Policing London Business Plan 2011-14: performance framework

Report: 5b
Joint meeting of the Strategic and Operational Policing and Finance and Resources Committees
Date: 17 March 2011
By: Director of Resources on behalf of the Commissioner

Summary

This paper

A. Recommendation

That Members

1. Comment on the proposed KPI list
2. Note the proposed KPI reporting framework to the MPA
3. Approve in principle targets for the crime indicators for inclusion within the Policing Plan 2011/12 for final approval by the Full Authority

B. Supporting information

1. Members have discussed the rationale in moving towards a VOLT based performance framework based around a smaller number of KPIs. The proposed set, with the inclusion of a Rape and a Roads KSI indicator, is shown as Appendix 1.

• The rationale for reporting rape outside of the Violence portfolio is that, due to its sensitive and traumatic nature, rape is far more likely to be under reported than other types of violence. The MPS has launched campaigns to encourage victims of rape to report the crime to the police. It is therefore clearer to exclude rape from changes in the numbers in the Violence portfolio, and report rape and serious sexual offences separately, as trends in the Violence portfolio would not be distorted by efforts to encourage the reporting of rape.
• The roads collisions KSI features consistently in the top 5 public priorities for policing London, and consistently within the top set of local concerns. The emerging Department for Transport and ACPO National Roads Strategies will maintain the focus on activity in this area.

2. Each KPI is, in effect, built on a portfolio of indicators. Members have been sighted on an example portfolio of indicators in the Safety theme for the Violence, Property and ASB KPIs. Members will clearly wish to be reassured that the range of indicators that the MPS is monitoring internally is appropriate. These are shown as Appendix 2.

3. Our proposed KPI performance analysis and reporting would be developed around:

• the same single KPI overview page and
• the same headline analysis for each KPI
• with a different level of exception analysis as required

4. We propose to report monthly to MB and the MPA on each overall KPI and on the headline changes to each indicator within the KPI portfolio. Some crime types would be monitored consistently across portfolios due to their importance.

5. We do not propose to report monthly in detail against each indicator in each portfolio but to take an exception approach focused on assessment and emerging trends. In the Safety theme this analysis would follow a VOLT approach, in the Confidence, Olympics, and Value for Money themes analysis would follow the appropriate method (such as survey, milestones, asset utilisation).

6. We would maintain internal monitoring across the range of indicators throughout the year, and report by exception against underlying indicators when our analysis demonstrates that the trend is exceptional. Reporting against each underlying crime indicator each month would detract from our preferred portfolio approach, focused on customer need and the inherent risk and harm that is assessed within any reported crime. We would prefer to retain flexibility of focus as emerging trends appear and focus on issues of real concern.

7. Members should be re-assured that data collection and a range of performance monitoring, analysis and reporting would continue. This would include reports to SOP, F&R, CEP and other MPA Committees as appropriate, both on relevant crime data and analysis and more in depth analysis on areas of interest. For example, performance against the current list of sub indicators (shown in Appendix 3) in the headline performance report to SOP will continue to be collected. Members should, however, note that there is a cost to collecting data (currently being estimated).

Targets

8. Members attending the 3 February briefing generally accepted the rationale of a stable approach to target setting given the extremely challenging environment for 2011/12. Subsequent discussions, between the Acting Commissioner and the Chair of the MPA, in MPA Committee and within the MPS, have re-defined this in a number of ways. We now propose:

• a three year target against the KPIs, rather than a one year target
• reductions in current crime levels that are, in this challenging environment, achievable

9. It is proposed that the target setting regime should take a more long term view than has been the case so far, and so the targets will cover the next three years rather than just next year. Therefore the targets below will be achieved or not depending on the relevant performance in 2013/14 compared to 2010/11.

10. This approach will encourage more long term thinking and planning as well as set the scene for future crime reductions against the background of the coming years’ significantly restricted financial environment. Furthermore a three year target will also give time for any short term non-financial trends to subside and so focus resources on the most vulnerable and repeatedly targeted victims; on the people repeatedly committing crime; and on the places and times most in need of policing.

11. Following a decade of significant reductions in crime, the proposal is for every KPI to require further improvement on this year’s performance. These targets reflect the challenges that face policing at a time when the MPS is implementing substantial change programmes and managing significant reductions to our budget. As a result our operational performance will come under real pressure.

• KPI 1 - Violent crime portfolio – success measured by the reduction in violent crime by 2013/14 compared to the level in 2010/11. The number of violence offences where a gun was discharged and where a knife was used to injure would continue to be reported to the Authority on a regular basis.
• KPI 2 - The number of sanction detections for rape – success measured by the increase in sanction detections for rape in 2013/14 than in 2010/11.
• KPI 3 - The number of people killed or seriously injured (KSIs) in road collisions – success measured by the reduction in KSIs in the calendar year 2013 compared to 2010.
• KPI 4 - Property portfolio crime – success measured by the reduction in property crime in 2013/14 compared to the level in 2010/11. As with violence, the numbers of these offences where guns were discharged and where knives were used to injure would be reported on regularly.
• KPI 5 - Anti social behaviour incidents - there will be an amended national definition for 2011/12 and so it should be a base line year with a target set once a year’s comparable data is available.
• KPI 6 - People who think the local police are doing a good job as per the MPS’s Public Attitude Survey – success measured by an increase in the percentage of people think the local police are doing a good job for 2013/14 compared to 2010/11.
• KPI 7 - User satisfaction with overall service – success measured by the increase in percentage of users are satisfied with the overall service for the year 2013/14 compared to 2010/11.
  

C. Other organisational & community implications

Equality and Diversity Impact

1. The planning and performance framework for 2011-14 will help to ensure that equalities and diversity implications are properly reflected in budget and business plans. Throughout the planning process Business Groups have been encouraged to consider the impact they have on internal and external communities and therefore develop activities that reflects the Service's commitment to equality and diversity issues.

Consideration of MET Forward

2. The developing Policing London Business Plan 2011-14 is drafted in full consideration of Met Forward: Two and follows the same themes and outcomes for policing London.

Financial Implications

3. The developing Policing London Business Plan 2011-14 reflects the financial environment within which the Service must operate. The proposals on KPI aim to help the Service make the best use of its resources in delivering agreed objectives.

Legal Implications

4. The MPA has a duty to secure the maintenance of an efficient and effective police force for its area and a duty to hold the Chief Officer to account for the exercise of his functions and those persons under his direction and control, under s6 of the Police Act 1996.

5. The MPA are also required to monitor the MPS’s performance against the Policing Plan under s6ZA of the Police Act 1996, as inserted by paragraph 8, Schedule 2 of the Police & Justice Act 2006 and the Police Authorities (Particular Functions & Transitional Provisions) Order 2008, as amended.

6. The proposed key performance indicators identified for inclusion within the Policing Plan 2011/14 will ensure a cross-section of policing activity can be monitored and that the police deliver on these priorities.

7. The Strategic Operational Committee is the relevant committee to receive and agree the recommendations within this report (prior to final agreement of the Policing Plan 2011/14 by Members at Full Authority) as it is responsible for considering and performance indicators set locally or externally.

Environmental Implications

8. The proposed performance framework (as delivered by a robust planning framework) will help to ensure that environmental sustainability issues are properly reflected in future plans and budgets.

Risk Implications

9. There is a risk of setting targets in a challenging environment that prove to be unachievable due to unknowns, or known unknowns.

D. Background papers

None

E. Contact details

Report author: Anne McMeel, Director of Resources, MPS

For information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback