Scrutiny of the Metropolitan Police Service performance and practice in Stop And Search - reference from Equal Opportunities and Diversity Board

Report: 16
Date: 09 January 2003
By: Clerk

Summary

At the December meeting of this Board, members asked that an early report be developed outlining proposals for a scrutiny into the MPS performance and practice in stop and search. This report outlines the initial proposals for members’ consideration.

A. Recommendations

Members are asked to:

1. Note and comment on the draft areas proposed for the scrutiny of stop and search in the MPS; appendix 1 paragraph 7.
2. Agree that a report be submitted to the next meeting of the Coordination and Policing Committee (CoP) to inform members of the Committee of the proposed scrutiny;
3. Approve the process outlined in paragraphs 10 to 14 to take forward the work on the scrutiny.
4. Note and comment on the proposed membership for the Scrutiny Panel in appendix 1 paragraph 8. (paragraph 16)

B. Supporting information

1. The most recent Home Office report ‘Race and the Criminal Justice System’ (see agenda item 12 on this agenda) published in November 2002, highlighted the increase in the levels of disportionality in stop and search for people of Black and Asian origin through all 43 police forces in England and Wales.

2. The Home Office has now established a new Unit to look into this issue across all the criminal justice agencies.

3. The sensitivity of policing stop and search is increasingly an issue, both nationally and within the MPS. Disportionality and perceived unfairness, threatens the operational effectiveness of stop and search as a tool to tackle crime, particularly street crime

Disportionality performance data in the MPS

4. The MPA has been monitoring the MPS equal opportunities and diversity data for some time. More recently, this Board has developed a process for receiving detailed performance data on a range of race, equal opportunities and diversity performance matters; of which stop and search is one aspect. Members have also considered a number of MPS reports outlining a range of initiatives in place for monitoring and measuring performance levels of stop and search at corporate and borough levels, including the External Fair Practice Monitoring initiative that has been recently implemented in boroughs.

5. What is apparent is that these measures have tended merely to reflect what is already happening, rather than seek to provide an understanding of some of the more difficult and searching ‘why’ questions or allowed the level of challenge or scrutiny that will stand the test of public confidence that the matter is being independently reviewed.

6. The MPS has recently established a working group to look in more detail at the issue of disproportionality in stop and search as well as other areas. This working group is chaired by Commander Cressida Dick and Lee Jasper, Policy Director to the Mayor of London. Cecile Wright, the Chair of this Board, represents the MPA. The MPA policy lead officer for equalities and diversity also attends these meetings. The MPS has a long established stop and search working group. Work is also now underway to progress the implementation of Recommendation 61 of the Stephen Lawrence Inquiry Report which it is anticipated will have an impact on stop and search.

MPA Scrutiny into Stop and Search

7. The prime function of the Equal Opportunities and Diversity Board is to lead by providing policy direction and guidance to the Authority and the MPS on all corporate policies, and other matters pertaining to equal opportunities and diversity. The EODB has been delegated the responsibility to enable and assist the Authority in addressing some of the more entrenched and difficult race, equal opportunities and diversity matters such as stop and search.

8. Despite all the work that has been carried out in this field, there remains a gap in understanding of the ways in which stop and search impacts specific communities and a role for the Authority in taking a lead to explore a range of views on this issue.

9. It was therefore agreed by this Board that it should conduct a scrutiny on the use of stop and search within the MPS. This decision will need to be endorsed by the Coordination and Policing Committee (CoP) as part of the overall decision-making process on MPA scrutinies.

10. Officers have drafted terms of reference of the Scrutiny for members’ consideration, including the benefits that the work could bring to the wider equal opportunities and diversity corporate direction of the Authority. This is attached at Appendix 1. The proposal aims to give members an overview of the scrutiny function and outlines, in brief detail, the four main aspects of the proposed scrutiny which are:

1. The use of profiling in stop and search
2. Use of stop and search data to inform police intelligence
3. The cost-effectiveness and efficiency of stop and search, and
4. The uses of stop and search performance to inform and engage communities.

11. These are headline areas only and detailed methodologies will need to be developed for each, including possible outcomes, so that the Board will be clear about the policy direction and practices that it may wish to see the MPS implement as an outcome of the scrutiny.

12. Preliminary contact has been made with several university departments to identify a suitable research student or researcher willing to conduct aspects of the work of the scrutiny, if approved by CoP.

13. Rather than await further reports to be brought to the March meeting of this Board, it is proposed that the Chair, in consultation with a small group of members, agrees the process for selecting the researcher who will undertake much of the work required.

Methodology for carrying out the scrutiny

14. The detailed methodology outlined in paragraph 7 in Appendix 1 builds on the methodology that has been used for the two previous scrutinies undertaken by the MPA. Much of the qualitative research and findings on areas such as person profiling is already in the public domain. Other aspects of the work such as the cost effectiveness may require methodologies to be developed that have not previously been used for MPA scrutinies. The stop and search scrutiny therefore has the potential to add to the value of what has developed previously.

Project Management and Guidance

15. MPA officers in the Performance and Review and Consultation and Diversity Units will provide the internal overview and management of the project. The Head of CDO will provide the day-to-day project management for the researcher carrying out the work with the Head of Performance and Review providing the expertise that will be required in terms of the methodological rigour of the scrutiny.

16. An essential pre-requisite of a credible scrutiny is a robust panel, able to bring an objective input. Some initial proposals are set out in paragraph 8 of appendix 1: members are invited to consider who should sit on the panel.

C. Equal opportunities and diversity implications

The area of police stop and search continues to be one of the most contentious policing practices for the black and minority ethnic community. The outcomes of this scrutiny could have huge benefit for the way in which the MPA will be able to engender the level of trust and confidence of all communities in London that in the policing service is fair, equitable and objective.

D. Financial implications

An honorarium will need to be offered to the student or students carrying out the work. This is still to be negotiated with the relevant universities, and will reflect the amount of work which is anticipated to be undertaken, but it is not anticipated that this will exceed £5,000 - £8,000. This expenditure can be contained within the EODB budget for 2003/04.

E. Background papers

• Home Office Race and the Criminal Justice Report
• MPA Performance Management information
• The Development of Overview and Scrutiny in Local Government September 2002.
• Overview and Scrutiny Handbook – Newham Council

F. Contact details

Report author: Julia Smith, MPA

For more information contact:

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

Appendix 1

Methodology for the MPA Scrutiny of the MPS Performance and Practice in Stop and Search

1. Background and Introduction to Scrutinies.

1.1 The role of overview and scrutiny committees was established by the current Government as part of the wider local government reform of the local authorities following the Local Government Act 2000. The function was designed to ensure that locally elected councillors who were not members of the new cabinet, were given the enhanced role to review and scrutinise not only the decisions made by the local executive, but also the local authority policy and performance in a range of areas.

1.2 In the early development of overview and scrutiny there has been a great deal of confusion over the exact meaning of the term itself. Previous research by local government researchers and organisations established that local authority councillors were taking a very eclectic approach to overview and scrutiny, resulting in the term being used as an umbrella term to cover a wide range of potential roles including, for example:

• Holding the local executive to account (or policy committees)
• Policy reviews
• Policy development
• Best value reviews
• External scrutinies
• Improvement agendas, performance review and management
• Ensuring corporate objectives are met
• Area scrutinies
• Monitoring and revising the constitution
• Engaging the public etc.

1.3 Recent research carried out by the Office for Public Management (OPM) found that the increasing use of overview and scrutinies by local authorities has led to a decline in the initial level of confusion over the meaning of the term. This is an encouraging development that can benefit the MPA that has begun its scrutiny function a little later than local authorities.

2. Role of the Equal Opportunities and Diversity Board in Overview and Scrutiny in the MPA

2.1 The prime function of the Equal Opportunities and Diversity Board is to lead by providing policy direction and guidance to the Authority and the MPS on all corporate policies, and other matters pertaining to equal opportunities and diversity.

2.2 In addition to its generic overview role, the EDOB terms of reference lists a number of specific functions relating to its overview and scrutiny role, these include the responsibility to ‘consider other areas of performance which have a specific impact on diversity issues; propose the development of performance indicators and target setting in areas of diversity issues and to consider areas of diversity where new or improved performance monitoring is required’.

2.3 The proposed scrutiny into Stop and Search is therefore just one example of the sorts of areas that the EDOB could contribute to tangible policy direction and leadership to bring benefit to the Authority in its role of ‘ensuring public trust and confidence in the police’.

3. Aims and Objectives of Overview and Scrutiny

3.1 Overview and scrutiny function has a vital role to play in the MPA. In brief, it ensures that the Authority and the MPS are publicly held to account for the decisions taken and seek to promote open and transparent decision-making and democratic responsibility for the policing of London’s diverse communities.

3.2 Whilst the MPA does not have a specific overview and scrutiny committee, as in the case of local authorities, the nature of the business of the Authority and the terms of reference of each committee means that its overview and scrutiny function is core to much of the work that they carry out. The Performance and Review Committee has been given the specific remit to give guidance to the Authority’s committees on the methodology for carrying out reviews and scrutinies. It can, where this is required and feasible, provide staff resource to assist in such scrutinies.

4. Types of Overviews and Scrutinies

4.1 The report by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, The Development of Overview and Scrutiny in Local Government (September 2002) highlights at least three types of scrutinies carried out by local authorities since the introduction of the Local Government Act. These are

• Policy development and review scrutinies,
• Best value reviews, and
• ‘holding decision-makers to account’

4.2 The MPA has, to date carried out two formal scrutinies, one under the auspices of the Professional Standards and Monitoring Committee (PSPM), (the Rape Scrutiny) and the other jointly by the PSPM and the former Consultation and Diversity and Outreach Committee (the Scrutiny into Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships). Both these areas of work were fully carried out by MPA officers and both could be described as policy review and policy development scrutinies.

4.3 Such reviews can be either ‘big picture’ reviews or more focussed reviews, as has been the case with the MPA reviews. The key outcome of policy development scrutinies is that of shaping the formulation of key plans and policies, through examining alternatives against needs, resources and other issues

‘Holding to Account’ Scrutinies

4.4 All the research into the performance of Overview and Scrutiny committees to date have found that the more challenging and sometimes more complex scrutinies aimed at calling or holding the executive to account have tended to be carried out less by local authorities, it is often the method that members have most difficulty carrying out because it often involves challenges to the power, influence and culture of the local party system. The research into this area by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister has also found that the function of holding members to account in such as transparent and rigorous manner is simply not part of the traditional role of committees.

4.5 This learning could be useful for the proposal for the type of scrutiny under proposal, which could be perceived and experienced as somewhat more challenging of the MPS performance and practice than the two previous scrutinies carried out by the Authority.

5. Benefits that the EDOB scrutiny could bring to the MPA and MPS

5.1 At the heart of the Overview and Scrutiny function is the principle that the process should be member-led. If conducted efficiently and effectively, the EDOB scrutiny could yield a number of benefits including:

• identifying a specific subject area that members can direct, influence and inform equal opportunities and diversity corporate and strategic policy and direction in the MPS and MPA
• complementing the equal opportunities and policy setting work of the MPS diversity directorate and directing that of the MPA
• providing useful insight and an element of ‘challenge’ to the Best Value process and the MPA and MPS systems of performance management and continuous equal opportunities and diversity performance
• securing the trust and confidence of the public generally, and certain communities specifically through its demonstration of transparency, openness and community involvement in the scrutiny process;
• holding key MPA personnel and the MPS to account through the use of evidential hearings etc;
• tackling cross-cutting and traditionally ‘difficult’ or sensitive issues; and
• stimulating a more reflective, evaluative and evidence-based culture for dealing with and addressing equal opportunities and diversity matters in the MPA.

6. Ensuring good practice in the EODB Scrutiny

6.1 There is already much available guidance on what constitutes good practice in conducting a successful scrutiny. The work previously carried out by the Performance and Monitoring Committee is an available resource, however, the EODB may well wish to seek external advice and support from the Centre for Scrutiny at the Improvement and Development Agency (IDeA).

7. Terms of reference for the EDOB Scrutiny

7.1 Given the nature of the subject being considered, it is proposed that rather than hold a wide-ranging review, the scrutiny should focus on four key aspects of stop and search which would build on the vast range of research and reviews that have already been carried out on stop and search, and benefit those aspects of the on going debate on the issue which have not been traditionally researched or explored, thus giving rise to the continuing disquiet from sections of the black and minority ethnic communities.

7.2 The areas proposed are not necessarily the most straightforward, but initial discussions with individual members, the Commission for Racial Equality and the Mayor’s office as well as academic institutions indicate that the detailed look into these areas would contribute significantly to addressing longstanding and unresolved issues surrounding police practice and use of stop and search. A further benefit for the Authority is the public credibility that it is likely to receive from undertaking such as review on the proposed areas.

7.3 The area that will comprise the scrutiny are:

7.3.1 Aspect 1 – Disproportionaility and profiling

A critical review of disproportionality in stop and search by seeking answer to difficult questions such as whether the consistently high levels of disproportionality in the MPS stop and search data linked to the profiling of Black and minority ethnic people. What is person profiling, when is it appropriate/inappropriate in policing intelligence and operations? What added value can the MPA bring to the MPS to address this issue?

A great deal of work has been done in the USA that could be used to inform this aspect of the review.

• Methodology
  The methodology that will be used will include desk research, review of the learning arising from the independent evaluation of the MPS Diversity (CRR) training, interviews and evidential hearing with key police academic personnel and members of the community who may have experience of being stopped and search.
• Proposed outcomes
  The proposed outcome of this aspect of the scrutiny will be to find out whether, and if so, what form of profiling is used by police officers in the MPS when making a stop or stop and search, and whether and how the MPA could affect corporate policy and policing practice to bring about changes in this area.
• Resource implications
  The researcher will carry out the more detailed research and review aspect of the scrutiny. As there is already a great deal of material immediately available on the internet, primarily from the USA, MPA officers can begin the data gathering process that can inform the more detailed review that will be required.

7.3.2 Aspect 2 - Use of stop and search data and policing intelligence

It is proposed that this aspect will be a critical look at the use that is made of the current stop and search data in the MPS policing intelligence on street crime and other crimes? What is its place in the MPS overall intelligence programme? Developments of the National Intelligence Model (NIM) should inform this aspect of the scrutiny.

• Methodology
  The MPS already has information on this area and it is therefore proposed that the EDOB should utilise this. The methodology used for this aspect of the scrutiny could include quantitative date analysis, questionnaires and evidential hearing.
• Proposed outcomes
  The proposed outcome of this aspect of the scrutiny will be to find out whether, and the level to which, the MPA at corporate and borough levels uses the stop and search data to inform policing intelligence on key policing initiatives such as street crime, burglary, drug crime and others. The judicial disposal rates could be key indicators of the use of intelligence. Members would need to be clear about the how it may wish to affect corporate policy and policing practice that could bring learning to the MPS for proposed changes in this area.

7.3.3 Aspect 3 – The cost effectiveness of stop and search

The public, MPA and MPS have agreed that stop and search is an essential part of policing in London. However, it remains the case that the inappropriate use of stop and search and the continuing increase in the disproportionate use of stop and search of certain sections of London’s communities continues to be a source of great anger for these communities. This has resulted in a state of historical distrust and level of disengagement that is currently hampering the overall progress that the MPS is now poised to make, especially in its recruitment and retention of people from black and minority ethnic communities. The scrutiny will look into the cost-effectiveness of stop search in financial terms (as an activity) and the cost to public confidence. Does the cost of one equal or outweigh the cost of another?

• Methodology
  The methods used for this aspect of the scrutiny could include desk research, including detailed review of the outcomes of the efficiency and effectiveness reviews, independent qualitative research, interviews and evidential hearing of key efficiency experts that could add benefit to the learning required.
• Proposed outcomes
  The proposed outcome of this aspect of the scrutiny will be to find out whether the cost effectiveness of stop and search is equal to the value that it contributes to policing by consent.

7.3.4 Aspect 4 – Public engagement and information
There are already practices in place in boroughs such as Lambeth and Westminster where stop and search data is used to engage and inform the local community organisations and groups about the use of stop and search locally as a means of engendering trust, developing confidence in policing performance, engaging the public for the purpose of informing and educating on local stop and search performance and practice. This aspect of the scrutiny will be to identify such good practice models.

• Methodology
  The methodology used here will be primarily questionnaire, review and interviews.
• Proposed outcomes
  The proposed outcome of this aspect of the scrutiny will be to identify areas of good practice that can be used to inform both and MPS and the public.

8. Scrutiny Panel Membership

8.1 Good practice guidance suggests that the scrutiny panel should not exceed six to eight members. It is also suggests that, in order to ensure transparency, external and community representation should always be sought for any scrutiny. The following membership is proposed and members’ views are sought on this proposal.

Panel Chair: Cecile Wright Chair MPA EODB

Four MPA Members from the EODB: One MPA member from another MPA committee Lynne Featherstone or Abdal Ullah

External organisations – two representatives

Community representatives – three representatives
A Chair of a CPCG?
Representative of the media

8.2 Advisors to the Panel

It is proposed that the Panel be supported by a small team of four MPA and MPS officers: Lead policy officer, MPA Planning and Performance; lead policy officer, MPA, Consultation, Diversity and Outreach; representatives from territorial police and Head of Performance (MPS).

9. Interviews and Evidential Hearing

9.1 The following individuals and organisations can be invited to give evidence to MPA members:

MPS
Community beat officers
Police sergeants on boroughs
Borough commanders
MPS diversity trainers and supervisors
Senior MPS managers
Traffic police
Diversity Directorate representatives
Deputy Commissioner of the MPS
Specialist Operations
Representatives of Territorial Police
MPS analysts
MPS independent Advisory Groups
Police Associations representatives

Research Institutions &/Researchers
Head of Home Office Race and Research Units
Professor Marion Fitzgerald
Professor Mike Hough
1990 Trust
Action for Irish Youth
Race on the Agenda (ROTA)

Community representatives and individuals

External Organisations
Commission for Racial Equality
Black Lawyers Society
Youth organisations (CAPA, etc)
Directors race equality councils

10. Resourcing the Scrutiny

10.1 The Consultation and Diversity Unit does not have the capacity to release a member of staff to undertake all aspects of the work. Therefore it is proposed that a research student or students be engaged to carry out much of the research aspects of this scrutiny. These researchers, working with MPA officers would also support MPA members in the drafting and development of the scrutiny report. MPA officers have already written to a small number of universities which have previously worked with the Authority. Additionally, based on his role at the London Metropolitan University, R. David Muir, the Deputy Chair of the Authority has been asked to see whether the LMU may be able to offer the assistance required to undertake this work.

10.2 Alternatively, the EODB could consider seeking a secondee from a partner organisation such as the GLA or CRE to assist in progressing specific aspects of the work required. As the work is clearly broken down into four areas, support could also be sought from the MPS consultancy directorate to conduct certain aspects of the work required. These options will be developed in detail following members’ deliberation on this proposal. MPA officers in the CDO and Performance and Review Units will manage this process.

11. Financial implications

11.1 It is proposed that an honorarium of £ 5,000 - £8,000 should be made available to the university that has agreed to assist the Authority with this area of work. The costs would be contained within existing budgets. If however, the secondee is being sought, salary costs may need to be negotiated with the supporting organisation.

12. Timescale

12.1 Subject to members’ approval and the successful selection of a university or alternate option to undertake this work, the work should begin by February 2003 for a period of 4 to 6 months, to be completed by July to September 2003. This timescale will need to be agreed with the university selected to undertake the work, or any other option proposed by members.

What is `good practice' in overview and scrutiny?

1. Good practice in terms of process

As has been previously discussed local authorities are using a range of processes to undertake overview and scrutiny. `Good practice' in terms of processes would involve:

• Developing an inclusive approach, working to engage all relevant stakeholders, including partners and the public;
• Working in a transparent way, where it is clear to all those involved how the overview and scrutiny process works;
• Demonstrating accountability for the processes and outcomes of overview and scrutiny;
• Being efficient in the work of overview and scrutiny, responding to the needs and aspirations of the community;
• Working in a deliberative way which underpins an evidence?based approach to the way overview and scrutiny works;
• Demonstrating a non?partisan approach to the work of overview and scrutiny, which places the needs and aspirations of the community above the consideration of party politics;
• Strengthening the democratic process of decision?making through improving the quality of debate and initiating debate.

It is also possible for authorities to work to identify `process outcomes', for example: quality and scope of public debate; development of new evidence and arguments; greater public awareness of reasons for decisions; better-informed and motivated non?executive/policy committee members.

2. Good practice in terms of outcomes

However excellent an authority is in terms of its processes, `successful' overview and scrutiny has to involve tangible and substantive outcomes. This means that overview and scrutiny committees must be able to demonstrate that they have achieved the aims and objectives for scrutiny and therefore have:

• Held the executive (or relevant policy committee) to account;
• Supported the development of effective policies and initiatives which have a beneficial impact on the community;
• Contributed significantly to continuous improvement in services through best value;
• Positively impacted on the work and outcomes of external agencies.

Demonstrating this `added value' can be problematic since measuring `influence' is not always a simple task however, there are a number of performance indicators that the EODB will wish to identify early in the process, especially where it will utilize the expertise of outside organizations to progress aspects of the work.

Adapted from Ch 11 The Development of Overview and Scrutiny in Local Government - Office of the Deputy Prime Minister September 2002
Notes on Conducting a Scrutiny in the MPA

A scrutiny is aimed at looking at a specific topic to improve MPS service provided or performance in an area.

Useful principles applied to scrutiny projects previously undertaken are:

• Write clear terms of reference and stick to them
• Keep the subject tightly defined
• Refer other issues that come up during the scrutiny to be looked into at another time/ by another body
• Keep outcome focused – always with a view towards recommendations that can be made
• Avoid duplicating research
• Focus on areas where the MPA and experience of members can add value
• Provide clear, actionable recommendations
• Member input is required – be clear with members about the time the project will require at the outset
• Dedicated officer support is required
• Projects are focused on relatively short-time actionable results, rather than rigorous academic research

The methodology previously applied has been:

• Initial background research and discussions between key officers and members to determine terms of reference
• Panel of members/ seconded members selected
• Terms of reference/ process agreed by panel
• Officers conduct background research
• Questionnaires or other new data collection carried out
• Key persons identified for evidence hearing sessions
• Questions agreed in advance of hearing sessions
• Sessions conducted
• All evidence written up and presented to members
• Members discuss and agree draft recommendations
• Officers write report
• Members agree final report and recommendations (with agreement by Committee as appropriate)
• Implementation plan written (by MPS)
  Twice yearly monitoring of implementation plan until all actions complete

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback