Professional Standards Performance Indicators 2009/10

Report: 12
Date: 1 July 2010
By: Director of Professional Standards on behalf of the Commissioner

Summary

This report provides:

• A brief explanation of the definitions and terminology used in the Professional Standards Performance Indicators.
• An update on current performance from the Professional Standards Performance Indicators, including information on trends for complaints and resolutions.
• Identification of and, explanation for, recurrent topics of complaints; officers attracting a high number of complaints; trends; and patterns of behavior, together with details of steps taken to redress any emerging issues.
• Details of any data available on how satisfied complainants are with the complaint process and resolution.
• Details of the preparation for, and anticipated impact of, the introduction of the revised Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) Statutory Guidance.

A. Recommendation

That

1. Members note the current performance indicators as illustrated in Appendix 1.
2. Members note any areas of risk, good practice and potential issues as identified in this report.

B. Supporting information

1. Appendix 1 – contains Professional Standards Performance Indicators for period to 31 March 2010.

2. Appendix 2 - contains definitions for categories and terminology used in the performance indicators and a diagram illustrating the difference between cases and allegations.

Performance information from Professional Standards Performance Indicators

3. The Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) report quarterly on public complaints and conduct matters within the Metropolitan Police Service. A copy of the report for the period to 31 March 2010 is contained at Appendix 1. The following points relate to areas of risk, good practice and potential issues requiring further investigation.

Public complaints 2009/10 (Appendix 1 – Table 1)

• Please note that the figures contained in Appendix 1 contain Direction & Control matters and complaints not recorded under the Police Reform Act 2002 and will, therefore, differ from the figures quoted by the IPCC.
• The number of complaints recorded in 2009/10 has seen an increase from 2008/09 of 12299 to 13456 allegations, a 9% rise of 1157 allegations. G20 accounted for over 40% of the 1157 increase, with 465 G20-related allegations (particularly for oppressive behaviour category). This rate of increase is reduced from the previous year where there was a 29% increase from 9553 to 12299 allegations.
• Since the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) was established in 2004, the drivers for the general increase in public complaints includes: a widening of the definition of who can complain beyond those directly affected by an incident; a rise in the number of people employed by MPS increasing those subject to complaint; and an increase in reporting portals, such as third-party reporting sites and DPS Customer Service Team on-line reporting.
• A comparison of 2010/11 first quarter data is not possible until the period is finished at end of June 2010. The data for this period will be available at the beginning of July 2010.
• The three main categories for public complaint remain failure in duty, oppressive behaviour and incivility. These three categories account for over 80% of all allegations. The breakdown of allegations and proportion of change is:
  • Failure in duty accounts for 5426 allegations (or 40% of total allegations) in 2009/10. This represents an increase of 15% from 4732 allegations in 2008/09. This category has increased in terms of allegations (by 694) and as a proportion of total complaints. There has been an upward trend over the last three financial years both in terms of number of allegations and as a proportion of total allegations (see Appendix 1).
  • Oppressive behaviour accounts for 3501 allegations (or 26% of total allegations) in 2009/10. This represents an increase of 13% from 3099 allegations in 2008/09. Of the 2009/10 increase of 402 allegations, 304 relate to G20. The numbers of allegations for this category has increased over each of the last four financial years (as detailed in Appendix 1) but as a proportion of the total allegations has been consistently in the region of 26%.
  • Incivility accounts for 2260 allegations (or 17% of total allegations) in 2009/10. This represents a decrease of 4% from 2362 allegations in 2008/09. This category has dropped in terms of allegations (by 98) and as a proportion of total complaints. Increases in this category over previous financial years have been reversed in 2009/10. This decrease coincides with this category being targeted by DPS Prevention and Reduction Team as outlined in paragraphs 5-7 below.
• There has been a reduction in the percentage of allegations being locally resolved and a corresponding increase in allegations investigated. In part, this is due to Borough/Operational Command Units (B/OCUs) choosing to undertake ‘proportionate’ investigations, and thus supplying the complainant with an outcome to an investigation letter rather than pursuing the local resolution route.
• In 2008/09 local resolutions accounted for 33% of allegations finalised, in 2009/10 this figure has reduced to 24%. This corresponds with an increase in unsubstantiated allegations, increasing from 34% of allegations in 2008/09 to 45% of allegations in 2009/10.
• There has been an increase in the proportion of local resolutions dealt with by B/OCUs (67% for 2009/10) and a corresponding decrease in the proportion of those dealt with by DPS (33%). These proportions accord with the expectations under the Taylor reforms. Compared to the previous financial year there has been a 7% increase in the proportion dealt with by B/OCUs.
• Since Taylor such changes have played a part in the increase in time taken to complete all cases, rising from a yearly average of 49 days in 2008/09, against a target of 64 working days, to 55 days average for 2009/10; an increase of 6 days.
• At the end of 2009/10 21% (257) of live cases were over the target of 64 days, this is 13% higher than the proportion that were over-target in 2008/09 (8%). The increase in investigations being dealt with by B/OCUs has influenced the increase in timescales.
• The time taken to locally resolve an allegation on B/OCUs has risen from an average of 38 days in 2008/09, to an average of 41 days for 2009/10. This is against a 43 working day target. B/OCUs are, post-Taylor, now investigating straightforward local complaints in addition to undertaking local resolutions. For the financial year 2009/10 B/OCUs have dealt with 45% of public complaint cases (3447 cases) compared to only 37% (2419 cases) in 2008/09. Whilst B/OCUs have invested in Professional Standards Champions (PSC) to offer a timely and professional response, this significant addition to workloads has increased time taken to resolve complaints locally. To support B/OCUs, DPS Borough Support Units (BSU) have a single point of contact (SPOC) for each B/OCU. The SPOC supports PSC and individual supervisors in dealing with complaints. They also provide personal briefings and update B/OCU managers as to best practice. Moreover, complaints are ‘flagged’ so that at 25 working days duration the B/OCU is immediately contacted by DPS BSU and support offered.
• In conclusion, the three main areas of public complaint are failure in duty, oppressive behaviour and incivility. Incivility and failure in duty are both MPS professional standards Control Strategy priorities (see paragraph 6). Issues as to timeliness are actively managed by BSUs and PSCs.

Conduct Matters 2009/10 (Appendix 1 – Table 2)

4. Completion of conduct matter cases has exceeded the 64 day target, with the average standing at 66 days at the end of 2009/10. This 16 day increase from 2008/09 (50 days) is due to B/OCUs dealing with misconduct under Taylor. A substantial reason for increase in timescales is the increase in conduct cases being investigated by B/OCUs and the associated administration such as misconduct meetings. The majority of this work would have been previously undertaken by DPS. For the financial year 2009/10 B/OCUs have dealt with 42% of conduct matter cases (367 cases) compared to only 28% (254 cases) in 2008/09. The support offered by DPS to B/OCUs is as for public complaints (as outlined in section above).

Recurrent topics of complaints; officers attracting a high number of complaints, trends and patterns of behaviour

5. Recurrent topics of complaints, trends and patterns of behavior are reported in the DPS Strategic Intelligence Assessment, which is informed by public complaint data, organisational learning data and intelligence received. There are five Control Strategy priority areas highlighted by this strategic analysis: failure in duty; incivility; information misuse; integrity assurance; and corrupt officers or those that would seek to corrupt. Each of these Control Strategy strands has an ACPO lead responsible for ensuring MPS Intelligence, Prevention and Enforcement measures are in place to address the issues arising. Strategic oversight of this work is provided by Professional Standards Strategic Committee (PSSC) chaired by the Deputy Commissioner.

6. Of particular relevance to public complaints are the Control Strategy areas failures in duty and incivility. Failures in duty account for 40% of all allegations recorded in 2009/10 (5426 allegations); for the previous three financial years the proportion was around 38%. Incivility accounts for 17% of allegations recorded in 2009/10 (2260 allegations); this is a reduction compared to previous financial years where the proportion was between 18-20%. In addressing incivility, DPS Prevention and Reduction Team (PaRT) have supported B/OCU management teams in reducing incivility through delivering Professional Standards Support Programme (PSSP) presentations in 2008/09 to in excess of 11,173 officers on 464 occasions. These presentations have been well received and achieve greater than an 80% satisfaction rating from audiences. The next PSSP cycle of presentations are to commence in late 2010. These will encompass failure in duty issues as well as continuing to combat incivility. Presentations highlight why certain behaviour is unacceptable and attracts complaints as well as providing guidance as to how a professional service is delivered. The key prevention messages contained within failure in duty and incivility Control Strategy action plans will be incorporated into presentations.

7. The recurrent theme of quality of supervision is relevant to all public complaints, including failures in duty and incivility, and is being specifically addressed by DPS PaRT. Through the Professional Standards Support Program (PSSP) the team is delivering awareness-raising sessions as to the importance of effective supervision of staff in addressing unacceptable behaviour. The training is titled ‘support for managers’ and is primarily focused at Sergeants and Inspectors working at Borough Operational Command Units. These sessions give MPS supervisors the knowledge and confidence to set high standards and deal effectively, and at an early stage, with personnel who do not meet expected standards. PSSP work has been viewed by a number of Independent Advisory Groups and has received favourable feedback.

8. DPS PaRT are redrafting the Complaints Intervention Scheme (CIS) policy to reflect Taylor reforms. CIS manages police officer’s behaviour and is triggered by an officer having three ‘events’ in a 12 month period. An event is a public complaint or conduct matter. The officer’s behaviour will then be reviewed by their line manager and the B/OCU Professional Standards Champion. The officer will be set a development plan. The emphasis of the plan is learning and behavioural improvement. Any initiatives and objectives set are to support these changes. The officer’s achievements will be monitored. Where the officer’s performance does not improve and remains below what is acceptable then unsatisfactory performance process is to be considered.

9. The number of officers/staff that fall under CIS has seen a 29% reduction, from 409 officers/staff (for the period May 2008-April 2009) to 291 (for the period May 2009 – April 2010). Territorial Support Group (TSG) has seen the largest reduction, from 62 officers under CIS to 24 due to proactive management by TSG. In 2008/09, TSG supervisors worked with DPS PaRT to identify how public complaints could be reduced within TSG. TSG management team utilise detailed DPS management information in reducing public complaints. An example of a specific intervention relates to two TSG officers with particularly high complaints (one of the officers had accrued 27 complaints in a three year period but also had an excellent return of work). These officers received a staged development plan to achieve behavioural change. This included attachments to PaRT, Civil Actions, Borough Support and a Lambeth community-based project. They assisted PaRT officers in delivering complaints-related presentations. Their impressive record of work continues but this intervention has led to behavioural change.

Satisfaction of complainants within the complaint process and resolution

10. The public’s satisfaction with the complaints system is not something which can readily be established under the current MPS working procedures. However, the DPS Customer Service Team are currently being fundamentally reviewed by a Superintendent with a view to incorporating a Quality Callback system. Also the IPCC conduct a yearly poll using MORI to establish customer confidence in the complaints systems. This is published on their website and is split by region. They use a sample size of 4000 for the England and Wales, pro-rata a sample size of about 1000 would suffice for the MPS area. DPS has agreed to explore the cost of such an activity, although it may be more difficult to make a business case with the current efficiencies being discussed. If accepted baseline figures could be produced for 2009/10 and then repeated yearly.

IPCC Revised Statutory Guidance on police complaints

11. On 1 April 2010, the revised IPCC Statutory Guidance on police complaints came into effect. The new guidance will help police forces to respond more effectively to concerns raised by citizens about the contact they have had with police and aims to reduce the amount of bureaucracy associated with complaints. The IPCC and MPS believe the guidance will:

• Enable front line officers and staff to resolve dissatisfaction on the spot where possible and allow minor issues to be addressed immediately before they escalate to the point of becoming a complaint.
• Enable officers and staff to take a proportionate approach to investigations, by setting out factors to assist in judging proportionality and setting minimum expectations of what must be done.
• Help to make the outcome of a complaint more meaningful to the citizen, by replacing the ‘substantiation’ of a complaint based solely on establishing provable misconduct with ‘upholding’ a complaint based on whether in all the circumstances the complaint appears to be justified.
• Widen the range of tools police services and police authorities use to drive improvement, by ensuring they consider and apply a broader range of outcomes including good quality explanations, apologies and learning.

12. DPS has undertaken a training and awareness programme for their staff and B/OCU Professional Standards Champions (PSCs) in the new IPCC changes. Future professional development training will prepare PSCs in how to deal with public complaints, particularly focusing on developing a local resolution system which will make use of current best practice in the investigation and mediation of complaints, to promote an increase in local resolution of complaints at a B/OCU level. A briefing session for MPS stakeholders was also held on 12 April 2010 to explain how the impact of the changes may impact their units.

13. Currently it is too early to measure the impact of revisions and any significant changes in the recording and resulting of complaints. This will be reviewed and reported on six months after implementation. It is anticipated that the number of upheld complaints will be higher than the number of complaints that were substantiated prior to the changes. It is not possible to forecast the level of increase there will be.

C. Race and diversity impact

Whilst there does not appear to be an impact on race and diversity in the current Professional Standards Performance Indicators they will be subject to continuous analysis, monitoring and review. This review process will include the indicators relating to management of conduct cases and public complaints that are consistently reviewed by Diversity and Citizen Focus Directorate. This is to ensure that there is no adverse impact on equality target groups and that any potential for adverse impact can be acted upon in a timely manner.

D. Financial implications

All costs relating to the above activities are covered from within existing MPS budgets.

E. Legal implications

This report provides information as part of the Governance process and no legal implications arise.

F. Environmental implications

None given.

G. Background papers

None

H. Contact details

Report author: Chris Maguire, Detective Chief Inspector, Directorate of Professional Standards

For information contact:

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

Appendix 2: Explanations of terminology used in the Professional Standards Performance Indicators

This appendix contains: an explanation of the terminology used in the report; description of allegation categories and the IPCC allegation type that are comprised within each category; description of allegation results that are used for public complaints and conduct matters. Full definitions on some of the terms used in the context of complaints and misconduct is provided in IPCC Statutory Guidance and is accessible via the IPCC website (www.ipcc.gov.uk)

Terminology

Public Complaint

Complaint about the duty-related conduct of a person serving with the police (who comes under the Police Reform Act 2002).

Conduct Matter

An issue raised by internal police management regarding the conduct of an officer or staff member.

Direction and Control

Police force organisational issues not within provisions of Police Reform Act 2002 e.g. budgeting; resources; deployment of officers.

Recorded

When a case is entered on the complaints computer system (Tribune for MPS).

Finalised

When an allegation has been investigated and the outcome has been completed. For cases locally resolved this would be the end of the local resolution process, in other cases it would be after misconduct action against the officer or staff member involved has been completed.

Case

Each case represents a single investigation or a Local Resolution process. It may contain one or more allegations, brought by one or more complainants, against one or more persons serving with the police (see the diagram at appendix 2).

Allegation

A claim or assertion that someone has done something wrong or illegal. There may be many allegations contained within one case (see the diagram at appendix 2).

Outcome Letter

Letter to complainant detailing the end result of a public complaint and any action against the officer or staff member involved.

Taylor Reforms

The introduction of new police misconduct and performance procedures is intended to be the driver which moves the emphasis of the police discipline framework from one of punishment to that of professional development and improvement. The focus of the reform is upon addressing unsatisfactory performance in the work place and encouraging a learning environment (of both officer and organisation) rather than utilising misconduct procedures.

Live Case

Case that are still under investigation or local resolution process.

Average Days to Complete

Calculated between the date the case is received within the MPS and the conclusion of an investigation or local resolution process (based on working days).

Misconduct decisions

Calculated between the date the decision to take formal action is made to date of the hearing or the date other management action is taken (based on working days).

Control Strategy

The control strategy outlines the operational priorities to be addressed proactively. Each priority will incorporate intelligence, prevention and enforcement opportunities. It is developed following a critical examination of professional standards and corruption areas affecting the MPS as set out in the Strategic Intelligence Assessment. It provides senior management with a framework in which decisions can be made about the issues that should take precedence when allocating resources.

Strategic Intelligence Assessment

The Strategic Intelligence Assessment (SIA) reviews all intelligence relating to professional standards and corruption that impacts upon the MPS. From this it identifies strategic priorities (expressed as control strategy priorities), which it recommends to the Professional Standards Strategic Committee (PSSC) as the areas requiring intelligence, prevention and enforcement activity.

Organisation Learning

An opportunity to actively create, capture, transfer, and mobilise knowledge to enable it to adapt to a changing environment. Opportunities for Organisational Learning arise in many ways, including complaints investigation. Not all investigations will identify such learning. It is recognised that Organisational Learning can arise from both good and poor practice.

Professional Standards Support Program

Professional Standards Support Program (PSSP) is to offer support and guidance to Borough/Operational Command Units (B/OCUs), reinforcing learning about professional standards, spreading good practice and making the key messages relevant to everyday work.

Quality Callback

The Quality Call-Back Process will provide real time information about the experience the member of the public has had in receiving a service from us.

IPCC Statutory Guidance

Guidance setting out the principles and standards for dealing with complaints or allegations of misconduct, including those on timeliness and proportionality.

IPCC Appeal

Application by complainant for the IPCC to review police decision. Appeals can be made to the IPCC by complainants in relation to either the non-recording of their complaint, the local resolution process that took place or the outcome of the investigations into their complaint. The IPCC then decide whether an appeal is valid, not upheld or not valid.

12MRA

12 month rolling average, an average is calculated over a rolling 12 month period.

Description of allegation categories and the IPCC allegation type that are comprised within each category for public complaints and conduct matters

Description of allegation results that are used for public complaints and conduct matters

Allegation Result

Explanation

Not Recorded

Noted on the system but not recorded as a complaint under the Police Reform Act 2002 definitions.

Local Resolution

Complaint is resolved at a local level such as B/OCU.

Dispensation

Exemption, granted by the IPCC to a force, from the need to take further action or no action at all about a complaint.

Discontinuance

Stopping an investigation that has already started.

Withdrawn

Complainant, or agent acting on their behalf, has retracted the complaint.

Substantiated

Following an investigation, there is a case to answer against an officer or staff member.

Unsubstantiated

Following an investigation, there is no case to answer against an officer or staff member.

Not Informed

Following an investigation, there is no case to answer against an officer or staff member and the officer or staff are not advised of the result.

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback