MPS partnerships and Local Area Agreements

Report: 7
Date: 3 May 2007
By: Assistant Commissioner Territorial Policing on behalf of the Commissioner

Summary

The report provides an update to one presented to Full Authority in May 2006. It covers the work to date on developing a corporate stance in respect of Local Area Agreements, in the wider context of a corporate partnership policy statement supported by Standard Operating Procedures. A draft of the proposed policy has been prepared and is now at the consultation stage.

Also contained within this report is an outcome summary of joint work carried out by partnership officers from the Authority and from the MPS.

A. Recommendations

That the Committee

1. notes the content of this report; and
2. receives an update on Local Area Agreements at its meeting in December 2007

B. Supporting information

Rationale for this report

1. This report is a follow up to one presented to Full Authority in May 2006 which dealt with MPS involvement in the Local Area Agreement (LAA) process. On that occasion, the MPS was asked to prepare corporate policy covering engagement in LAAs. The present paper provides an update on this work, in particular the review of Round 2 boroughs.

2. In January 2007, the Authority’s Internal Audit Directorate published a report: ‘Review of Partnerships – Funding and Control’. This report was the final product of work spanning the period during which the MPS conducted the Service Review. An emerging theme in these reviews is the clearly identified need to formulate corporate policy for partnership activity. Support for such a policy may also be found in the Audit Commission report on managing partnerships.

3. It has been recommended that a single partnership policy be generated which, in its Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs), deals with the role of the MPS in the LAA process. In the period since this matter was last presented to the Authority, the white paper on local government has been published (Oct 2006) and a recent document – Developing the future arrangements for Local Area Agreements (DCLG March 2007) – has set out plans for significant changes to the existing LAA model, arising out of the white paper. All of these publications have by necessity delayed the formal agreement and publication of Corporate policy. As a consequence, 2007/08 is described, in the above mentioned DCLG paper, as a year of transition and preparation for the new LAAs. The development of LAAs will be a significant area of work. It is proposed that an annual review of progress will be brought back to the Committee in December 2007.

Key elements in the new approach to LAAs

4. The new LAA model will see a move away from a concentration on funding to a focus on a specific, limited number of targets bringing together the following: a ‘base set of pre-existing statutory educational and early years targets’ (of which there are currently 18); a set of up to 35 ‘improvement targets’ taken from the national indicator set; and a number of specifically local targets. The local targets will not be monitored beyond the local partnership level.

5. The existing LAA framework consists of four blocks: 1. Building Safer &, Stronger Communities, 2. Children and Young People, 3. Healthy Communities and Older People, 4. Enterprise and Economic development. The funding is also channelled into these four blocks. In order to move away from a funding-focused process, these blocks will now be expressed as ‘themes’ with the fourth being Economic Development and Environment. The aim is to encourage a greater sense of common endeavour through more crosscutting priorities bridging the themes.

6. In respect of funding, the new LAAs will be supported by a significantly wider range of funding sources which, the paper states will include ‘Council Tax, mainstream funding (inc. Police and PCT), formula grant, Single Capital Pot and more. This broadening of the funding captured by the LAA requires the direct involvement of a range of partners including the police. The planned legislation sets out the named partners expected to participate in the planning and delivery of the LAA, these include, the Chief Officer of Police and the Police Authority. While the local authority is clearly required to take a leading role in the process, it will not be able to impose targets on named partners. The Authority needs to be alert to the possibility of top slicing of police grant and ensure that a fair share of any such top slicing is received.

Results of joint MPA/MPS review of police engagement in round 2 LAAs

7. In the last quarter of 2006, MPA partnership officers worked with counterparts from the MPS to carry out a review of police involvement in the 15 round 2 LAAs. This exercise involved visits and interviews with borough commanders and police partnership leads in each of the relevant boroughs. The findings of this review have informed the guidance contained in the SOP within the draft partnership policy. It will also be used to maximise the engagement of borough police in the transitional planning phase leading to the new LAAs beginning in April 2008. That date coinciding also with the implementation of the Crime and Disorder Act Review recommendations.

8. In summary, the review found that there was evidence of the direct involvement of senior police managers in the negotiation of the LAAs, with a particular and understandable focus on the Safer and Stronger Communities element. In addition, the majority of interviewees reported the belief that the process has strengthened the existing partnership.

9. It appears that for some the LAA is seen as largely synonymous with the former Local Public Service Agreement (LPSA) process. The close association arises out of the focus on stretch targets with their related pump-priming funding and potential reward grant. The great majority of agreements contained stretch targets with specific relevance to policing (often connected with domestic violence or other violent crime, and community engagement targets). In addition there are targets which appear to be unrelated to policing but towards which the police can make a contribution. For instance an educational attainment target may require work on attendance and reducing truancy and the police may assist with this issue. In the same way, policing targets are often dependent on the efforts of other agencies. This is no more perhaps than the basic rationale for partnership working. The review showed that some boroughs have made explicit undertakings across the partnerships through which individual agencies declare specific activities in support of each other’s targets – this is identified as good practice. In addition, some boroughs had identified an SMT lead for each of the policing related stretch targets and these are also reflected in tasking and coordination group planning.

10. The review appeared to confirm the wider findings in respect of existing LAAs in that there is a tendency to see them as largely peripheral to the core business of partner agencies and also to see them as predominantly a funding initiative relevant to the local authority. The LAA block system seems on the one hand to have provided some definition within what is a broad spectrum of public service delivery. However, it has also encouraged or maintained an element of silo working, whereby partners concentrate exclusively on what they perceive to be their own block. Hence the police may focus exclusively on the Safer and Stronger Communities block. As a consequence there is perhaps less attention to cross-cutting priorities than might have been hoped; an issue that is to be addressed under the new LAA framework.

11. It was interesting to note that for one or two boroughs, where crime managers were overseeing policing related targets, partnership lead officers identified within their role the task of looking at the work being done under other block headings. Again, this is a useful emphasis. In some cases there appeared to be good oversight of the LAA at the level of Local Strategic Partnership executive board but that more effective cross-cutting activity would be achieved by cascading this broader overview to other levels within partner agencies.

12. There was broad consensus that a potential conflict exists between corporate and national priorities and targets identified as priorities by local partnerships. Clearly, in boroughs where there was a match between local and national priorities, the problem was not marked. However, for others the perception was that their performance continued to be measured against corporate priorities and the LAA appeared simply to add to the number of targets upon which they were to be assessed. Again, it seems that this issue may be addressed under the new framework.

Key features of proposed partnership policy

13. The draft policy recognises that the term ‘partnership’ is potentially ambiguous, meaning different things in different circumstances. Furthermore, there is existing policy and guidance covering activities which would constitute partnership working – for instance sponsorship and trading. As a consequence, this draft policy has been prepared as a corporate document but with specific attention to identified gaps and also with a particular eye to the work of Territorial Policing through the 32 borough operational command units (BOCUs). What follows is a summary of main elements within the proposed policy and supporting SOPs. These subsections also relate to the main points contained in the Internal Audit recommendations.

Defining partnership working

14. Part of the rationale for the policy is the imperative accurately to define and record partnership activity. To this end, a definition is contained within the policy which is intended to identify two key features of partnership working, each of which carry business risks and therefore justify policy: the first relates to partnerships in which police representatives may commit resources to support a common partnership aim; the second relates to partnerships on which police representatives sit, and which in the course of operating, draw down funding from sources external to the MPS or its Authority. In the first instance the concerns revolve around the extent of overall commitment of resources and the need to meet the expectations of partners in the context of ever changing policing demands. In the second area, concern really focuses on demonstrable compliance with financial regulations. There is an over-arching need to ensure that partnership, valuable as it is in so many ways, does not become an end in itself and that the MPS – through its representatives – enters into partnerships that are consistent with corporate objectives.

Commitment of MPS resources

15. The particular difficulty with this aspect of partnerships is that it covers such a wide range of activities, extending from the commitment of perhaps an individual member of the MPS sitting on a partnership board all the way to the commitment by senior managers of significant resources to a partnership initiative as part of core police business. The aim of any policy in this area must be to maximise clarity and accountability while minimising restrictions on the development of effective partnerships. To this end, what is needed in the policy is a requirement to report relevant activity to the named partnership lead, using the existing line management structure to authorise any commitment.

Funding

16. With regard to the financial accounting requirements associated with partnership funding, the LAA seems to place the principal obligation on the local authority as the primary recipient of the funding. However, the pump-priming money that stretch targets attract as well as the funding that follows specific pieces of work, creates a need to ensure effective controls within individual partner agencies, including the police. The MPS, through Business Support, Finance Services, offers clear guidance and has systems in place for managing this funding. The draft partnership policy provides signposting to the relevant aspects of this guidance.

Consistency with corporate priorities

17. There is a widely recognised need to ensure that partnership activity, while being an indispensable aspect of public service delivery, does not run contrary to the primary aims and objectives of the MPS. The proliferation of various forms of partnership across all 32 boroughs generates the potential collectively to impact significantly on resources. The first task in establishing or reviewing a partnership is to ask whether it is operating in support of the organisation’s priorities. An additional reason for this is subsequently to enable effective evaluation of a given partnership.

Compliance

18. While it is recognised that much of the work covered by the policy will be carried out on individual Operation Command Units, where the primary responsibility for ensuring compliance will remain, there is a clear requirement for central monitoring. This function is necessary to maintain a corporate picture of partnership activity and within this to manage business risks associated with the multiplicity of initiatives and partnership ventures across the organisation. This central function is currently fulfilled through regular audits by Business Support accountants. However, the Authority’s Audit report highlighted a need for greater certainty that all relevant activity is being identified and reported.

19. In addition, the central monitoring function is a valuable aid to the identification and dissemination of good practice. This point was recognised some time ago in the Scrutiny Report (2003) which recommended the establishment of a corporate partnership team. This team, which combines partnership and crime prevention, is located within the Safer Neighbourhoods Unit in the Territorial Policing command. The team is responsible for drafting the policy in consultation with others and will, in due course review the policy, specifically in the light of the further developments affecting LAAs, as outlined above.

Business risk management

20. The identification and management of business risks accruing through partnership working is a recognised priority. The draft policy includes reference to this and links to guidance being developed by the MPS Risk Management team. The principle upon which this process operates is that risk management is a responsibility of the individual OCU and for MPS personnel engaging in partnerships. However, the central team will provide guidance and training to enable staff to fulfil this function. The process is also graduated to minimise bureaucracy for the lower risk activities.

LAA Guidance

21. Since the pilot agreements were negotiated and signed in April 2005, guidance from the relevant government department (then ODPM, now DCLG) has developed considerably as lessons are learned from the earlier stages. This evolutionary approach has given way to significant changes outlined in the recent document ‘Developing the future arrangements for Local Area Agreements. It is against this background that the element relating to LAAs, within the policy, has been written.

22. It should be noted that the current transition to new LAAs means that the SOP relating to these agreements takes the form of guidance. The aim here is simply to recognise the ongoing and significant changes to the LAA framework. A subsequent review will establish whether changes to the policy are required. What is offered, at this point, is a self-assessment questionnaire for the use of BOCUs in monitoring the level of their own engagements with the LAA process.

Next steps

23. The draft policy requires the final approval of Policy Clearing House before being authorised for publication by the TP Command Team. There is, however, a final opportunity for consultation with senior BOCU managers at a seminar on 23 April 2007, in which the Authority will be involved. Additional elements, including Business Risk toolkits currently under development will be included in the policy in due course. The policy itself will be subject to review as outlined above, to take account of the developments affecting LAAs.

Abbreviations

LAA

Local Area Agreement

SOP

Standard Operating Procedure

DCLG

Dept. for Communities and Local Government

LPSA

Local Police Service Agreement

C. Race and equality impact

1. The policy and supporting SOPs are subject to ongoing Impact Assessment, a requirement for a new policy. While this is still to be completed, it is believed that there is a neutral impact in respect of diverse communities. If anything, the move towards formal agreements for partnerships and ensuring consistency with corporate priorities will encourage more targeted activity, addressing particular sections of the community with a view to improved engagement. It will also enable greater awareness of the range of partnerships in existence.

D. Financial implications

1. The terms of the policy do not require any new resources; they simply require actions within existing management roles. Much of the work is currently being done at a local level and the proposed policy will achieve demonstrable compliance across the many Operation Command Units engaging in partnerships.

2. The central teams referred to in the policy are in place and already work closely with boroughs to manage funding and advise of partnership initiatives. The introduction of Local Area Agreements has not so far added significantly to the workload of borough or central personnel. It will be necessary to reassess the position in the light of changes brought about the transition to new LAAs. As set out in the proposals for the new LAAs, the Police and the Police Authority have defined roles within the Local Strategic Partnership in developing the LAA.

3. One issue on which clarification will be sought from DCLG or Government Office as soon as possible is the future of the stretch target element contained within the existing LAA model. The document on the future of LAAs makes no reference to these although it is suggested, informally that they should continue, although the final decision may be dependent on the Treasury’s Comprehensive Spending Review. The specific issue for partnerships (and the MPS) is the use of pump-priming.

4. New budgetary and staffing commitments should not be entered into unless there is a clear written understanding/agreement that liabilities for continuing payment cease at the end of partnership funding monies to fund staff posts.

E. Background papers

• Developing the future arrangements for Local Area Agreements – DCLG, February 2007
• MPA Internal Audit Report January 2007
• Governing Partnerships: Bridging the Accountability Gap – Audit Commission, Oct 2005
• Local Area Agreements: Guidance for Round 3 and Refresh of Rounds 1 and 2. March 2006

F. Contact details

Report author: Andrew Bayes Partnership Team (TP), MPS.

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback