Review of the Resource Allocation Formula (RAF) 2005/06

Report: 4
Date: 11 February 2005
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report provides an explanation of the new formula that will be used to allocate police officers between Borough Operational Command Units (BOCUs) for 2005/06. The report proposes a number of options for implementing the results of the review, a recommendation for the preferred option and how this might be funded.

A. Recommendations

1. members agree the structure and weightings of the new formula that will be used to allocate police officers between BOCUs;
2. members agree an allocation process to BOCUs based on the application of a 2% cap against the existing Budgeted Workforce Targets (BWTs), and ensuring that no BOCU loses officers against its existing BWT; and
3. members agree the process for funding the additional resources required to support the no losers approach through deferment of equivalent new growth pending the outcome of the Service Review.

B. Supporting information

Context and current position

1. The Resource Allocation Formula (RAF) is currently used to allocate police officers between the 32 BOCUs across London and was approved by the Metropolitan Police Authority in January 2002 for three years. The formula is used to apportion an agreed level of resources, it is not used to decide what the appropriate overall budget to BOCUs should be. The formula is applied only to the BOCU element of the Territorial Policing budget and also does not extend to the Safer Neighbourhood teams, which are funded separately.

2. The RAF is therefore only part of the picture when considering how resources are deployed on boroughs. For example, in addition to the Safer Neighbourhood teams there are a number of specialist units and officers working on boroughs every day that are not covered by the formula such as murder teams, child protection teams and firearms officers. The project team will make available to members an illustration of the level of deployments that Specialist Crime, Specialist Operations and the pan London Territorial Support Group have made over the first seven months of 2004/05, but this is by no means exhaustive. These units enhance the policing services provided by their existing BOCU colleagues, who also include PCSOs, police staff and the Special Constabulary, and form a significant element of the overall MPS budget directed towards borough policing.

3. This report is specifically concerned with that resourcing covered by the Resource Allocation Formula and builds on the proposal brought to this committee in July 2004, which set out the key elements that will be captured in the new formula used to allocate police officers. At that meeting members broadly agreed to the substance of the two main components of the formula, Demand and Need. These are designed to reflect both the reactive element of policing and the longer-term social and environmental factors present on boroughs.

4. Since July the project team have consolidated the most appropriate measures and weightings contained within each of the two main components. These determine the various influences that each issue or activity will have on the outcome of the model. At the same time, the team has developed structures for the remaining two components in the formula, Opening the Shop and Capital City & Security. The rationale behind the inclusion of these components and what they are designed to represent is set out later in this paper. The full structure of the new formula, including the proposed high-level weightings between the components, is attached at Appendix 1.

Need component

5. The Need component is intended to reflect the longer term social and environmental factors that affect the need for policing on boroughs. The component moderates the year on year fluctuations in crimes and incidents that are measured within the reactive policing component (Demand). Through the workshop process 11 separate indicators of the need for policing have been identified, which have informed the Need component of RAF.

6. The indicators either contribute to the volume of incidents (i.e. levels of crime) such as deprivation, or make an incident that is already being dealt with more resource intensive (complexity) such as geography. Some of the indicators fall into both categories and add to both volume and complexity such as drug abuse. The indicators that have been identified as generating a need for policing are set out in Appendix 2.

7. The project team has removed ‘future commercial and residential developments’ from the list of 11 indicators previously proposed by stakeholders. This is because the best measure for this indicator currently available is a GLA database of planning applications approved by local authorities, which is seen as unsuitable for the following reasons:

• not all local authorities are consistently represented on the database
• not all planning permissions proceed to construction
• it is not easy to establish a link between the type and scale of development and the need for policing; and
• some of the largest projects e.g. Thames Gateway are not included on the database due to their lead times etc.

8. The remaining indicators have been modelled in the Need component by assessing how each affects the volume of crime on a borough and therefore the predicted need for policing. The statistical technique known as regression analysis has been used to calculate the appropriate weightings for those indicators associated with crime e.g. the greater the level of deprivation present on a borough, the higher the level of crime.

9. Those indicators that also lead to an increased complexity in policing, such as dealing with people with mental illness, have been accounted for elsewhere in the model within the Demand component. This is to recognise the consequent increase in workload associated with these people both as perpetrators and victims (e.g. requirement to involve social services).

10. The benefits of treating volume and complexity discretely in the formula are:

• All indicators identified can be included in the model.
• It recognises the additional resources required to support victims and people affected by the crime.
• The weightings within the Need component are significantly informed by an established statistical technique.
• Weightings can also be applied that reflect the complexity of policing and incorporated within the Demand component.
• It takes advantage of the knowledge and experience of operational police officers.

11. The project team has written to all local Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRPs) setting out the structure of the proposed Need component and invited views. Four CDRPs responded and stated that they were broadly content with the approach taken. There have been no negative responses.

Demand component

12. The Demand component is intended to reflect the response element of policing and incorporates the initial police response to an incident or crime, the subsequent investigation where appropriate and the prisoner processing and post charge activity carried out by police officers.

13. This component captures all the reported incidents and crimes investigated on a borough and records what police are actually dealing with on a daily basis. As with the Need component, the project team has utilised the knowledge and experience of practitioners on BOCUs using a structured process. These officers have been able to provide an informed view on the relative workload associated with various activities and this has strongly influenced the weightings within the Demand component.

14. The four main phases of the component i.e. initial response, crime investigation, prisoner processing and post charge activity are set out in the ‘Demand triangle’ attached at Appendix 3. Weightings have been applied to the activities within each phase to reflect the relative workload associated with them e.g. rape investigation is significantly more resource intensive than burglary. The four phases have subsequently been weighted relative to each other to reflect the resources used at each phase. The weightings demonstrate that more than 80% of this reactive workload is concerned with initial response and crime investigation.

15. The Demand triangle illustrates the workload associated with carrying out specific policing functions. The complexity factor has been incorporated into Demand which represents a compounding resource requirement when dealing with people that display certain characteristics e.g. mental illness, alcohol abuse. Police practitioners were asked to assess the relative increase in workload for each complexity factor. These factors have been weighted accordingly and are set out in Appendix 4. The complexity element has been used as a multiplier within Demand to acknowledge these additional policing requirements.

Need and Demand high level weightings

16. The high level weightings in the existing RAF model for Need and Demand are in the ratio of 60/40 in favour of Need (these are converted to 54% and 36% respectively once the Opening the Shop and Capital City components are taken into account). There is no quantitative way of deciding the relative weightings of these two components; it is largely a matter of professional judgement.

17. The structure of the new formula incorporates BOCU workloads associated with criminal justice processes for the first time. The Demand component will also reflect the workload generated by all screened in crimes, which are weighted according to the investigative effort and resources required. The Need component, on the other hand, includes enhanced alcohol abuse data and drugs and mental health data for the first time.

18. At a forum held on 9 July 2004 open to all internal and external stakeholders who attended the formula development workshops, the delegates present voted for a shift in the high level weightings towards Demand.

19. Many external stakeholders and BOCU Commanders are of the view that the reactive workload that police officers are engaged in every day should drive the allocation process more than the existing 36%. It is proposed that there should be a 50/50 ratio between Need and Demand in the new formula.

Opening the shop

20. The purpose of this component is to ensure that each BOCU has sufficient resources to post police officers to those functions that are designated as mandatory such as custody officer or counter terrorist Rainbow officer. This component assists the smaller BOCUs since it recognises that certain posts have to be filled to ‘open for business’ irrespective of the amount of resources allocated to the BOCU. Opening the Shop is essentially not volume related and is generally the same for every BOCU.

21. Under the existing RAF the minimum number of police posts allocated to each BOCU via Opening the Shop is 26. However, over the last three years the number of posts identified as mandatory on BOCUs by the project team has increased significantly, including anti-terrorism patrol (bomb car), Sapphire team (sexual offences investigation), integrated borough operations units and liaison officers for prolific and priority offenders. This has increased the minimum number of posts allocated under this component to 53 (Westminster has been treated separately to recognise the scale of infrastructure). The full breakdown of posts allocated under this component is attached at Appendix 5.

Capital City and security

22. This component is designed to reflect the additional activities associated with policing central London that are not adequately captured elsewhere in the formula, particularly with regard to visibility and security requirements, high numbers of symbolic sites and the volume of visitors. In the new formula the Capital City & Security component is quantifiably based on data around the government security zone and top tourist attractions.

23. In the existing formula this component has a high level weighting of 3%. In view of the increased security requirements since the previous review the project team recommends that the high level weighting for the component should be increased to 3.5%. A more significant increase to this component will have a destabilising effect on the formula.

24. It is proposed that the government security zone covering security post requirements in Westminster, Lambeth, Tower Hamlets and the fixed security posts in Greenwich for Belmarsh Court should be allocated 50% of the resources under this component to reflect the continuing specific security requirements affecting these boroughs.

25. The project team recommends that the other 50% of this component should be allocated to boroughs in accordance with the number of tourist attractions with more than 1 million visitors per year (excluding parks). This approach is intended to reflect the increased footfall of tourists and visitors attracted to these areas. There is no intention to establish any relationship between the population visiting these attractions and the number of crimes and incidents that take place. A detailed breakdown of this component is attached at Appendix 6.

Commissioner’s judgement

26. This element recognises that no formula, however sophisticated, can take account of all factors and eventualities. Commissioner’s Judgement is not a part of the formula itself but is a discretionary element which can be applied in exceptional circumstances when the Commissioner decides that the addition of police officers in one borough results in a safer city than if those officers were allocated according to the formula. In terms of overall impact on the formula, this is likely to be negligible since any allocations are unlikely to exceed 0.2% of the total number of officers to be apportioned.

27. Commissioner’s Judgement might typically be applied in one or more of the following circumstances:

• If there are compelling operational imperatives that are insufficiently captured by the formula.
• If there is a specific operational need, not replicated on other boroughs, that requires the significant additional ongoing deployment of BOCU officers.
• If the Commissioner considers that the safety of London might be enhanced by such an additional allocation.

28. Implementing the results of the review

There are essentially two options being proposed to this committee; one based on the pure outcomes from the formula review and the other based on the application of a 2% ‘cap’ against the existing Budgeted Workforce Target (BWT). This second option helps to contain the movement of officers between boroughs to a manageable level. With each option there is an opportunity to implement the results so that no borough loses police officers.

‘No losing boroughs’

29. The ‘no losers’ approach was one of the original aims set out by the MPA Project Board when the terms of reference for the review were agreed in November 2003. It was intended to protect those BOCUs that fared less well under this review compared with their current BWT, which has been informed by the existing formula. This approach was adopted by the Authority three years ago when the existing formula was implemented and was considered to be the fairest and most practical means of implementing the results.

30. The MPS proposes a similar ‘no losers’ approach when implementing the results of this review since it has a number of benefits:

• there is no reduction in the number of officers allocated to any borough
• it avoids the situation where a BOCU that has additional officers which are purchased by partners could be perceived as having those same officers removed by the formula. The MPS and MPA does not wish to discourage partners from purchasing additional officers that will clearly benefit policing services locally
• it minimises the shift in resources between boroughs that could adversely affect operational delivery.

31. If the pure RAF outcomes are applied some boroughs stand to gain or lose up to 30 officers. If those boroughs that would otherwise lose officers are allocated their existing BWTs (i.e. no losers) the number of additional officers required to implement this option is 176 at a cost of around £6.7 million, which includes a contribution towards support costs.

‘Capping the results’

32. With the application of a 2% ‘cap’ no borough will gain or lose more than 15 officers. If the no losers approach as outlined above is adopted under this option, the number of additional officers required to implement is only 106 at a cost of around £4 million, which similarly includes a contribution towards support costs. The project team considers this to be the most appropriate option since it provides all of the following four benefits:

• it is a move towards a fairer allocation of resources
• there is reduced shift in resources between boroughs
• no borough is disadvantaged, and
• it can be funded more easily within existing resources.

This option has been discussed fully with the Chair of the Authority who has endorsed the recommendation of the project team.

The MPS Service Review

33. The Commissioner and the MPA have now launched the Service Review which will fundamentally examine the ways in which policing services are delivered. This review is intended to identify efficiency opportunities and scope for redirecting resources and is due to report in September 2005.

34. Such a wide ranging review is likely to result in a much reshaped organisation which is better structured to provide the policing service that the people who live or work in London expect. As such, the current funding and allocation arrangements to boroughs set out in this paper may well become transformed in the years ahead as the MPS establishes different structures that meet these changing needs. In particular, the number of officers provided by these options is not immune from alteration by the Service Review.

Funding the implementation of the RAF review

35. If the review is to be implemented with no losers, and with the application of a 2% cap, it will be necessary to fund an additional 106 police officers. There is no additional funding available at this stage beyond that reflected in the draft 2005/06 budget which is about to be approved by the Mayor and London Assembly. Within the draft budget there is provision for new growth, other than Step Change, totalling £17.7 million. It is proposed that the MPS Management Board identify £4 million of growth items which could be deferred pending the outcome of the Service Review. This would release sufficient funding to meet the cost of 106 police officers plus a proportion of the supporting costs. The deferred growth would be able to proceed once the resources have been identified in the Service Review which can be redirected to these purposes.

36. The MPS also proposes to bring forward the growth in Specialist Operations (SO) and Specialist Crime (SC) under the Step Change Programme to 1 October 2005 (i.e. extended from the four month funding proposal set out in the MPA Budget Submission 2005/06) to deliver truly Safer Neighbourhoods. The cost of this is an additional £1.02 million. It is therefore proposed that the MPS Management Board identifies a total of £5.02 million of these growth items which could be deferred pending the outcome of the Service Review.

37. Members are asked to approve the option at paragraph 32. An exemplification will be provided at the meeting.

C. Race and equality impact

1. Diversity issues are recognised within both major components of the formula.

2. In the Need component there is an index of population diversity which is used to capture the size and number of ethnic categories in London, and the issues that affect these communities, such as different cultures and vulnerability to crime.

3. The Demand component of the formula takes into account the complexity of dealing with people who have English as a second language, both as victims and perpetrators of crime, and the additional workload that this entails.

D. Financial implications

1 The key financial implications arising from this report concern the implementation of RAF and, in particular, how to support those boroughs that would potentially lose officers under the new formula. The cost of maintaining those boroughs at existing Budgeted Workforce Targets with a capped application is £5 million, of which £3.3 million represents police officer pay. A sum of £4 million would cover the cost of officers plus immediate supporting costs. The additional cost of bringing forward the Step Change growth to support Safer Neighbourhoods is £1.02 million.

2. The total sum required of £5.02 million will be found within the existing draft budget by deferring an equivalent value of new growth other than Step Change. The deferred growth will be specifically identified when the MPA is asked to approve the final budget allocation at its March meeting. The deferred growth can be reinstated once the Service Review has identified sufficient resources to be redirected for these purposes.

E. Background papers

• COP Committee Report 4 19 July 2004

F. Contact details

Report author: Michael Debens, RAF Project Manager

For more information contact:

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

Appendix 1: Overview of new formula, including proposed high level weightings

* Figures in brackets indicate percentages in the existing RAF

Need

The levels of crime predicted by the social and environmental needs of a borough represented by a range of ‘need’ indicators and associated measures (see list at Appendix 2). This component reflects the longer term issues present on a borough and moderates the year on year fluctuations in the numbers of crimes and incidents taking place.

Demand

The number of reported incidents, crimes and associated case papers processed on a borough. This includes the workload associated with responding to calls, investigating crime, processing prisoners through custody and preparing cases for court.

Capital City & Security

This relates to the special requirements of London as a capital city and, in particular, central London. It includes issues such as terrorism, the ‘shop window’ effect and tourism. The component is built up from the number of officers permanently and exclusively posted to anti-terrorist and security patrols on a BOCU, as well as the number of visitors to London’s top tourist attractions (based on London Tourist Board data)

Opening the Shop

This relates to the core infrastructure posts for the BOCU, takes account of the resourcing implications of posts that are designated as mandatory and thus underpins the operational resilience of the BOCU. Essentially, this component is not related to volume and will be the same allocation for every BOCU. A full list of the proposed posts is attached at Appendix 5

Commissioner’s Judgement

This is a discretionary element that is not part of the formula itself. It is applied in exceptional circumstances when the Commissioner decides that the addition of police officers in one borough results in a safer city than if those officers were allocated according to the formula

Appendix 2: Need Component – Indicators and Measures

Some of these indicators cover a number of different issues and so feature both under Need (as they are associated with crime levels) and under Demand (as workload complexity factors). Indicators that are related to volume are denoted by a ‘V’, those that are related to complexity by a ‘C’, and those related to both by a ‘V&C’.

NOTE: the indicators below are listed in alphabetical order, not in order of importance.

* Diverse communities as defined as an identifiable group of people e.g. by ethnicity. Other diverse communities such as gender, disability, age and sexual orientation were considered. These communities are either reflected elsewhere in the formula (e.g. young people as a discrete indicator), the distribution is even across all boroughs (e.g. gender) or suitable measures do not exist to adequately capture the associated policing issue (e.g. sexual orientation).

Indicators used under Need (Volume)

Alcohol abuse/ Night time population

Issues:

• Late night town centre disorder, including violent crime
• Other public order issues associated with alcohol consumption

Measure:

• Score incorporating the number of licensed premises (pubs, nightclubs) their capacity and their opening hours, based on licensing data held by BOCUs.

Deprivation

Issue:

• Levels of crime tend to correlate with levels of deprivation, both in terms of victimisation and perpetrators.

Measure:

• Income deprivation and employment deprivation domains of the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) Local Index of Multiple Deprivation

Diverse communities

Issues:

• Issues that affect these communities (e.g. different cultures)
• Recently arrived communities, tensions with established communities. This may lead to a greater need for policing, e.g. conflicts, hate crimes.
• Victimisation e.g. harassment, vulnerable victims
• Greater likelihood to under-report crimes, e.g. hate crime

Measures:

• Index of Population Diversity – constructed on the number and the size of ethnic communities in each borough (based on Census figures)
• Number of asylum applicants in receipt of subsistence only support from the National Asylum Support Service, and supported in National Asylum Support Service accommodation, available for 2002 from Office of National Statistics (ONS)

Drugs

Issue: 

• Relationship between drug use and other crimes

Measure: 

• the number of people receiving drug treatment in 2003/04 by borough of residence

Mental illness

Issues:

• More likely to be the subject of a missing persons enquiry
• Relationship with victimisation
• Large volume of incidents caused by dysfunctional behaviour associated with a wide spectrum of mental disorders

Measure:

• the Mental Illness Need Index (MINI index) (derived from individual domain scores from the DETR Index of Multiple Deprivation 2000), widely used in the NHS.

Retail activity

Issue: 

• volume crime issue: retail premises (e.g. shopping centres) can attract offenders (visitors as potential victims), and the premises can be targets of crime, e.g. shoplifting, credit card fraud, theft by employees, criminal damage.

Measure: 

• retail sector employment per borough provided by the Greater London Authority (GLA)

Transient population excluding night-time population associated with licensed premises (see above)

Issue: 

• link between the size of population and the number of potential victims and perpetrators

Measure: 

• number of day-time trips (including public transport and car travel) on a week day by residents of the London area - London Area Transport Survey

Young people, schools

Issues:

• Young people are at risk of both offending and victimisation
• Crime prevention, advice and diversion activity around young people

Measures:

• Pupil Level Annual School Census (PLASC) data on number of pupils in secondary education per borough of school
• Census figures on number of residents aged 11-17
• Census figures on number of residents aged 18-24

Young people with low educational attainment

Issues:

• Poor educational attainment is a good indicator of current and future involvement in anti-social behaviour and criminal activity
• Educational attainment may be related to certain cognitive characteristics that make an individual more likely to be involved in anti-social behaviour, including sense of self worth, impulsivity, difficulty in thinking ahead, etc.
• Diversion, prevention

Measures:

• PLASC data on GCSE pass rates by borough of school and residence

Indicators used under Demand (Complexity)

Alcohol abuse

Issues:

• People under the influence of alcohol are more difficult to deal with
• Officer safety issue, victim/witness safety

Measure:

• as above

Language barrier and asylum seekers (element of Diverse Communities)

Issues:

• Added complexity in dealing with victims and perpetrators (e.g. language, cultural barriers)
• Provision of additional support when dealing with victims and perpetrators who are asylum seekers

Measures:

• PLASC figures on English as a second language by borough of residence
• Number of asylum applicants (as above)

Drugs

Issues:

• Dysfunctional behaviour associated with drug abuse may add a degree of complexity to the whole spectrum of police activity, e.g. officer safety issue, difficult to reason with the individual
• Added resource intensiveness in each interaction, more likely to require a greater number of interactions in the long run (e.g. less likely to turn up at court, to pay fines)

Measure:

• Number of people receiving drug treatment in 2003/04 both by borough of treatment and by borough of residence

Geography

Issues:

• Deployment/redeployment of BOCU officers
• Difficulty in obtaining rapid support from central units, e.g. Territorial Support Group (TSG) and Armed Response Vehicles (ARVs)
• Officer safety issues

Measure: 

• score that takes account of the shape of the borough, the location of police stations and its location within the Metropolitan Police District.

Mental illness

Issue: 

• added degree of complexity to dealing with incidents involving people with a mental illness, both as victims and as offenders (the greater the propensity for mental illness on a borough, the greater the likelihood that dealing with incidents will be more complex).

Measure:

• as above

Young people

Issue: 

• added complexity associated with dealing with a person under the age of 18 as a victim, witness or perpetrator (e.g. appropriate adult)

Measure:

• Census figures on number of residents under the age of 18

Appendix 4: Demand Component Weightings to reflect the complexity of policing

The following indicators were identified as adding complexity to policing. A police practitioner workshop assessed the relative weights of the indicators on the basis of associated workload (see paragraph 15)

Appendix 5: Police Officer Opening the Shop

 These represent the core posts to ‘open the shop’. The size of some of these units will be determined by Need or Demand.

The standard number of officers needed to staff a 24/7 post is 5.4, based on the following formula:

[365 (days) x 3 (shifts)] divided by [204 (effective days)] = 5.37 rounded to 5.4

Appendix 6: Capital City & Security Component

1. Security

The security element comprises those posts designated for the Government Security Zone, Canary Wharf and Belmarsh Court.

2. Tourism

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback