TP Performance Report

Report: 6
Date: 10 June 2010
By: DAC Owens

Summary

This report summarises the existing Territorial Policing (‘TP’) Performance Management Framework and describes how this will accommodate the emerging changes to the structure of TP. The report outlines new performance products now being used to identify risk in relation to victims, offenders and locations and to provide a better understanding of value for money.

A. Recommendation

That

1. Members note the existing arrangements and emerging changes to the TP Performance Management Framework.
2. Members give their support to the revised focus on ‘victim-offender- location’.

B. Supporting information

1. The MPA issued its Policing Plan at the beginning of the 2010/11 financial year. The Plan reflects the Mayor's priorities and the strategic framework laid down by the Chair of the MPA in the "Met Forward" document. It is also informed by various public consultation exercises as well as the MPS's Corporate Strategic Assessment. The Plan sets out the strategic outcomes and corporate objectives for the MPS. Those objectives and outcomes then form the basis for individual business groups' plans, priorities and monitoring arrangements for the coming years.

2. A copy of the existing TP Performance Management Framework is attached at Appendix A. Whilst the performance management structure remains the same, the content now focuses on the risks presented in relation to victims, offenders and locations. The move to a 5 Area structure will allow Area Commanders to manage and assess performance across their respective policing Areas. Oversight of this process will be provided through the established TP Strategic Performance Meetings and the ACTP Chief Officer Group.

Repeat Callers and Anti Social Behaviour.

3. Repeat callers complaining about anti social behaviour (‘ASB’) during the last 24 hours are identified locally, and this information is augmented by further data produced centrally by TPHQ that identifies Repeat Callers during the past 6 months. When taken together this information is used to better understand the risks posed by - and to - vulnerable callers, and to agree appropriate local action to resolve the issue. The number of Repeat Callers and volume of repeat calls generated will be monitored at TP Strategic Performance Meetings as a proxy measure of a BOCUs ability to resolve chronic problems within communities.

4. The governance structure in relation to ASB related issues provides oversight in the following manner. The ASB Strategic Delivery Board, (chaired by Cdr Safer Neighbourhoods),reports to the Confidence and Satisfaction Board, (chaired by DAC TP), and the Violence Board, (chaired by ACTP), which then both report into the MPS Performance Board (chaired by the Deputy Commissioner). There is a direct link to the Pledge Delivery Board (chaired by Cdr. Safer Neighbourhoods), Key Performance Review Meetings (both chaired by DAC TP) and the London ASB Board.

Offender Management.

4. The monitoring of offenders continues to be a priority with an increasingly sophisticated regime to effect further improvements at BOCU level. The intention is to identify those offenders that cross crime-types in order to (a) target them in relation to their criminality and (b) to provide a more accurate picture of prolific offending focussing on the individual rather than their specific crime-types.

Mapping.

5. Our mapping capability continues to evolve, with data now being available to TP Strategic Performance and TP Tasking Meetings to identify not only repeat locations of crime - but individual ‘hot streets’ where most crimes are being committed at a sub-ward level. This has obvious implications for tasking and deployment of resources but also provides significant opportunities to improve public and officer safety and improving intelligence gathering. Further development of temporal assessments of crimes committed and crime trends allow a more intelligent use of the data as a predictive tool to further refine our tasking and deployment processes.

6. The existing TP Performance Management Framework continues to be effective in delivering the appropriate level of oversight to identify risk and prioritise those activities that offer opportunities to improve public and officer safety, ‘confidence’ and ‘satisfaction’. However, the TP Performance Management Framework is being reviewed under the aegis of the TP Development Programme review of performance and intelligence - this review is the subject of a separate paper. The emphasis on ‘victim-offender-location’ has focussed our tasking and deployments to locations and against individuals, which is likely to produce sustainable benefits for communities. Our improved ability to identify and respond to repeat victims will allow us to engage with ‘cause’ rather than ‘effect’.

7. TP Performance.

8. The variation between BOCUs is being addressed not only at the existing Strategic Performance Meetings (where variations in BOCU performance is highlighted), but also through the emerging prescribed local performance management framework as directed by ACTP. This will ensure that consistent messages from the TP Command Team are accurately communicated to senior practitioners at BOCUs to further generate improvement activity. An illustration of how this additional forum fits into the existing Performance Regime is attached at Appendix B.

Confidence.

9. The MPS target of public confidence as measured by the British Crime Survey (BCS) is to achieve a figure of 59.4% by the end of March 2012. There is an interim target of 55.4% by the end of March 2011.

10. The MPS current performance for public confidence - as measured by the British Crime Survey (BCS) for the single national top down measure - is currently at 53.1% based on latest available data for quarter three Q(3) of 2009-10 at end December 2009. This is an increase of 1.9% from the quarter two (Q2) position of 51.2% at end September 2009. The confidence interval range is 2.6%, with a range between a low at 50.5% and a high at 55.7%. The MPS is first in its Most Similar Family (MSF) of West Yorkshire Police, West Midlands Police and Greater Manchester Police.

11. Compared to its MSF, the MPS is graded as “significantly better” and is also graded as “significantly better” compared to the previous year. The MPS is showing a steady upward actual trend above the iQuanta trajectory towards the public confidence targets, and is graded by the Home Office as “better” against the trajectory.

12. The PAS measure of public confidence ranges from 11% at Barking & Dagenham to 87% at Hounslow.

13. The MPS holds a monthly Confidence Board, chaired by DAC (TP). The Board is responsible for agreeing a strategy for research and inspection activity to ensure a coordinated approach to improving confidence and has identified those boroughs with areas for improvement. The TP Performance Unit, together with the Strategic Research and Analysis Unit (SRAU) and TP Safer Neighbourhoods are working together to provide them with the necessary support.

14. Performance against the ‘confidence’ indicators are produced quarterly and included in the mainstream corporate products (listed below).

1. The monthly Strategic Performance meetings.
2. The quarterly Key Performance Review meetings held for each Area
3. The monthly Area Commanders Performance Meetings,

Within these meetings, ‘confidence’ and ‘satisfaction’ are the overarching indicators for the MPS. The TP Performance Unit provides the necessary support by ensuring thorough analysis of the data and identifying good practice

15. Work within the MPS confidence strategy continues, with continued bespoke improvement coaching for identified boroughs. Since the beginning of the year, a dedicated team has worked alongside the local senior management teams at Bexley, Hackney, Greenwich and the other three South Central Area boroughs. The approach to practical borough assistance has focused on ways to operationalise the Confidence Model and to make sense of the critical processes a borough has to focus on to improve its public confidence.

Policing Pledge.

16. The Policing Pledge makes a promise to the public to deliver national service standards on priority areas covering: emergency and non- emergency response times, access to information on local policing priorities and methods of accessing services. The newly appointed chair for the Policing Pledge Strategy Board is implementing a new action plan following a detailed review. The board is planning a programme of Policing Pledge and confidence workshops for July 2010.

17. The PAS performance target is 79% for the Indicator ‘Police would treat you with respect if you had contact with them for any reason’. The most recent performance data shows an MPS average of 77%. Borough performances range from 96% at Waltham Forest and Barnet to just 35% at Barking and Dagenham. The MPS are conducting a fundamental review of customer service as part of the TP Modernisation project. A customer service strategy (across TP) is currently being developed and is expected to be published in May 2010. Following on will be the development of a comprehensive customer service model. It is anticipated that this will take at least 6 months.

18. Responding to the HMIC observation regarding a lack of wider public consultation in the production of ward profiles, in June 2010 each borough SN lead will supervise the planned review of all their ward/neighbourhood profiles. This should assist in reflecting local community priorities in local policing strategies.

19. The target for the MPS for the Public Attitude Survey (PAS) indicator ‘Have you heard about your local Safer Neighbourhood team?’ is 45%. At the end December 2009 (quarter three 2009-10) the current rolling 12 month target is 34%. Seven boroughs met or exceeded this target, and performance ranges from 4% in Newham to 81% in Greenwich. In response to this wide disparity, two half-day workshops were held in April 2010 between TP and other business groups. Safer Neighbourhood leads from boroughs with the highest PAS results for this particular target were invited and a range of improvement recommendations were made, including holding a masterclass in communication.

Local Area Agreements & Crime Reduction Partnerships

20. The performance year 2010 - 2011 is the final delivery year for the current LAA set. Whilst there are not currently any identified risks to MPS targets and strategies, several BOCUs are unlikely to deliver some of the targets they agreed with their Local Strategic Partnerships at the beginning of the LAA process. The targets at risk are those set against NI 15 (Most Serious Violence) and NI 16 (Serious Acquisitive Crime). Whilst due regard was given in the MPS target setting process to the commitments in the Local Area Agreements, five BOCUs set MPS bespoke targets for 2010/11 at a level below that required to deliver NI 16 (SAC) and ten BOCUs set targets for the period 2010/11 at a level below that required to deliver NI15 (MSV). This target setting process was conducted in consultation and agreement with representatives of GOL (Government Office London)

21. A primary task for the MPA and the MPS is to understand how each Crime Reduction Partnership functions, to identify good practice and to share this directly with other partnerships. From 2009 the Basic Command Unit Fund (BCUF), administered by the MPA worked in conjunction with the MPS to collate, quality assess, and approve spend plans and monitor performance. This collaboration has offered a valuable insight into the workings of each partnership and the way in which they allocate BCUF funding.

22. The Home Office guidance for the BCUF for 2010/11 states that each project supported by the fund must be linked to one or more of the five ‘confidence’ themes. The spend plans provide a breakdown of how each theme has been interpreted by the borough and, in turn, how it has been addressed by this particular funding. The BCUF administration process includes an agreement that MPA officers carry out analysis of the spending plans, under the five ‘confidence ’themes. The outcome will be shared with boroughs in a workshop during autumn 2010.

C. Race and equality impact

1. Unless incidents and crimes are consistently and accurately recorded, a disparate service will be provided to callers and victims of crime. These risks are amplified if these are repeat callers and/or victims.

D. Financial implications

1. The financial implications of the TP Modernisation Programme (including the impact on the TP Performance Management Framework) are the subject of a separate paper. This will include the potential impact of not receiving the Basic Command Unit Fund referred to in paragraphs 16-18 above.

E. Legal implications

This report has been produced as part of the governance process and no legal implications arise.

F. Background papers

None

G. Contact details

Report author: DCS Peter Barron, MPS.

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback