Integrated prosecution teams

Report: 12
Date: 6 December 2007
By: Assistant Commissioner Territorial Policing on behalf of the Commissioner

Summary

Report to the MPA on the proposal to introduce Integrated Prosecution Teams within the MPS.

A. Recommendations

That:

1. the Committee approve the continued roll out of the Integrated Prosecution Teams within the MPS;

2. note the cost and savings implications of implementing Integrated Prosecution Teams;

3. delegate authority to the MPS to implement the Integrated Prosecution Teams programme; and

4. approve the funding proposals for the programme including the carrying forward of TP resources totalling £5.1m.

B. Supporting information

1. This report deals with the implementation of Integrated Prosecution Teams (IPTs) and follows the piloting of the initiative at three sites (Hackney, Tower Hamlets and Waltham Forest). The initiative is part of the London Criminal Justice Board three-year (2008 – 2011) plan for delivering criminal justice. The aim is to deliver the best criminal justice in Europe through a programme of initiatives including:

• Integrated Prosecution Teams
• Simple Speedy Summary Justice
• Proportionate file build - Directors Guidance Quick Process
• Virtual Courts
• Improving Prisoner Availability
• Community Justice
• Conditional Cautions

2. The Integrated Prosecution Team concept involves the collocation of MPS and CPS staff in police stations in order to deliver a more effective service, efficiency savings, performance improvement and improved citizen focus. The principal methods of delivery will be the elimination of the substantial duplication that currently occurs between police and CPS and improvements in the initial case-build that dramatically reduces the need for post charge remedial work. The MPS is committed to reducing bureaucracy and unnecessary paper work to increase the provision of front line service.

3. The proposed structure of Integrated Prosecution Teams has been agreed between the MPS and CPS. The core elements are:

• MPS Casebuilders working in Case Progression Units preparing case files to the appropriate standard and eliminating subsequent remedial work.
• CPS staff doing the function formerly undertaken by MPS case clerks through elimination of the duplication between existing MPS and CPS administration, allowing MPS case clerks to be redeployed as Case Builders or within a post-prosecution support function.
•  MPS staff in a Post Prosecution Team, completing activities such as PNC resulting, CICA claims and compliance with Records Management Branch policy.

4. Employment of Case Builders, together with enhanced quality assurance within CPUs, would lead to the improved quality of case papers and less remedial work being required, allowing for swift progression of a single prosecution file through the criminal justice system.

5. The IPT initiative will build on work previously done on statutory charging and ‘No Witness No Justice’, and will allow the realization of maximum benefits from other CJ initiatives including the Director’s Guidance ‘Quick Process’, CJSSS ‘Simple Speedy Summary’ justice and minimum standards for file build, all of which place an increased emphasis on obtaining evidence and completing a set of correctly prepared proportionate case papers at an early stage.

6. Early preparation of case papers which are fit for purpose will have a positive impact on the effective trials rate and an increase in early guilty pleas. These in turn have an impact in terms of reducing unnecessary court hearings, increasing the number of offences brought to justice (OBTJs) and improving public confidence in the criminal justice system. Re-aligning CJU case clerks to CPUs as case builders will ensure a proactive approach to providing sufficient case papers at an early stage to meet the requirements outlined above.

7. Other options to improve the delivery of criminal justice and demonstrate cashable savings were considered. The options to do nothing or outsource CJU functions to CPS London were discounted due to legislative requirements, union and logistical issues. A third option to realign CJU Case Clerks to the case builder role within Case Progression Units to improve file quality was discounted as it not only did not deliver cashable savings but would have been difficult to resource.

8. The implementation of the Integrated Prosecution Teams will realize a saving of approximately 161 police staff posts from within existing Criminal Justice Units. This equates to a cashable saving of approx £4.5m on a year on year basis. In addition, the IPT will also deliver non-cashable savings in reducing duplication of paperwork in the region of £280,000 per annum.

9. Benefits:

• Cashable savings reduction in police staff posts
• Non cashable savings reduction in duplication and photocopying
• Improved efficiency most appropriate person undertakes task
• Improved criminal justice performance in relation to sanction detections, offences brought to justice, discontinuances and effective trials
• Improved confidence in the Criminal Justice System
• Improved satisfaction with service provided by police
• Speedier Justice, case builders ensuring file fit for purpose for first hearing
• Reduced Bureaucracy, Less police time spent building case files

10. The pilot sites have demonstrated the ability to realize the savings while experiencing no adverse impact in relation to ineffective and effective trials and the discontinuance rate. Performance in these areas remains comparable to pre IPT implementation data. They are currently in the process of being ‘signed off’ as having achieved the business norm for the new model.

11. It is proposed that the next sites to go live will be Bexley, Barnet and Westminster. The implementation preparation will commence in December 2007 and it is anticipated that the sites will go live in March 2008. Further roll out for the remaining 26 BOCUs will commence in April. A detailed delivery plan is currently being produced.

12 The construction works relating to the provision of suitable facilities will be broadly in line with the principles of the published MPA/MPS Environmental Strategy. Construction related works would, as far as practicable, adhere to the Mayors five Environmental Strategies concerning air quality, noise, biodiversity, climate and energy in undertaking the works.

C. Race and equality impact

See attached Equality and Impact Assessment at Appendix 1.

D. Financial implications

Approval is sought to the full rollout of the IPT programme across all boroughs. The table below shows the estimated costs and funding for the full rollout of IPT including the costs of the original pilot, which have already been reported to the MPA.

Table 1: Estimated costs and funding for the full rollout of IPT

2. On the basis of current estimates the costs in 2008/09 will be some £947,000 more than the provision in the draft 2008-11 budget submission. TP are satisfied that, if necessary, these costs can be managed within the approved budget. The anticipated savings in 2009/10 and beyond are higher than the provision in the current budget submission and will be available to contribute to TP’s future savings targets.

3. The accommodation and DOI estimates are based on the experience gained on the three pilot sites but must be considered indicative at this stage and will be kept under review. An allowance has been included for any building costs associated with displacing staff from existing accommodation to create the necessary space for co-located IPT. The DOI costs reflect CPS needs in placing their ICT on existing MPS infrastructure. Some elements of these costs may be capital in nature and if so will need to be added to the capital programme budget. To the extent that this is the case, any capital expenditure will be matched by a revenue contribution to capital. Any significant variation in costs will be subject of a further report to committee.

4. Provision for the set up costs was made within the TP budget for 2007/08. As the project has been delayed, they will now be incurred in 2008/09. Approval is, therefore, sought to carry forward these resources to cover these future costs.

5. The costs above assume full roll out of IPTs to existing borough accommodation. Where this is not possible it may be that some sites would need to wait until the creation of borough based custody centres. The impact of this would be to reduce the costs identified above.

6. The table above includes a share of the one off project costs for CPS of £1.9m (2007/08 -£0.6m, 2008/09 -£1.3m) to cover the cost of temporary staff during implementation that the MPS have agreed to pay to enable the CPS to undertake additional outstanding MPS and CPS actions on existing case files.

7. The MPS Project Team consists of 1 Inspector, 2 Sergeants, 1 Police Constable and 6 Band D’s at an annual total cost of £430,000 (based on TP average costs) to manage the research, planning, pilot and full implementation phases of this project.

8. By participating in this programme, the CPS will be able to dispose of existing accommodation assets. Additional savings may, therefore, be achieved following legal negotiations with CPS, in relation to any rent received for the occupation of MPS premises. This could range from £250,000 for a nominal rent to £2m based on Property Services market value estimates. These potential savings have not been included in the financial analysis for this programme. The lease agreement currently being negotiated between MPS and CPS will build in a provisional agreement in relation to rental charges and the requirement to review this in 2009. These values have not been included in the £4.8m savings identified.

E. LEGAL IMPLICATIONS

Letters of comfort covered the tenancy of the CPS in the three pilot sites. An overarching lease agreement is currently being drawn up between the two agencies. This lease agreement will cover issues such as CPS furniture, access to CPS IT and maintenance of the sites. In addition, the Lease agreements will cover issues relating to Health and Safety requirements.

F. Contact details

Report author: Mark Simmons, 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