how they work, and how they are resourced, led and managed. It will look at Crime and Disorder Partnerships (to identify best practice), formal service partnerships (how we work with other service providers such as the CPS) and support partnerships (how we work with business partners).

4. Costs

This piece of work will look at trends in expenditure, benchmark against other organisations, look in detail at activity, and drive work looking at the value of different pieces of activity.

5. Projects

An assessment of how the major change programmes align to the new vision will be carried out. Service Review will focus on the gains from modernisation (police reform) and new technologies available through these major change programmes. In particular, it will look at harnessing the opportunities rather than being driven by them.

What input would be particularly helpful at this stage?

Your views would be particularly helpful on where the biggest specific gains to be made lie around improving efficiency and effectiveness within the Service. Any other suggestions as to how we could improve effectiveness, cut duplication or bureaucracy within the organisation would also be welcomed.

How can you contact the Service Review Team?

We have appointed a dedicated consultation manager, DCI Petrina Cribb, in order to promote communication around the Review. Her contact details are:

DCI Petrina Cribb:

Tower Block
New Scotland Yard
Broadway
London SW1H 0BG

Telephone: 63768/020 7230 3768

E-mail@: petrina.cribb@met.police.uk

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback