Proposals Arising from the Review of Safer Neighbourhoods

Report: 9
Date: 30 June 2011
By: Assistant Commissioner Territorial Policing on behalf of the Commissioner

Summary

Safer Neighbourhoods (SN) policing was fully implemented across the Metropolitan Police Service in 2006 to deliver improved public confidence in the police through a balanced approach of engagement and enforcement activity, based upon problem solving policing.

A team comprising 1 sergeant, 2 constables and 3 PCSOs (1-2-3) was established on every ward, enhanced to 1-2-6 for wards with a population of 14,000 or more. This standard model enabled the SN programme to deliver neighbourhood policing to the residents of London’s 624 wards in a short timeframe. Four years on, SN is regarded as a success. As was the intention within the original programme, the MPS Territorial Policing (TP) Development Programme provided the opportunity to review central SN policy. The review aims to ensure alignment with wider changes to the policing model, and share extensive good practice which has developed.

The SN Review, agreed at Management Board and discussed with the MPA, was commissioned to examine what Safer Neighbourhood Teams (SNTs) deliver, the location and structure of SN teams and their demand.

The review undertook consultation at Strategic, Borough and Ward level, capturing the views of strategic partners, stakeholders, and the public. Boroughs were asked to conduct an internal assessment of their SN model and identify options for service delivery. Simultaneously, the MPA conducted an independent scrutiny of aspects of SN delivery, which reported on 17 March 2011.

The SN review findings corresponded closely with those of the MPA:

• Strong support for the concept of Safer Neighbourhoods;
• A desire for even closer partnership working with Local Authorities and other strategic partners with improved sharing of intelligence, tasking, service provision, accommodation and procurement; and
• A high demand by Boroughs for flexibility within central parameters to deliver ‘Safer’ services.

Key recommendations are summarised in section A below. Subject to approval of the recommendations of the SN Review, implementation of the developing model for SN delivery will commence immediately

A. Recommendation

That Members:

1. Endorse the developing SN Operating Model (Para 56-58), in particular the following elements:
   1. SNTs should maintain their existing structure, with ability to temporarily flex resources across ward boundaries in response to specific SN problem solving demand. Flexibility will operate within the revised SN Abstraction policy.
   2. 2 PCs and 3 PCSOs (6 PCSOs on enhanced wards) will remain unchanged.
   3. The default geographic area covered by every Safer Neighbourhoods team will continue to be the Ward unless there are exceptional reasons to amend these boundaries so that they meet local need.
   4. All SN resources will work to a shift pattern that meets local needs but which, in particular, will reflect SN demand and the desire of Londoners to have an appropriate number of officers on duty during the evenings and at weekends.
   5. Front line leadership of teams will be provided by SN Sergeants, who will cover either a team or teams depending on the need, demand and complexity of the policing environment.
   6. Crime reduction and tackling ASB are objectives of SNT activity.
2. The developing supervision model will lead to a reduction of approximately 150 SN Sergeants in 2011/2 on a pro-rata basis. The implementation of the SN sergeant selection processes to commence at the earliest opportunity.
3. The reduction represents the first step towards meeting 300 Sergeants as outlined within the Policing Plan 2011-14. Work to realise the full reduction continues within the TP Development change programme which is reviewing the overall number and function of Sergeants and Inspectors posts within TP.

B. Supporting information

Introduction

1. Safer Neighbourhoods Policing is considered a major success for the MPS, and has delivered significant improvements in community confidence since it was introduced in 2006. The following chart gives year by year comparisons for Confidence drivers based on Public Attitude Survey (PAS) data.

Table 1.

2. The introduction of SN has been credited with delivering the improvements in each of the critical performance areas. The aim of the MPS SN review is to build upon this success. It also aims to take account of the wider changes happening within policing, including the need to deliver improvements in a tightening financial landscape, and reflect the development of the TP operating model.

Background to Safer Neighbourhoods Policing

3. The MPS launched the incremental implementation of Safer Neighbourhood policing across London in 2004, delivering ninety-six Safer Neighbourhood Teams. By the end of 2006, full rollout of 630 teams across London’s 624 wards was complete, every ward benefiting from a policing presence of 1 sergeant, 2 constables and 3 PCSOs, the 1-2-3 model. Six additional SNTs were created to extra capacity in busy areas (Crystal Palace Triangle and Westminster). Enhanced teams of 1-2-6 were introduced where the population exceeded 14000. This was based on census data from 2001, and accounted for 87 wards, across 13 pre-dominantly outer Boroughs, a total of 261 additional PCSO posts.

4. A key driver for the creation of Safer Neighbourhoods was the desire to break what was termed “the reinvention cycle” [1]. The MPS, along with police across the UK, had tried on a number of occasions to develop a sustainable community policing model. The results of previous attempts to achieve this had suggested that increasing and competing demands on the police, without additional investment or disciplined change management, has resulted in a cycle of implementation failure (i.e the reinvention cycle).

5. The standard ‘one size fits all’ model was developed, in conjunction with other factors such as Signal Crime theory, to enable swift delivery of neighbourhood policing to London residents. This ensured that the principles of the National Reassurance Policing Plan (NRPP) 2003 could be delivered through engagement and enforcement. This required the skills of PCSO staff and warranted police constables, under the leadership and supervision of a sergeant. The NRPP principles specified:

• The consistent presence of dedicated neighbourhood teams capable of working in the community to establish and maintain control;
• Intelligence–led identification of community concerns with prompt, effective, targeted action against those concerns; and
• Joint action and problem solving with the community and other local partners to improve the local environment and quality of life.

6. Once established, SNTs were trained to initiate a 7 stage policing process (research local communities; engage with local communities; identify public crime and ASB concerns; investigate and analyse concerns; select priorities for action; respond to and tackle public priorities for action; review). In addition both non-abstraction and conditional deployment policies were established as a mechanism to ensure that SNT officers were given a clear mandate to focus on the needs of local communities.

7. From the outset the presence and remit of SN teams have been well supported. It has variously been described by Management Board as “the jewel in the crown of policing” and “The hard edge of policing and its core bedrock”. However, as the model was embedded, Boroughs have sought to enhance flexibility ensuring that SNTs work effectively both with each other and with other police resources to deal with local problems.

8. This review of SN Policing was conducted as part of the TP Development Programme, a wide-ranging review of the TP Operating Model designed to deliver efficiencies and continue to improve policing services.

The aim and purpose of the SN Review

9. The aim of the SN review was to examine the capability, process and structure of Safer Neighbourhoods, in order to maintain and improve the delivery of high quality neighbourhood policing. This needed to take into consideration the wider changes to TP and its overall budget. To achieve this, the review looked in particular at the current scope of SNT service delivery, the location and structure of the SNTs, and whether they are meeting the demands of the public.

10. Four main factors influenced work undertaken to meet the objectives of the SN review:

• The MPS/MPA Policing London Business Plan 2011/14
• Organisational learning as to what works in the delivery of neighbourhood policing
• Changes to the MPS balanced policing model generated by developments in other areas of the TP Development and other organisational change programmes.
• The views and requirements of stakeholders, partners and Londoners

Scope of the Review

11. The review took place within a clear framework agreed by Management Board (in November 2011) and based on the agreed Design Principles set out below. These were aligned with the principles of the MPA Scrutiny. The scope of the review was defined as:

Figure 1

12. Additionally, the current position in relation to the Home Office grant and local funding arrangements for PCSOs were part of the review.

Design principles

13. The design principles, agreed by Management Board, defined the focus and potential scope for change. The principles ensured that the current high levels of community satisfaction with SN Policing that have been achieved through SN model would remain. These principles are:

• There will be consistent presence of dedicated neighbourhood teams capable of working in the community to establish and maintain control;
• Neighbourhood teams will undertake intelligence–led identification of community concerns with prompt, effective, targeted action against those concerns;
• Neighbourhood teams will also undertake joint action and problem solving with the community and other local partners to improve the quality of life of local people;
• The number of funded PC/PCSO posts within SN will be maintained across the MPS based on the 2011-14 business plan;
• SN PC/PCSO posts will remain within their existing borough, including the enhanced (1)-2-6 resources based on the 2011-14 business plan;
• The retention of an SN Abstraction policy that will provide a strong and robust framework to minimise any abstraction of SN resources from their ward; [2] and
• SNTs will continue to provide a named presence in every ward.

Findings of the review

14. The findings of the review, internal, external and public consultations have been consistent and are aligned with MPA scrutiny recommendations. In summary the MPS review found:

• A strong support for Safer Neighbourhoods;
• A desire for even closer partnership working with Local Authorities and other strategic partners with improved sharing of intelligence, tasking, service provision, accommodation and procurement; and
• Flexibility within central parameters for individual boroughs to deliver ‘Safer’ services.

15. The following sections outline the findings of the review in terms of the (i) role and objectives for SNTs (ii) their location (iii) the demand for service and (iv) the structure of teams. In addition, in order to ensure that SN operates as an essential and fully integrated part of the TP operating model, this review has considered (v) current and future operating environment. Findings in each of these areas are set out below.

The Role and Objectives for SNTs

16. As SNTs have become embedded in policing their roles have developed. The review found:

1. Local SNT activity and visible presence must continue as it has driven Londoners’ confidence in MPS
   1. As stated, confidence in the MPS has improved from 56% in 2006 to 66% at the latest PAS.
   2. The SN abstraction policy has provided an effective framework to manage the deployment of staff and this has supported local delivery and visibility.
2. SNTs must continue to have a lead role in delivering reassurance and problem solving locally, which includes reducing crime and ASB
   1. The Design Principles (para 13) emphasise the MPS commitment that SN delivery will remain focussed on the NRPP core functions of Reassurance Policing and Problem Solving.
   2. The SN approach to problem solving makes a major contribution to reducing demand upon other areas of policing, and leads to crime reduction and has a beneficial effect on other public sector services, such as hospitals and schools. [3]
   3. While SN teams have a stronger role in relation to reassurance policing than response officers, the review raised debate about the extent to which SNTs should be accountable for crime reduction and ASB on their wards.
   4. The SN Review on-line survey indicated that the public did support SNTs tackling crime (85%) and anti-social behaviour (81%) as part of their reassurance policing role. A stronger emphasis on tackling crime and ASB serves to reinforce that the SN policing style (visible, accessible, familiar) and that its community and partnership based problem solving methodology should be directed towards patterns of victimisation in the local community. The MPS has identified ASB as one of five key drivers when promoting public confidence and re-assurance.
   5. The SN policy team has developed a strategy to improve the consistency of approach to responding to Anti-Social Behaviour, including guidance for SNTs on how they will contribute to improved performance in this area. [4] This strategy is being piloted in four Boroughs – Harrow, Hackney, Lambeth and Richmond. These pilots will be evaluated in July 2011 and the results will be shared within the MPS and MPA. The key features of these pilots are:
      • Responding to public expectations including the need to identify and capture repeat and vulnerable victims/callers of ASB
      • Identification of repeat/ vulnerable callers at first point of contact to enable immediate deployment of officers (i.e. “I” or “S” grade response)
      • High risk victims to be recorded on CRIS and to be dealt with by SNT
      • Co-ordinating response to ASB to ensure consistency
      • Development of cohesive and consistent relationships to initiate joint problem solving activity
      • Further examination of the way in which tacking ASB effectively can impact on public confidence
      The implication of this work is that SNTs will deal with the victims of ASB in a more comprehensive way and as a core part of their function.
3. Priorities for SNTs need to be set in consultation with local communities, with engagement driven through ward panels
   1. SN priorities must continue to be set in consultation with local communities in order to improve confidence in the service. The SN Review on-line survey indicated that 73% of people wanted local police to deal with priorities focused on community concerns.
   2. SN priorities in London currently reflect a desire for SNTs to actively reduce crime and ASB, further supporting the inclusion of these as explicit SNT objectives for every Ward.
   3. There are 630 ward panels in London: each set three objectives for their SNT. The priorities set by these ward panels provides valuable information for the SN Command to inform corporate policy and strategy. Valuable community intelligence is also received through these panels, to drive problem-solving activity locally. The SN team, with the MPA, continue to look at how to develop ward panels to deliver effectively for communities.
4. Opportunities to support closer working with partners across community safety areas are supported
   1. The NRPP recognise that the tripartite relationship between police, the public and partners is an effective way to tackle community problems. The review consultation process, in particular consultation by Assistant Commissioner Territorial Policing (AC TP) with Local Authority Chief Executives, highlighted an appetite for even closer partnership working including:
      • SN teams sharing accommodation/access points with other local services
      • Sharing intelligence and tasking with local authority ward based teams.
   2. The SN review recognises that greater efficiency and enhanced intelligence sharing can be achieved through closer working with partners, and that opportunities afforded by streamlining activity with Local Authorities should be taken wherever this would result in enhanced service delivery. The MPA Scrutiny of SN recommendations support this conclusion.
   3. In some areas closer partnership working may provide opportunities for further streamlining of lines of supervision. There are specific opportunities for closer partnership working with Safer Transport Command (STC) who are currently reviewing their business model. For example changes to the delivery model for the STC may provide an opportunity to further align management structures and manage costs.

17. The majority of the review findings provide further support for maintenance of the SN existing model and reinforce the relevance of the design principles. These are incorporated into the Proposed Operating Model (para 56-58).

18. Recommendation: Crime reduction and tackling ASB are objectives of SNT activity.

Location of SN Teams

19. The ward based engagement has been widely regarded as a success over the last 4 years by providing a clear geographic and accountability structure that supported the implementation and delivery of SNTs. However the review identified challenges including the public not always recognising ward boundaries and problems not always fitting ward structures. The SN team covering the ‘Crystal Palace Triangle’ is a proven example of a non-ward based team, created under exceptional circumstances to tackle cross border issues at a location where five boroughs meet.

20. The strengths of using ward boundaries are their alignment to Local Authority management structures, which facilitates closer partnership working. This approach also enables gathering of data, such as crime statistics, which are currently predicated around the ward structure, to continue without need for costly and time consuming re-designation. The SN Review found little evidence of a need or desire to change the number of geographic delivery areas within Boroughs, other than in Boroughs where the local authority is reviewing their own delivery structure. In such cases, the Local Authority and BOCU are working closely together to develop an approach that is consistent for both partners.

21. The public support wards as the right location for SNTs. As part of the SN review online survey, 72% of respondents indicated that the Ward based model met their needs for SNT provision, with only 8% saying it did not.

22. Recommendation: the default geographic area covered by every Safer Neighbourhoods team should continue to be the Ward, unless there are exceptional reasons to amend these boundaries so that they meet local need.

Demand for SNT services

23. At the start of the SN programme in 2004, ‘Signal crime theory’ was used as a basis for understanding and improving confidence. Population, as opposed to the concentration of crime and ASB, was the primary driver of resourcing levels and supported the drive for a standard resource model. Four years later, the MPS understands more about the drivers of confidence based on detailed internal research. [5] Research findings suggest that “engagement, fair treatment, effectiveness in responding, and alleviating anti-social behaviour and crime” are all critical for improving confidence.

24. The implication for SNTs is that building confidence requires continuing and effective engagement with local communities – and that SNTs should be resourced to deliver this function in every neighbourhood. However the need to tackle ASB and crime suggest that a standard resourcing model may not align resources against demand effectively. Without either additional resources or flexibility, SNTs are unlikely to achieve their potential in terms of maintaining and driving improvements in community confidence.

25. The Review examined pressures on SNTs in terms of demand based data for Total Notifiable Offences (TNO) and Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB). The Review examined the level of demand in London’s 624 wards to rank them on high to low demand. Demand varies significantly. For example using this data Holborn and Covent Garden Ward is 16.6 times higher than in Darwin Ward (Bromley). However, the footfall of Holborn and Covent Garden Ward is much greater. The Borough of Croydon contains the fifth highest demand ward (Fairfield), and also the ward in 616th place, Selsdon and Ballards. Fairfield (the town centre), is 10.5 times busier than Selsdon and Ballards, and has a much higher footfall. Crime statistics are not the only driver of demand but an important indicator. /p>

26. It should be noted that the unequal distribution of both victims and offenders across the MPS, means that forthcoming proposals to improve support to victims, particularly repeat victims of ASB and to improve the ways in which offenders are managed are likely to exacerbate the variation in demand on SNTs still further.

27. Strategic partners recognised the need for and value of SN staff being deployed to areas of greatest demand to deliver problem solving where it is most needed. They also considered that flexible deployment would generate benefits in terms of increased opportunities for partnership working. The public and some ward councillors did express some concerns about losing staff from their ward. However, feedback from the boroughs and the local authorities accepted that changes to deployment needed to operate in line with the wider delivery principles for SNTs and had to be able to support the development of local engagement and relationships. Flexibility in terms of deployment will be linked to robust reporting to, and consultation with Local Panels, and the SN abstraction policy will be updated to reflect this.

28. In operational terms, there are significant benefits to establishing a flexible resource capable of supplementing medium/ long term problem solving with short term, high profile enforcement activity. The value of this approach (i.e. “crack down and consolidate”) is well documented and provides an effective option to support local communities. Whilst there are locations that experience long term crime and ASB issues that would benefit from sustained investment, there are also many locations that encounter sporadic or crime problems that can quickly move across boundaries. Without flexibility to tackle such issues early on, such problems can take root and, if given time to develop, can require far greater police and partnership resources to tackle them effectively.

Structure of Safer Neighbourhoods Teams

29. The limitations to match SN resources against SN demand have been raised by the Boroughs as a key issues associated with the current structure of teams. The review focussed on identifying the most effective approach for delivering flexibility, within the constraints of the design principles and local needs.

30. Size and Composition of SNTs: The consultation process and Borough Internal Assessments generated a number of options in terms of how change could be approached.

31. The existing structure for an SNT is either 2 PCs and 3 PCSOs or 2 PCs and 6 PCSOs based on population. All Boroughs returned an internal assessment report setting out their preferred approach with supporting evidence. A wide variety of thinking was reflected in the returns, however the consistent message was one of allowing greater flexibility of SN resource deployment, to meet locally identified demand.

32. In relation to the proposed structure of SNTs, three Boroughs requested no change to the current structure of their teams. Twenty seven (27) Boroughs requested the opportunity to enable team strengths to be changed to reflect operational demand. Thirteen (13) Boroughs also requested local capability to deploy generic problem solving teams drawn from SNTs that could work on a more permanent basis in support of Safer Neighbourhood priorities across different wards.

33. Three approaches were considered as a mean of providing flexibility:

• Approach A: Maintain existing structure but flex resources across boundaries in response to SN demand. This enhances the current abstraction policy, allowing resources to be moved under managed circumstances to meet local problems. The abstraction policy would therefore be amended to widen the role of the SN Inspector - as outlined in the following paragraph:

  “SN Inspectors are permitted local operational flexibility to deploy SNT staff across ward boundaries to tackle a defined shared problem or to use resources for a specific event or identified operational risk for a defined period of time. However this should be in response to a problem solving need and will not permanently alter the structure or functions of the SNTs. If deployed operationally in this way, SNT sergeants and teams continue to have ownership for the problems of their own wards, must be available to deal with urgent issues, and keep responsibility for managing communication with their community and partners”

• Approach B: Re-align the local SN structure to meet the demand needs of the local community, maintaining at least a PC and PCSO in every ward. However to manage exceptional issues which may occur in wards with less day to day resource, the abstraction policy described in Approach A will be applied but decision making will remain with the Borough Commander and will not be devolved to Inspectors, to reflect that it will only be used in exceptional circumstances.
• Approach C: Boroughs maintain the existing model and abstraction policy but top slice SN resources to create teams which will then provide the flexibility to respond to short term demands in support of SN problem solving.

34. Feedback from the consultation and comparison with the framework provided by the Design Principles, suggests that both Approach A and Approach B offer robust and consistent SN models to provide the flexibility required by police and partners. Approach A aims to meet the needs of local communities by providing more opportunity to flex resource across boundaries to tackle crime and disorder issues - while protecting the relationship that has been developed between local residents and their SNT. Approach B enables a more permanent flexing of resources between teams, amending team strengths in line with demand. However, the risk of such an approach is that the capacity of some SNTs to deliver engagement, visibility and presence in their neighbourhood will be limited. Approach C offers the flexibility of a taskable team but, in doing so, inevitably separates some SN officers and staff from the communities they serve and, in doing so, provides a challenge to the connection of officers to their local communities that is fundamental to the SN design principles.

35. When considering the different approaches TP took account of wider changes as part of the Development Programme. While the review focussed on the SN resources, tackling crime and disorder problems is a generic policing responsibility. The challenge for the MPS is to ensure the continued integration of SN by examining what other policing resources can support delivery at a neighbourhood level. For example the Response pilots in Lambeth and Brent are testing the ability to manage emergency and non-emergency response in a more efficient way. This model will provide choices to the MPS regarding how to best use resources released from response teams. In Lambeth this has taken the form of working alongside existing SNTs, providing increased flexibility to meet demands. The Brent pilot has focussed officers on supporting local problem solving, also providing additional operational flexibility. Full evaluation of the Lambeth pilot will be complete in November 2011, with evaluation in other areas six months after their start.

36. Given this wider work and the opportunities that they may provide to the MPS in the future, the review recommends that Approach A provides the most appropriate position to take regarding SN team structures. It provides stability in terms of team structures and the flexibility to tackle SN issues across boundaries that have been the consistent theme across returns from local Boroughs.

37. Recommendation: SNTs should maintain their existing structure, with ability to temporarily flex resources across ward boundaries in response to specific SN problem solving demand. Flexibility will operate within the revised SN Abstraction policy.

38. Management structures Every one of the 624 wards and the additional six non-ward teams has a dedicated sergeant. The view of strategic partners, several Senior Officers, and many SN sergeants, is that the current team model of one sergeant to five staff in the SN context is too ‘supervision rich’ in most circumstances. The analysis of the demand across wards means that while management ratio is consistent, workload is disproportionate between quieter and busier wards. The SN Review sought to assess the role of the SN sergeant and identify opportunities to rationalise posts and this was the basis of the planning assumption in the Mid-Term Financial Plan (MTFP) to reduce 300 SN sergeant posts.

39. A recent analysis of TP’s management on costs categorised the Safer Neighbourhood sergeant roles as a “medium complexity” management role with an associated on cost of 24.7%. This on cost will include all supervisors in Safer Neighbourhood roles and means that almost a quarter of the staffing costs of Safer Neighbourhoods is taken up with managers. In comparison Response teams are also assessed as a medium complexity management task, but have a significantly lower management on cost of 19.6%.

40. In comparison to other forces, and MSF family in particular, the MPS ratio of constables per sergeant, and constables and PCSO per sergeant, is lower than similar forces have managed to achieve. [6] The existing 1:5 supervision ratio within the majority of SNTs is a key contributor to the overall MPS ratio and suggests that other forces are using their sergeants differently and that there is room to explore whether the MPS can deploy its sergeants more effectively in a front line leadership role.

41. The role of the SN sergeant was examined in two phases as part of the review:

1. Borough Internal Assessments: Boroughs conducted an Internal Assessment of their SN model, scrutinising their current ward profiles and suggesting an initial SN supervision proposal for their BOCU. 15 Boroughs offered up 56 sergeants for release, with no expected impact on the quality of service provision. If this was extrapolated to all Boroughs the saving would be in the region of 120 sergeants.
2. TP Chief Officer Group (TP COG) led workshop and process: The review undertook to define the role of the SNT sergeant. A workshop led by TP COG identified the critical expectation of the role. The Area Commanders, working with their Boroughs applied this criterion to revisit the number of sergeants required to deliver SNT. This process indicated that around 150 sergeants could be released, with no expected impact on the quality of service provision. This is set out in detail in the ‘Sergeants Options paper’ to TP COG.

42. There is scope to increase the management ratio of Safer Neighbourhood sergeants from the current 1:5, and also a need to change the culture of some front line managers so they understand that they are there to manage staff and processes, rather than operate in a ‘senior constable’ role.

43. Taking into account ‘on cost’ analysis, comparison with MSF supervisory ratios, the Borough Internal Assessment, TP COG workshop, and consultation with SN Sergeants, the initial assessment of the review is that SN supervision (to manage the existing workload) could be delivered by around 470 - 490 sergeants, as opposed to the current total of 630. This relies on shared sergeant supervision across quieter adjacent wards.

44. TP COG support moving towards the total of 480 SN sergeants within 2011-12, with each Borough reducing on a pro-rata basis. This will generate a financial saving of £4.7m in year one on the assumption that all 150 FTE savings are achieved in September 2011, rising to a total of £9.5m per year from 2012/13 onwards. The HR process to select SN sergeants will need to commence at the earliest opportunity after the MPA SOP meeting on 16th June 2011, to enable the full realisation of the forecast financial saving within the proposed timescale.

45. When considering further reductions in SN management on-costs, consideration must be given to the potential impact of change programmes within TP and other business groups. As outlined below (‘Current and Future Operating Environment’, Table 1), there are a number of pressures within the wider operating model that may impact on the role and functions of both SN Sergeants and Inspectors. In particular, as the programme moves into the Post-Olympic phase, both roles may be affected by changes in the delivery of STC and response functions (as outlined above). As a consequence, to meet the further planned reduction of 150 sergeants, TP Development will keep the number and functionality of these posts under continual review and ensure that this is an area of focus within work on the wider operating model.

46. Recommendations:

• Front line leadership of teams will be provided by SN Sergeants, who will cover either a team or teams depending on the need, demand and complexity of the policing environment.
• The developing supervision model will lead to a reduction of approximately 150 SN Sergeants in 2011/2.
• This represents the first step towards meeting the reduction of 300 Sergeants as outlined within the Policing Plan 2011-14. Members note that work to fully realise a reduction of 300 Sergeants continues within the TP Development change programme which is reviewing the overall number and function of Sergeants and Inspectors posts within TP.

47. SN Shifts Patterns: The current SN shift pattern position is that each Borough sets out its own shift pattern tailored to the local neighbourhood. A recent review by the TP Performance Unit revealed a wide disparity in the hours that SNTs work and indicated that current shift patterns do not always meet demand.

48. A single SN team working together provides ward coverage for 8 hours per day, 5 days per week, with minimal resilience to address time critical incidents in relation to core SN functions, such as repeat ASB victimisation on their ward, or urgent offender management issues requiring an immediate response.

49. The SN survey also highlighted that ward residents wanted to see more of their SNTs at weekends and evenings (as opposed to daytime hours):

Table 2

50. To address the disparity between shifts and demand, the TP Development programme established a set of central parameters for SNT shifts in order to meet local need. These parameters have been shared with Boroughs for feedback and to support them to develop an effective local shift pattern.

51. The framework by which SNT shifts should be agreed is:

• SMT Lead is responsible in ensuring that shift patterns meet local demand;
• SN shift arrangements must provide flexibility for SNT to deal with local priorities;
• Only Cluster Inspectors or above can authorize change of shift;
• Shift patterns should enable increased productivity and enable improved performance; and
• Shift patterns should promote staff health and welfare and comply with the European working time regulations.

52. In order to provide improved Borough and MPS resilience, the shift pattern for individual SNTs will be offset on a cluster basis, to enable cluster Inspectors to temporarily flex resources to respond to emerging problems if necessary. This will provide support in the event of critical operational demands and will ensure the consistent visibility and presence of SN officers and staff. An offset shift pattern, providing comprehensive cover at Cluster or Borough level, is likely to become more important should the proposals for both ASB and IOM continue to develop. Both of these functions would benefit from the ability for SNTs to provide mutual cover in the event of time critical action necessary to either support victims or manage offenders.

53. Recommendation: All SN resources will work to a shift pattern that meets local needs but which, in particular, will reflect both SN demand and the desire of Londoners to have an appropriate number of officers on duty during the evenings and at weekends, and will enable SN cluster inspectors to flex resources in response to emerging SN problems.

Current and Future Operating Environment

54. SN operates within a complex policing environment and not in isolation. Within the TP development programme the wider operating environment is subject to change in several areas that may have implications for a future SN Operating model. The table (below) sets out the principal known areas of change that are likely to affect SNTs:

Table 3 – Summary of influences and opportunities for Safer Neighbourhoods

Table 3

55. The implication of the above work is that the role and functionality of SNTs will need to be kept under continuing review throughout the TP Development Programme. This will ensure the effective and efficient integration of SN into the policing model both operationally and strategically.

Proposed operating model for SNTs

56. The vision for SN policing of the future is one which builds on the excellent foundations to date, where high quality local policing is delivered with resource flexibility, and with supervision which is aligned to areas of demand. A reduced number of sergeants will manage high profile, visible SN officers whose contribution to TNO and ASB performance is measured and acknowledged. Above all, SN Policing will operate in a manner that is fully integrated into all areas of Borough and MPS policing. This vision is consistent with the TP Development Programme operating model.

57. There are four key components of the proposed SN operating model, shown in the diagram below:

• The service to be delivered
• The capability required to deliver the service
• The business process changes that are needed to make things happen
• The structure and management of delivery resources

Figure 2.

58. Taking into account both the design principles and the findings of the review, the proposed SN Operating model is as follows:

• Outcomes: the primary outcomes sought from Safer Neighbourhoods Teams will be:
  • Maintenance or improvement in levels of community engagement, confidence and satisfaction in policing.
  • Reductions in crime and ASB.
• Service: the role and function of Safer Neighbourhoods policing will be to:
  • Provide a consistent presence in each neighbourhood that is capable of working in the community to establish and maintain control over crime and ASB in their area.
  • Undertake intelligence–led identification of community concerns with prompt, effective, targeted action against those concerns.
  • Undertake joint action and problem solving with the community and other local partners to improve the quality of life of local people.
  • Ensure that victims of ASB, particularly repeat victims, are given appropriate support.
  • Ensure that offenders residing in their geographic area of responsibility are managed in an appropriate way.
• Capability: in order to deliver this service:
  • The existing SN structure of PC and PCSOs will be maintained on every Borough. Enhanced teams will remain under review in relation to future funding for the additional 3 PCSO posts.
  • The default geographic area covered by every Safer Neighbourhoods team will continue to be the Ward unless there are exceptional reasons to amend these boundaries so that they meet local need
  • If necessary, SN resources will be flexibly deployed on a temporary basis across ward boundaries to address the wider needs of SN problem solving need.
  • BOCU SN Resources will be permanently allocated to wards according to existing structures- but every ward will have a minimum strength of one PC and one PCSO during periods of temporary resource redeployment.
  • All SN resources will work to a shift pattern that meet local needs but which, in particular, will reflect the desire of Londoners to have officers on duty during the evenings and at weekends, and will allow for temporary flexible deployment of SN resources in response to emerging SN problem solving need.
  • SN resources will not be abstracted from their wards other than in accordance with the revised SN non-abstraction policy.
  • The provision of SN bases will reflect local partnership opportunities within the overall Estates Strategy and agreed CRE principles.
• Process: SN police officers and staff will:
  • Continue to deliver community based and partnership problem solving using the 7 stage SN policing process. This 7 stage process is now being communicated as “We asked, you said and we did”.
  • Temporary redeployments across ward boundaries will be approved, managed and monitored using existing Problem Solving processes through the Borough Tasking system, to include feedback of results to local Ward Panels. The SN abstraction policy will be updated to include detailed guidance in this respect.
• Management Structure: the leadership and management of SN policing teams will be as follows:
  • Front line leadership of teams will be provided by SN Sergeants, who will cover either a team or teams depending on the need, demand and complexity of the policing environment, as decided by the Borough Commander.
  • SNTs will be grouped into clusters and each cluster will continue to be led by a SN Inspector with responsibility for ensuring operational delivery by those teams and for delivery at cluster level, including ensuring SN cluster resources are available 16/7 for temporary flexible deployment in response to emerging SN problem solving need.
  • Each Borough will have an identified SN lead at senior management level who will be responsible for the strategic management and leadership of SNTs. These Senior Management leads will also be responsible for ensuring co-ordination between SNTs and other members of the wider “safer” family - particularly Safer Transport teams.
  • Borough Commanders will retain responsibility for ensuring that the local delivery of SN is consistent with local community and partnership needs and that it operates within the MPS SN framework.
  • TPHQ will provide the strategy and policy functions for the delivery of SN across London. It will also provide an audit function to ensure effective performance and delivery of SN across the capital.

Implementation

59. The transition to the developing model of Safer Neighbourhoods, as approved by Management Board, will be through the TP Development Programme, on a project management basis using a four stage approach (see figure)

60. To enable the projected savings to be in place for the FY 2012, implementation must be complete by the start of April 2012, giving a transition period from the time of the MPA SOP meeting on the 16th June 2011.

Figure 3 [Follow the link to view the full-size version]

61. Change to the SN model will be supported by an SN project team comprising 1 x Superintendent (annual cost of £102,266), 1x Chief Inspector (£85,954), 1 x Inspector (£80,159) and 2 x Constables (£98,844). The total cost of the project team for 12 months is £367,223. Other support will be delivered by the Development Programme infrastructure.

62. In November 2010, the MPA supported a ‘pause’ in the delivery of the SN2 Estate Programme, pending the operational review of Safer Neighbourhoods. Approval of the SN Operating Model will allow TP and Property Services to jointly review the current SN estate. This review will include consideration of the MPS Corporate Real Estate Plan and allow those sites with potential lease breaks to be given full consideration during the Estate Review Process identified in the table in paragraph 60.

63. In addition to the Corporate Real Estate plan there are a number of other dependencies to be taken into account when reviewing the SN estate. These include co-location opportunities with partners, the potential to provide joint SN and ST team bases within existing accommodation and the outcome of the TP Development public access review. The SN proposal contained in this report will allow opportunities for Safer Neighbourhoods teams to share with Safer Transport teams to bring synergies.

63. Communications: Key messages will be developed at strategic programme level to ensure that the outcome and rationale of the review are clearly explained. A range of communication methods will be used to reach as wide an audience as possible, with particular focus on those outlined in the table below:

Strategic Partners

As a minimum, communication to include:

• Chief Executives
• Local Members of Parliament
• Leader of the Council
• Opposition Leader
• MPA Link member
• GLA Member
• The ‘Responsible Authorities’ of the Community Safety Partnership

Neighbourhood Partners

As a minimum, communication to include:

• Ward Councillors
• Ward Panel Chairs
• IAG
• NHW Co-ordinators
• Key Local Authority Managers
• Town Centre Managers
• Neighbourhood Warden Managers
• School / Education Heads
• Representatives of Parks Police and BTP

Community

As a minimum, communication to include:

• Hold one advertised public meeting
• Local residents and local business people
• Including discussion about the service, delivery and outcomes of local safer neighbourhood policing as an agenda item in ward panel meetings and public meetings
• Informing members of Key Individual Networks
• Using opportunities afforded by other communication networks such as neighbourhood link Table 4.

C. Other organisational & community implications

Equality and Diversity Impact

1. EIA summary: an initial screening was carried out and remained in place and updated along the life cycle of this project. The following issues were identified as part of the EIA.

2. Internal: Issues relating to changes in the SN abstraction policy , shift patterns and increased management responsibilities have been highlighted within the initial screening of the EIA. Where possible, mitigating actions or considerations have been included within the document. These will need to be followed through to ensure that the potential for adverse impact is minimised. . Issues relating to relocation of staff as a result of the Safer Neighbourhood Review: in this case this will be found to impact upon persons with disabilities, especially if travelling time is increased. It will also impact upon staff with caring issues.

3. External: several potential issues are highlighted in the EIA relating to targeted and appropriate engagement mechanisms outside of the current ward panel structure. Consideration should be given to linking in with partners’ engagement structures such as partnership boards, day centres, community organisations and PCTs.

Consideration of Met Forward

4. The SN Review primary supports the Met Streets strand of the Mayors Met Forward programme and contributes towards four of the remaining seven strands. The recommendations outlined in the review are aligned with the Mayors commitment that SN teams will continue to act as a bedrock of local crime fighting. The review builds upon our problem solving and preventative approach which remains core to Safer Neighbourhoods.

Financial Implications

5. The reduction of 150 sergeants balances efficiency with effectiveness and risk management in the short term.

6. The MTFP identifies that this programme strand is challenged with delivering savings of up to 300 Police Sergeant posts by the end of 2013/14, with a cumulative saving over the period 2011-14 of £28.5m and annual savings thereafter of £15m. All of the savings identified in this business case are pay-related.

7. The current planning assumption is that 150 posts will be realised in September 2011 by not recruiting to fill vacant posts and further reducing numbers by following a Borough based SN sergeant selection process, governed by corporate HR selection policies. It is important to note that this selection process will need to commence at the earliest opportunity after the MPA SOP meeting on 16th June 2011, in order to realise the forecast savings in the proposed timescale. There is a risk that slippage of the HR selection process timescale would result in a loss of benefit of up to £791k for every month of delay. It should also be noted that if displaced sergeants cannot be deployed into other posts then the overall saving will not be achieved.

8. Whilst this may generate additional savings in the first two years, as compared to the MTFP the current proposals leave a savings shortfall of £5.5m per annum from 2013/14. Work to realise the full reduction continues within the TP Development change programme which is reviewing the overall number and function of Sergeants and Inspectors posts within TP.

9. The savings position can be summarised as follows:

Table 5.

10. The project team costs identified in paragraph 61 (£367k) will be met from existing TP budgets.

11. As identified in paragraph 62, the SN base programme has been paused pending the outcome of this review. On this basis the Capital Programme and budget has been revised and property/DoI revenue savings of £5m per year from 2011/12 have already been built into the 2011/14 business plan. It is, therefore, critical that the accommodation implications of this review are determined as quickly as possible. An SN Estate update will be completed in July 2011.

Legal Implications

12. A number of the issues raised in this report have employment law implications i.e. change of shift, relocation of staff/officers and the selection process for re-deployment of police sergeants. These will all require consultation with the unions/Federation. Further, as the EIA has identified caring/disability issues may have to be addressed. The redeployment of PCSOs into SNT from other areas, where funding is ceasing, will assist with otherwise displaced employees. As is flagged in the report, the legal issues relating to property will also need to be considered.

Environmental Implications

13. The SN Review recommendations do not impact upon the current environmental footprint of SN therefore there are no implications for the environment from the Review.

Risk (including Health and Safety) Implications

14. Key delivery risks are set out below. The risks will be managed as part of the implementation of change both by the TP Development Programme and locally by the Borough Commanders who are accountable for delivering the business change.

Table 6

D. Background papers

• SN Review Key Principles
• MPA Scrutiny Recommendations
• SN Review on-line survey results
• Findings of the ACTP meeting with heads of Local Authorities
• Borough shift pattern guidelines
• SNT Role Profiles
• Safer Neighbourhood EIA
• MPS/MPA Policing London Business Case 2011/14
• 32 Borough Internal Assessment reports
• 32 Borough Consultation Summary templates
• Challenge Panel Summaries and ‘You Said, We did’ response
• TP COG SN Sergeants Paper v1 (including Appendices 1 and 2)

E. Contact details

Report author: SN Project Team

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback