Independent Advisory Group Review 2007

Report: 12
Date: 29 March 2007
By: DAC, Operational Services Directorate, on behalf of the Commissioner

Summary

This report provides an update to the report submitted on 28 September 2006 to the MPA full Authority in relation to the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) Independent Advisory Group Review 2007. The IAG review, anticipated to conclude this month, will provide an effective, clear, supportive and cohesive model for engagement with IAGs across the MPS. The review has involved significant consultation with stakeholders to identify and maximize the positive impact and to engender support from those affected by the changes. The review with recommendations will be submitted for approval by the MPS Diversity Board in April, prior to full implementation in May 2007.

A. Recommendation

That the report be noted.

B. Supporting information

The background and terms of reference of this review

1. MPS Independent Advisory Groups (IAGs), and the relationship between the MPS and independent advice, has been subject to a number of limited reviews in the past. However, this review is far wider reaching and comprehensive, drawing from the wider context of community engagement. The consultation stage of the review has taken longer than was originally anticipated, because of the depth and breadth of consultation undertaken, not least with advisors themselves.

2. The first MPS IAG was convened in 1998. The purpose of this and subsequent IAGs was to address concerns raised in the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report (McPherson, 1999) that a large ‘gap’ existed between the MPS and local communities. McPherson proposed that the police should start a process that would create a ‘genuine partnership’ with local communities which would increase their ‘trust and confidence’ in the police.

3. The MPS, and the communities of London, benefit substantially from the commitment of a small number of independent advisors who give up their time to help the MPS learn and improve performance across a very wide range of service delivery areas. However, police-community engagement has evolved significantly since 1998. Consultation and engagement have now become the way we police. This review reflects those changes.

4. The term ‘corporate’ IAGs refers to the five MPS IAGs providing advice concerning disability, gypsy and travellers, LGBT, race, and youth issues across the MPS. “Specialist” IAGs are those that provide advice in the context of a specialist policing area, e.g. gun crime or child protection. ‘Borough’ IAGs are those based on one of London’s 32 boroughs.

Review aim

5. In partnership, to review the concept of Independent Advisory Groups related procedures and existing protocols, and to update MPS guidance.

Objectives/Terms of reference

6. Terms of reference for the IAG Review were reported to the MPA Full Authority on 28 September 2006 (Review of Independent Advisory Groups). They are set out again below:

• To ensure consistency across the MPS central IAGs in tasking and deployments
• Review efficient working practices between corporate IAGs that avoid the silo effect
• To develop standard operating procedures for corporate IAGs
• To develop efficient monitoring, feedback and financial systems
• To update existing MPS guidance for independent advisors that promotes effective working practices and set minimum standards, for dissemination across the organisation.

The composition of the review team

7. The review team is chaired by Detective Superintendent Sue Williams; the Project Manager is Chief Inspector Tom Morrell, both of the Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate. Throughout the review, independent members of corporate, specialist and local borough IAGs have been involved in the direction of the work.

The Progression of the review

8. In addition to the analysis of many documents that relate to the IAG process, significant consultation has taken place with stakeholders. This includes:

• Three stakeholder consultation events took place on the 14 August, 14 September, 31 October 2006
• Feedback obtained from MPA members at a meeting of Full Authority on 28 September 2006
• Questionnaires circulated to IAG police users and independent advisors with a deadline for completion by 21 November 2006
• Semi-structured interviews with all corporate IAG chairpersons and other identified stakeholders
• Engagement with MPA officers from the Race and Diversity Unit
• Presentation of emerging findings to IAG chairs on Friday 15 December 2006 and, following a very constructive debate, their circulation to IAGs across London for further comment
• Feedback from the MPA Equal Opportunities and Diversity Board on 30th January 2007
• Visits by the Review Team to a number of IAG meetings to present the emerging findings and seek additional feedback

Emerging issues

9. The information gathered from the consultation process has been analysed and placed in the context of both the wider environment of police-community engagement, and the existing MPS IAG model. Conclusions from this process have identified a range of recommendations for change or re-affirmation of good practice as follows:

• Independence and governance of IAGs.
• Specialist and community advisory groups.
• Deployment.
• Resources for IAGs.
• Finances.
• Recognition.
• Recruiting.
• AG terms of reference.
• Monitoring systems.
• Standard operating procedures.
• Vetting.
• Cohesion of the IAG process.
• Training.

10. The recommended changes will provide a more coordinated and coherent approach to the IAG aspect of police engagement with communities. This, in turn, will increase trust and confidence in the police service that communities demand and deserve.

Future issues, work and timelines

11. Due to the interest that this review has generated the consultation period was extended to the end of February 2007. The findings have been analysed and the final draft recommendations have been drawn up - Appendix 1 and will be presented to the MPS Diversity Board for ratification in April 2007. It is intended that the recommendations, new Standard Operating Procedures and MPS guidance for independent advisors will be implemented from 1 May 2007.

Abbreviations

IAG

Independent Advisory Group

LGBT

Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender

C. Race and equality impact

1. MPS independent advisory groups comprise members of the public from diverse ethnic backgrounds, cultures, faiths, disabilities, professions, sexual orientations, genders and ages. Members bring a wealth of experience, to the MPS and offer the benefits of community perspectives. Advisory groups have evolved considerably since their inception and whilst many milestones and successes have been achieved, the MPS cannot be complacent in ensuring that maximum benefit is achieved from the process.

2. The MPS continues to work with advisory groups who reflect London’s diverse communities and to be receptive to challenge and constructive criticism. By engaging with communities through the advisory process, benefits have been gained, both for the MPS as a service provider and for communities whose voices have been heard and acted upon. Independent advice is a recognised, effective process of improving trust and confidence in the police among communities. Through the MPS IAG Review and development of new and existing procedures, independent advice will continue to support the MPS commitment to make London safe for all the diverse communities we serve.

D. Financial implications

The budget to support corporate IAGs currently is provided from the Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate overall spend. Specialist IAGs (e.g. Trident) are financially supported by their respective sponsoring directorate. Local borough IAGs are supported from local budgets. It is anticipated that this position will continue. There are no other financial implications resulting from the MPS IAG Review.

E. Background papers

• Review of the Independent Advisory Groups MPA Full Authority (28.09.2006)

F. Contact details

Report author: Chief Inspector Tom Morrell, MPS.

For more information contact:

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

Appendix 1

Independence and Governance of IAGs - Recommendations

Recommendation 1

The following definitions will apply:

Independent Advisory Group

“A group that is constituted to help develop a genuine partnership between the Metropolitan Police Service and London’s community. It consists of voluntary independent advisors who are brought together to provide independent advice to the police.’

Independent Advisor

‘An Independent Advisor is a person who is independent of a police service, of other independent advisors, and independent of any government body or linked organisation that has a formal monitoring or scrutinising responsibility for police performance or activity. An independent advisor may be representative of a community but does not represent a community. They may sometimes provide reassurance to a community’

Independent Advice

‘Advice, guidance or constructive critical appraisal that is provided to the police by an independent advisor to challenge or inform police decision-making. The advice or observation may or may not be applied and it carries no liability to the person delivering it. ’

Non-independent advice

‘Advice, guidance or constructive critical appraisal that is provided to the police by any person who is not an independent advisor or police employee. The advice or observation may or may not be applied and it carries no liability to the person delivering it.’

Recommendation 2: The current Independent Advisory Groups for Disability, LGBT, Race, Gipsy Travellers and Youth, will be considered as having parity with each other and will be known as Corporate Independent Advisory Groups.

Recommendation 3: MPS advisory groups will be governed by the organisation within the structure and framework of the MPA and MPS Community Engagement Strategy 2006 – 2009.

Specialist and community advisory groups

Recommendation 4: Independent advisory groups that have been created to provide predominantly non-independent advice relating to a specialist area of work, and which are neither a corporate or local borough IAG, will each be known as a ‘Specialist Advisory Group’ and not as an ‘Independent Advisory Group’.

Recommendation 5: A directorate that instigates or has current ownership of a Specialist Advisory Group will be solely responsible for its structure, terms of reference, maintenance, resourcing and support.

Recommendation 6: A borough Operational Command Unit (BOCU) that instigates or has ownership of an advisory group that is not an IAG but is used on a regular basis to provide predominantly non-independent advice to the police will be known as a ‘Community Advisory Group.’ The BOCU will be responsible for the group’s structure, terms of reference, maintenance, resourcing and support.

Deployment

Recommendation 7: Each corporate IAG will identify a person who will be responsible for the deployment of an appropriately skilled or experienced independent advisor to deal with every request received from the MPS for independent advice. This person will provide a specific point of contact for the deployment of independent advisors.

Recommendation 8: All requests to use an independent advisor from a corporate IAG must be made through the MPS Communities Together Strategic Engagement Team (CTSET). CTSET will identify the appropriate IAG that can best support the request. It will pass the request on to the nominated point of contact for that group that is responsible for deployment, who will nominate the most suitable independent advisor volunteer to deal with the task. Once an independent advisor has been identified, the task of contacting the advisor and for ensuring that appropriate access issues are met will fall to CTSET in urgent cases, and the IAG Coordination Unit for all other matters.

Recommendation 9: CTSET will be responsible for proactively providing senior investigating officers of appropriate serious crimes or critical incidents with the opportunity to receive independent advice.

Non-financial resources for IAGs

Recommendation 10: A dedicated Independent Advisory Group Coordination Unit that is responsible to a clear senior management line of command will be appointed to provide support and co-ordination to the IAG process. The function of this team will include:

1. Attendance at all corporate IAG meetings and sub-group meetings to:
   1. Provide administrative support for meetings, as agreed between respective chairpersons and the MPS
   2. Deal with all physical and information access issues, including access to corporate IAG minutes
   3. Address Health and Safety issues
   4. Capture topics being discussed to enable co-ordination of the wider IAG process
   5. Follow up actions that facilitate the effectiveness of the IAG process
2. Promoting understanding of the MPS independent advisory group process to internal and external stakeholders, that includes:
   1. Dealing with all requests and freedom of Information Act enquiries
   2. Giving presentations
3. Maintenance and Development of existing and new systems and initiatives that enhance the effectiveness of the IAG process
4. Coordination of efficient and effective learning and development for Corporate independent advisors, that includes:
   1. Training
   2. Attendance at appropriate conferences
   3. Facilitation of appropriate visits
5. Effective communication between corporate IAGs, Specialist Advisory Groups, Community Advisory Groups and Local IAGS, Diversity and Citizen Focus Diversity Strands, CTSET, other MPS departments and portfolios, the MPA and ACPO.
6. Management of Corporate IAG budget processes.
7. Administration and monitoring of the corporate independent advisor recruitment process
8. Oversight of security clearance arrangements
9. Recording and monitoring equitable deployment of independent advisors in liaison with IAG specific points of contact for deployment, to ensure that no one advisor is overburdened.

Finances

Recommendation 11: Corporate Independent Advisors will forward reimbursement claims within three months to the IAG Coordination Unit for processing. To promote effective financial management only claims that are submitted within the time period will be processed for payment. Claims for payment must be expedited without delay. Expense claim forms will be redesigned to be compatible with MPS financial management systems.

Recommendation 12: Consideration should be given to a review of funding streams for the advisory group process to allow for the proportionate allocation of expenses to independent advisors by respective directorates across the Service.

Recommendation 13: IAG budgets will be managed in accordance with financial arrangements for the MPS and be fully auditable. Where concerns arise about proposed or actual expense claims from an independent advisor the matter will in the first instance be addressed through the relevant IAG Chair. Thereafter, if the issue has still not been resolved, it will be referred to the Director of the MPS Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate, as necessary.

Recommendation 14: The current fiscal reimbursement approach for independent advisors needs to be fully reviewed and amended, as necessary, to ensure that an independent advisor does not fall within the status of an ‘MPS employee’. This recommendation will supersede Recommendations 11, 12 and 13.

Recognition

Recommendation 15: Estimable or exceptional commitment to the independent advisory process may be recognised through the existing MPS reward system, in consultation with corporate IAG chairpersons or deputy chairpersons.

Recruitment

Recommendation 16: The process to recruit new independent advisors will be a joint responsibility between the MPS and the respective IAG, based on the current publication of ‘The Commissioner for Public Appointments Code of Practice For Ministerial Appointments to Public Bodies’ in respect of Lower Tier Bodies . The Director of the MPS Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate will ultimately be responsible for accepting the appointment of an independent advisor to a corporate IAG who has been recommended through this process.

Recommendation 17: A recruitment process will focus on appropriate target audiences for respective corporate IAGs that ensure representatives from relevant ‘grassroot’ communities have an opportunity to become independent advisors. Membership of an IAG should aim to include a representative from each main diversity area where the need to develop ‘genuine partnership’ and ‘trust and confidence’ with the police is greatest. The age range for membership of the Met Youth Independent Advisory Group remains at 14 to 25 years inclusive. Borough Commanders should be notified that a corporate recruitment process is underway so that they have an opportunity to bring it to the notice of relevant local communities.

Recommendation 18: An independent advisor will be appointed for four years. An Individual may apply for reappointment, but must not serve for more than two terms in the role. An independent advisor may serve a second term with the agreement of the IAG chairperson or co-chairperson and the Director of the MPS Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate. This recommendation applies retrospectively.

Recommendation 19: Where an independent advisor’s appointment is due to be terminated immediately or within six months as a consequence of Recommendation 18 that appointment will remain valid for one year after the date that these recommendations have been agreed by the MPS Diversity Board. This will allow IAGs to plan for replacements.

Recommendation 20: In an effort to remain cost efficient, only one recruitment process will be permitted within a 12- month period by each corporate IAG.

IAG Terms of Reference, Standard Operating Procedures and Guidance

Recommendation 21: Each IAG will have a ‘Terms of Reference’ that will reflect the recommendations of this review and include:

1. The group will bi-annually elect a chairperson or a maximum of two co-chairpersons. An independent adjudicator who is agreed by the current chairperson(s) and the MPS will oversee this process
2. A chairperson or co-chairperson may have a maximum of two consecutive terms of office
3. Sub-groups may be formed, but where different IAG sub-groups are examining the same or similar issues the Director of the MPS Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate may instead institute one corporate focus group to consider and advise on the topic, that includes a representative from each IAG. Either an independent advisor or an MPS employee who is elected bi-annually by the group will chair a corporate focus group
4. An IAG will meet at regular intervals, as determined by the group, and agreed by the MPS
5. Any IAG member and the MPS may table agenda items for meetings
6. A member who does not attend three consecutive IAG meetings can have their membership withdrawn by the IAG chairperson(s)
7. The Nolan recommendation relating to the ‘Seven Principles of Public Life’ will apply to appointed independent advisors

Recommendation 22: Consideration should be given to the current Custody Guidance IAG becoming a corporate focus group.

Recommendation 23: The MPS will formulate standard operating procedures in consultation with corporate IAG chairpersons that reflect the agreed recommendations of this review.

Recommendation 24: The MPS will update the ‘Guide for Independent Advisors’ and ‘Guide for Establishing Independent Advisory Groups’ in consultation with corporate IAG chairpersons. These will be reviewed annually to ensure that they remain current and relevant.

Monitoring

Recommendation 25: An IAG will prepare a realistic work schedule, which is agreed with the MPS within the parameters of the group, regarding its plans for the police-reporting year. The MPS will assist the IAG to draw up the work schedule, if requested.

Recommendation 26: Each corporate IAG will complete a tightly structured annual report for submission to the Director of the MPS Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate by 31 July. The guidance and framework for this report will be developed by the MPS, in consultation with stakeholders. The report will relate to IAG performance for the preceding reporting period April to March.

Recommendation 27: The minutes of respective meetings will be used to record the rationale for the use or non-use by the police of advice that is provided by an independent advisor.

Recommendation 28: The Director of the MPS Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate will arrange for a review of the IAG process once every three years. The next review will take place in March 2010.

Vetting

Recommendation 29: An Independent advisor will not ordinarily be vetted unless they volunteer to be involved in specialist work that requires it, in which case they must receive full security clearance compatible with the nature of work for which they will be involved. The extent of security clearance will be a matter for the respective directorate that is responsible for the area of work in question.

Recommendation 30: Those involved in the advisory group process should not be permitted unescorted access in police buildings unless they are exempted by MPS policy.

Cohesion of the IAG process

Recommendation 31: The Director of the MPS Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate will meet at least two times a year with Corporate IAG chairpersons. Each attendee may table agenda items for these meetings. The MPA may provide a representative at this meeting.

Recommendation 32: The MPS will organise an annual conference for representatives of all MPS Independent Advisory Groups, Specialist Advisory Groups and Community Advisory Groups that will be aimed at learning, sharing good practice, and promoting the overall cohesiveness across all advisory groups. The MPA may send one or more representatives to the conference.

Recommendation 33: A member of the MPS Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate management team (i.e. Band ‘C’/Inspector or above) and a representative from the respective MPS Diversity Central Team strand will be available to attend the full meetings of each Corporate Independent Advisory Group.

Training

Recommendation 34: Police employees engaged in the corporate IAG deployment and coordination arrangements will receive appropriate learning in knowledge and skills to support their role. A training needs analysis will be undertaken by the MPS in consultation with appropriate stakeholders.

Morris Inquiry Recommendation 16

Recommendation 35: The MPS will draw up a protocol in relation to disclosure of documentation and the rationale for decisions to independent advisors.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback