Project Umbra

Report: 6
Date: 16 November 2006
By: Assistant Commissioner Territorial Policing for the Commissioner

Summary

This report provides information on Project Umbra and Violence in the name of ‘so called honour’.

A. Recommendations

1. That the contents of this report are noted;
2. That the MPA continues to support Project Umbra.

B. Supporting information

Background

1. In 2004 the London Criminal Justice Board (LCJB) commissioned Project Umbra. The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) was tasked to develop a domestic violence strategy for London’s criminal justice agencies. The project is a multi-agency initiative designed to proactively manage all aspects of domestic violence to provide a consistent level of professional service – across all Criminal Justice agencies - to victims (including children).

2. The project was managed by a multi-agency programme board and chaired by Commander Crime, Territorial Policing (TP). This programme board set the strategic direction of Umbra and directed its 5 work strands, which are led by partners from across the various organisations managing domestic violence in London.

The five strands are:

3. Each of the strands work to an action plan, which has been developed to meet the strategy and objectives of the other domestic violence activity taking place across London e.g. MPS & Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) strategy and the Mayor’s Domestic Violence strategy. The overarching objectives are to improve service delivery to victims and hold perpetrators to account.

4. The priorities of the police service in England & Wales, including the MPS, in responding to this crime are as follows:

• To protect the lives of both adults and children who are at risk as a result of domestic violence;
• To investigate all reports of domestic violence;
• To facilitate effective action against offenders so that they can be held accountable through the criminal justice system; and
• To adopt a proactive multi-agency approach in preventing and reducing domestic violence.

5. The Mayor of London’s second Domestic Violence Strategy, published in November 2005 is focused on achieving four aims:

• Increasing safe choices for women and children experiencing domestic violence so that they might plan safer futures without compromising their quality of life;
• Holding individual abusers accountable for their behaviour in such a way that reduces risk and which not only acts as a future deterrent for them, but also as a deterrent to potential abusers;
• Actions which undermine social tolerance or approval of domestic violence or actions which challenge inaction by either individuals or organisations; and
• Providing children and young people with the knowledge and skills to build relationships based on respect and mutual understanding, with shared power and a commitment to non-violence.

6. These strategies accord with other key national developments and strategic policies being developed by other agencies including the LCJB, Home Office (National Domestic Violence Action Plan), Every Child Matters, and Supporting People et al.

7. In determining domestic violence the MPS works to the ACPO definition, which has now been adopted by HM Government. The definition of domestic violence is as follows:

‘Any incident of threatening behaviour, violence or abuse (psychological, physical, sexual, financial or emotional) between adults (aged 18 years or over) who are or have been intimate partners or family members, regardless of gender or sexuality.

(family members are defined as mother, father, son, daughter, brother, sister, and grandparents, whether directed related, in-laws or stepfamily).

8. Until recently the London Domestic Violence Forum (LDVF) Steering Group was the overarching body for the delivery of the London Domestic Violence Strategy. The group also tracked the progress of the implementation of recommendations pertaining to individual agencies and the various strands of Project Umbra were allocated all the recommendations requiring multi-agency collaboration. The Programme Board oversaw progress of the strands and managed any potential conflicts.

9. At the July 2006 Project Umbra Board meeting it was decided to merge this Board with the LDVF as the most effective and efficient way forward to deliver business. The new structure clearly illustrates the relationship and lines of communication between the London Domestic Violence Steering Group, the London Criminal Justice Board and the Metropolitan Police Authority Domestic Violence Board. These 3 strategic groups are further supported by the London Domestic Violence Forum, the Association of London Government Domestic Violence Coordinator Network and the current 5 Project Umbra work strands.

10. The LDVF Steering Group oversees all domestic violence work in London. It is jointly chaired by the GLA and the MPS and meetings alternate between City Hall and New Scotland Yard. The London Criminal Justice Board has appointed Ms Dru Sharpling (Chief Crown Prosecutor for London) as its Domestic Violence champion. The London Criminal Justice Board is fully committed to supporting a pan-London response to DV.

11. The Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) Domestic Violence Board has been set up to monitor, scrutinise and support the MPS in its response to domestic violence. The Board aims to secure continuous improvement in the MPS’ response and disseminate best practice and innovation across the 32 Borough Operational Command Units (BOCUs). Commander Allen and the Violent Crime Directorate’s Operational Command Unit (OCU) Commander attend this forum.
12. There is a duplication of agency membership across the 3 main strategy groups, which meet quarterly. This is welcomed as it ensures consistency, synergy, energy and drive.

Employment

13. Each of the current 5 strands of Project Umbra has representation from across the six equality strands (i.e. Gender, Age, Sexual Orientation, Race, Faith [or no belief] and Disability). Not all strands have representation from across the equalities spectrum. All the strands are currently reviewing their membership in order to have the correct decision-making (and accountability) representation from Statutory and Non-Government Organisations (NGO). In addition this process allows for an ideal opportunity to ensure that all strands are representative of the 6 equality strands.

14. An MPS Senior Partnership Consultant has strategic and operational lead for Project Umbra, a responsibility that is shared with the Violent Crime Directorate (VCD) OCU Commander. Over the lifetime of the project it has become clear that the level of administrative support required was neither properly identified at the outset or provided, to enable the effective management of several ambitious strands of work. This has had a particular impact on strands led by NGO’s, whose own resources are very limited. (That said, good progress has been made across the strands, which is reflected in paragraph 45 of this report).

15. On 2 October 2006 The Violent Crime Directorate OCU Commander led a meeting of the strand leads at which a resource plan – to be implemented by the VCD CSU Service Delivery Team DCI - was developed. Negotiations are underway with the LCJB and other partners to resolve the administrative arrangements. The LCJB has publicly supported, as have other partners the drive to ensure that the London response to Domestic Violence is adequately resourced. Pending full time recruitment, capability to provide part time administration support to progress all 6 strands of Project Umbra has been identified and is now in place.

16. The VCD Community Safety Unit (CSU) Service Delivery Team are accountable for ensuring DV policy development and compliance, improving service delivery and performance outcomes at the front end. In addition this team conduct daily monitoring (and intervention) of high risk cases, supervise homicide reviews and emerging findings, and conduct performance interventions with under achieving Boroughs. A number of MPS assets assist the Service Delivery Team in the despatch of their responsibilities including the Performance Information Bureau (PIB) and the VCD Intelligence Unit.

17. Strategy, Modernisation and Performance Directorate provide further support through the provision of performance management and strategic development material.

Service delivery

18. Project Umbra and its five strands are seen as one of the principal delivery arms of the Mayor’s Second DV strategy. In its operation the current strands takes cognisance of the six equalities strands in each of their work areas. This also includes strand membership. There are specific initiatives focused on so called Honour based Violence and affected communities including work exploring needs of disabled and LGBT DV victims. Further is being planned to ensure that the needs of all Black and Minority Ethnic (BME) communities are addressed e.g. links to Trident and gun crime etc. The MPS will develop a violence against women strategy in the near future and work has been commissioned to examine the impact of crime on women in the capital and will draw out the impact on specific community groups. Children’s needs are specifically addressed via Strand 3. Strand 4 will build on the research into homicide reviews focusing on DV perpetrators and links to other forms of criminality. Future work will also look at DV perpetrators who may also have been the victims of violence and abuse themselves.

19. As previously highlighted the VCD CSU Service Delivery Team DCI has been appointed to review and in the interim to take forward Project Umbra. This review work will be finalised by 17 November 2006.

20. Across the strands there is a wealth of professional and expert experience in the domestic violence field. These professionals represent at present, some 28 statutory and voluntary organisations. From the MPS a number of different commands and directorates are represented e.g. Violent Crime Directorate, Child Abuse Investigation Command, Operation Emerald and the Diversity & Citizen Focus Directorate. Work is progressed through the London DV Forum Steering Group to engage reluctant partners.

21. The Violent Crime Directorate was established in March 2006 and was formed with the intention of providing a central service focus for the delivery of performance on Violent Crime. It is pertinent to note in 2005/06 24% of all violent crime had their origins in domestic violence. In real terms there were 108314 DV incidents, of which 60400 were recorded as crimes. The overarching intention of the Directorate is to address dangerous people, dangerous places and to support vulnerable victims.

22. The VCD aims to increase the number of offences brought to justice, reduce the number of victims of all forms of violent crime and increase trust, confidence and satisfaction of DV victims. A fuller report regarding the progress of the Violent Crime Directorate was presented to the Authority in October 2006.

23. From an MPS perspective the VCD Teams (CSU Service Delivery Team, Project Sapphire, Operation Jigsaw, Operation Compass) and the Specialist Crime Directorate’s Child Abuse Investigation Command are the principle strategic drivers for this project. The front line operational drive is provided by the 32 Borough Community Safety Units, Project Sapphire and the Child Abuse Investigation Teams which are strategically placed throughout London. Within the VCD effective communication links have been established between the CSU Service Delivery Team and all the other teams listed above. A Daily Management Meeting is conducted to discuss high-risk cases and co-ordinate a proactive intervention as necessary. This process is reinforced by the fortnightly Tactical Tasking and Coordinating Group. This is an intelligence-led forum, where key decisions are made about the allocation of VCD resources. This includes the targeting of dangerous offenders including DV perpetrators.

24. There is a performance management framework for CSU service delivery and performance outcomes, which also impacts on how Umbra is progressed locally. This framework includes performance reviews at Borough Daily Management Meetings, Borough Senior Management (SMT) Performance and separate Link Commanders meetings, Crime Control Strategy meetings (the next round of these meetings commence on 2 November 2006), MPA DV Scrutiny Board and the focussed performance interventions conducted by the VCD Service Delivery Team. This is further evidenced by the local strategic and operational partnerships developed by the CSUs with their advocates, refuges, local courts, prosecutors etc.

25. The impact on service delivery is such that the financial year to date (FYTD) sanctioned detection rate is 34.8%, which compares favourably against the performance for the previous 2 years.

26. Performance monitoring (and capture) is primarily conducted through the Crime Reporting Information System (CRIS) where all DV incidents and offences are recorded. As a whole the MPS is satisfied that it has systems and processes in place to capture the vast majority of information by equality strands for suspects, victims, perpetrators and witnesses which is detailed as follows:

Race

• The recording of Ethnic Appearance of victims, witnesses, suspects and accused is mandatory and there is a good level of compliance in this area.
• The recording of self defined ethnicity of victims, witnesses, suspect and accused should be completed in all cases. This is completed in about 50% of records for victims. If suspects are unidentified, then the self-defined ethnicity may not be known.
• There is a facility on the CRIS to include nationality of victims, witnesses, suspect and accused.

Faith

• There is a facility on the CRIS to include the religion of victims.

Age

• Ages are recorded for all victims, witnesses, suspects and accused. The ages are grouped in monthly reports

Gender

• Gender is recorded for all victims, witnesses, suspects and accused.

Sexual orientation

• Sexual orientation is not currently recorded on the CRIS system. Specific searches are conducted on CRIS to identify victims and witnesses involved in same sex domestic violence. This is an area for development and further consideration given the passage of the Equality Act 2006 and the Sexual Orientation Regulations 2006 governing the equality of the provision of goods, facilities and services.

Disability

• Disability is recorded for all victims. The categories of disability are also recorded.

27. Essentially the MPS has the Information Technology system (CRIS) in place and is capable of capturing equality data accurately. However, in order to secure the accuracy of this data the following fields need to be made mandatory:

• Self defined ethnicity
• Religion
• Nationality

By making the fields mandatory the inputters must complete the field before they are permitted to move forward and complete the report.

28. The Violent Crime Directorate is managing a project, which is reviewing the system of ‘victim profiling’ with regards to domestic violence and hate crime. The recent change of the CRIS supplier has delayed the opportunity to improve the data quality.

29. The CRIS system is monitored locally by the borough Crime Management Units and line managers ensure that primary investigating and other staff enter data accurately.

30. The impact on service delivery is such that the financial year to date (FYTD) sanctioned detection rate is 34.8%, which compares favourably against the performance for the previous 2 years (2004/05- 19.1%, 2005/06 - 27.7%). A DV abuser is now more likely to be charged or otherwise brought to justice than at any other time.

31. Between 1 April 2006 and 30 September 2006 there were 31027 incidents of domestic violence, which have been recorded as per ACPO guidelines. These incidents resulted in 14590 arrests (47%). When a subset of these incidents with only the relationships of husband/wife or boyfriend/girlfriend or ex of any of these relationships are examined the gender difference is as below:

• Male Aggressor – Female Victim – 22629 Incidents 10870 Arrests 48%
• Female Aggressor – Male Victim - 3529 Incidents 1397 Arrests 40%.

32. However it becomes apparent that not all of these incidents involve just two people present or ex partners, but often involves a third party, such as new boyfriend or new girlfriend who then becomes either the victim or the aggressor. There are also difficulties with data input errors. These two categories account for about a third of the incidents above. It is not possible at this stage to quantify the proportions of either.

When all the incidents with an inconsistent relationship code are excluded the results are as follows:

• Male Aggressor – Female Victim – 14752 Incidents 10423 Arrests 71%
• Female Aggressor – Male Victim - 2591 Incidents 1308 Arrests 50%
• 84% of Domestic violence involve involves persons in an intimate rather than familial relationship.
• 87% of the aggressors in these incidents are male 13% are female.
• 56% of Domestic violence incidents involve only the persons in the intimate relationship. Of these where the male was the aggressor, 71% were arrested, where the female was the aggressor the arrest rate was 50%.

33. This data indicates that there is not a disproportionate arrest of women in DV cases. However this analysis continues to be reviewed and further work will be conducted in relation to offence categories and seriousness. It is also pertinent to note that whilst the MPS domestic violence positive action policy is gender neutral, we do not support the commission of ‘dual arrests’ were both victim and suspect are arrested at crime scenes.

34. Homicide reviews and rape reviews continue to be integral work for the MPS and strategic partners particularly in relation to service delivery and lessons to be learnt for all agencies involved in working to safeguard victims and their children.

35. In addition the MPS does take on other reviews generated via a variety of sources including Gold Strategy meetings, Critical Incident Advisory Team and the Homicide and Serious Crime Review assessments that provide further avenues to identify relevant learning points. The CSU Service Delivery Team support these review processes. The identified learning maybe at a borough or Organisational level and is used to inform learning, policy development and its impact on equality and diversity of service provision.

36. The issues that are highlighted in such reviews can be impactive at policy, strategic and tactical level. Recent reviews have highlighted disproportionality in the levels of homicide and serious offences committed by known persons i.e. partners and relatives against persons from BME communities. Some of the work of Project Umbra, particularly Strand 2, is looking at what we need to do in order to better serve those communities, including assisted reporting, availability of information in appropriate languages, accessibility to support for minority groups and availability of specialist advocates with greater understanding of experiences of BME victims to support them through the criminal justice system or other routes to safety. In addition the MPS has recognised the need to identify and work with ‘newly arrived’ communities to give community members a better understanding about the availability of DV support services and what the police and wider criminal justice processes are.

37. Domestic violence homicide statistics for 2005/2006 showed BME women represented 58.8% of victims, a disturbing figure if compared to the statistics on the population of London. (refer to 2001 population census). Of the 34 DV homicides in 2005/06, 6 victims were male, 28 were female of which 20 (victims) were BME women. This has highlighted and reinforced the development of a specific risk identification/assessment & management tool with heightened risk factors being identified. It clearly identifies the need for awareness and sensitivity but warns against making assumptions about victims and/or perpetrators based on the notion of multiculturalism. This element prompts staff to consider how this translates to women from BME communities and how the cultural background can increase risk and impair decisions to leave a violent situation. The model prompts consideration of BME women who may or may not be subject to honour based violence but have other needs e.g. Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual or Transgendered (LGBT) women, disabled women, women from traveller communities and/or women who are representative of these areas individually or collectively. Further work around this area is being considered and addressed through Strands 2 and 6 of Project Umbra (see paragraphs 46 & 47).

38. More recent activities have focused on forms of honour based violence, a form of domestic violence, which almost exclusively affects women and girls from diverse communities. This area has commanded unprecedented focus in light of a number of high profile homicide and 'near miss' cases in recent years. It has prompted increased investment in research and analysis of incidents of forced marriage and/or other forms of honour based violence, in an effort to build a more accurate picture of the problem. This, in turn, is being invested in the development of a number of products such as a frontline toolkit, a tactical menu of options for initial investigators and senior investigators, training of frontline responders and specialist investigators across business areas. Research and analysis of a number of 'cold' cases over a number of years where it is suspected that the primary motivation may be in the name of honour, is being conducted to ascertain the extent of such violence and inform thinking around future strategies in managing risk, tactical response and policy associated with such violence.

39. The MPS leads the ACPO ‘so called Honour’ Violence Working Group, where learning is shared and good practice is promulgated. This is a two way communication process, where good ideas are used to inform MPS thinking and service provision.

40. Strand 1 of Umbra continues to look at the suitability of the form 124D (the MPS’ DV reporting book) and the risk assessment and management tool described above in an effort to ensure that emerging issues from constant review of performance and response to incidents is incorporated into practice. One such issue that was rectified was changing an aspect of the risk management tool to Community Isolation/Awareness. This sign posts police officers and police staff to recognise the issue of risk was based around isolation and not just because victims were from differing cultures. Further work is also being scoped as to how incidents are flagged and data of individuals connected with the crime is collated to enable greater strategic analysis to ensue.

41. Strand 6 of Umbra continues to be developed and will concentrate on the implementation of Section 9 Domestic Violence Crime & Victims Act 2004 and its impact on the conduct of DV Homicide Reviews. Recommendations relating to the progress of this strand will be submitted to the London DV Forum by 17 November 2006 in line with the other developments relating to Project Umbra. Once the main work of the strand has been developed and reaches an aspect of maturity, it is envisaged that the strand will assess, review and develop work around DV victim suicides, self-harming, assisted deaths etc. This should be viewed as an aspiration to the future.

42. In November 2005 the MPS published a report entitled ‘A review of Rape Investigation in the MPS’. The review highlighted issues relating to the continued financial support of Sexual Assault Referral Centres (Havens), ‘no criming’ rape allegations, reviewing the victim-assailant relationship and how this impacts on the outcome of an investigation. In addition recommendations were made relating to Project Sapphire having closer ties with the CSU delivery team and other strategic public protection units. This closer working has been developed with the formation of the Violent Crime Directorate and the co-location of all the public protection units at Territorial Policing Head Quarters. There is greater cooperation and data sharing in respect of daily crime reviews of DV rapes and consultation in the updating of the current Project Sapphire policy.

43. As described following the establishment of the Violent Crime Directorate there is more effective ‘joined up’ working across the disciplines which manage public protection matters, including the development of the intelligence structures. Please see background paper entitled ‘Violent Crime Directorate Update’ report of October 2006.

44. National Intelligence Products have been developed in the Violent Crime arena, which discuss the relationship between repeat and first time offenders and offence types. There is a distinction between public and private place violent crime offending. This analytical work continues and the findings will be used to inform operational deployments and tactics to target and effectively manage.

45. Additional analysis work has been progressed beyond this review. Emerging findings have identified that suspects involved in ‘DV flagged’ serious sexual assaults are more likely to be charged, and there is less likelihood that such allegations will be no crimed, than any other suspect/victim relationship falling within this generic crime group. This is an emerging finding and the analysis work is yet to come to maturity.

46. Project Umbra has delivered significant service improvements, including the development and forging of open partnership working. Areas of good practise are highlighted below illustrating the relevant strands from which the work was derived:

• Strand 1 - There is now a more co-ordinated approach to the gathering of Criminal Justice data between the MPS and CPS. This is allowing both organisations to develop more sophisticated data capturing tools that look behind the headline figures. What this means in real terms is an ability for greater interrogation of individual borough’s performance not only around quantative but also qualitative data. A further piece of work is being developed and progressed between the MPS and CPS to undertake a more in depth review of both police, prosecutors and courts practises in highlighting areas of vulnerability and areas of good practise.
• Strand 2 - There has been a significant increase in the amount of boroughs that now have access to and fund DV advocacy workers. This has been notable since the inception of UMBRA. It must be recognised that the input that advocacy workers have to boroughs DV response is very positive. When comparing those boroughs with access to advocacy workers to those without, there is a significant improvement in performance and service delivery. This can be evidenced by one North East London borough prior to employing a DV advocate in April 2005 as only having a 38% attendance by DV victims at DV court trials. Due to the work of the DV advocate on this borough this attendance at court of DV victims is 100%. This has to be seen that by providing support to victims and their families through advocacy this has enabled the Criminal Justice System to hold more perpetrators to account for their actions. The success of advocacy workers should not only be seen in improving performance but it’s benefits can be seen in reducing the levels of seriousness through intervention and access to support networks as well as aiding a reduction in repeat victimisation.
• Strand 3 – With the re-introduction of a flag on the MPS IT systems relating to children in DV homes or families associated with DV has closed a vulnerability around the proactive monitoring of children. This flag has previously been removed from use and therefore DV reports with childcare issues could not be effectively monitored and relevant data garnered. The work of Strand 3 has enabled the re-introduction of the flag (CC [Child Care] flag) on the MPS crime reporting system.
• Strand 4 – The partnership between police and the Probation Service on this strand continues to develop. Support has been provided for the piloting across three boroughs of the Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme (IDAP) monitoring system. IDAP is based upon the principle that the safety of the victim and her children are of paramount importance whilst the perpetrator is attending the IDAP Programme. Our protocols with the Probation Service allows for the respective boroughs to feed back information to IDAP case managers at probation when one of their IDAP nominals comes into contact with police in any context. The resultant consequence allows for greater management of risk by these potentially dangerous individuals allowing for victims and their families to have additional built in protection as and when required.
• Strand 5 – The development of Specialist and Integrated courts is obviously the fundamental theme here. Since the inception of UMBRA the MPS area has seen 6 specialist court applications. There are 2 areas in operation, Croydon and West London Magistrate Court areas and the likelihood of 4 more in the very near future. Croydon are the first court area to have one integrated court with both civil and criminal matters being heard by the one judge. The ethos of ‘one judge one family’ clearly being demonstrated.
• Strand 6 – The development of the DV murder review process continues. All MPS DV murders are currently reviewed by boroughs and their findings are then fed back via the Violent Crime Directorate to inform organisational learning, review and develop policy, promote greater inter partner co-operation and develop information sharing protocols. Through this learning and the plethora of other work around risk management, and homicide prevention there has been a direct influence on the DV Homicide rates which have fallen over the last 3 years - 42 murders in 03-04, to 34 murders 04-05, again 34 murders 05-06 and this financial year to date 11 (as at 24 October 2006). The current review process needs to be developed further, and will do when section 9 Domestic Violence; Crime & Victims Act 2004 is enacted. However, currently there is concern about the independence and objectivity of the review process. Each review report is quality assured by an experienced CSU Service Delivery Team officer. The key question is: does the homicide review multi-agency action plan address the gaps in service delivery, which may have led to the death? If an effective plan has been developed – is it being actioned? Are the emerging findings and areas for development being promulgated across the agencies? These aspects are the responsibility of Strand 6 and the VCD Service Delivery Team to proactively manage and progress.

Community engagement

47. Community engagement in seeking solutions to honour crime has been essential in terms of the development of strategies to combat this form of violence. It is acknowledged that the experience of voluntary sector and NGOs has been at the forefront of trying to affect change in this area and the MPS has added its voice. Dialogue with groups such as Southall Black Sisters and Ashiana Network to name a few, has allowed the MPS to have a unique insight into this arena. As 'critical' and objective friends, they have, and continue to challenge the MPS on its policies and practices where violence against women and children is present. The benefits of such relationships have enabled the inclusion of advocates from a number of projects across London to engage in co-delivering the one-day domestic violence awareness training for Constables – Inspectors across the MPS. We continue to seek new opportunities to work and engage with communities in a meaningful way to improve understanding of some the unique challenges they face. FORWARD (Foundation for Women's Health Research and Development) have recently undertaken work at the MPS Crime Academy delivering a programme on Female Genital Mutilation (FGM), its affect and consequences.

48. The MPS Honour Based Violence Working Group has a wide range of representatives from organisations working with the varied and complex issues that fall under the generic title of ‘so called Honour’ Based Violence (HBV). The agencies represented include FORWARD, Women Living Under Muslim law, Iranian & Kurdish Woman’s Rights Organisation, Refuge, Amnesty International, Positive East (LGBT), Ashiana Project, Social Services, MPS (VCD, CAIC, Staff Associations, Crime Academy), London Councils, specialist health provision, Southall Black Sisters, CPS, MPA and academics etc. The membership demonstrates investment in the current and growing relationships that are contributing to developing safety for those subject to such violence. It is important to note that this type of engagement does not conclude at the MPS's borders but extend across the UK and internationally to have a deeper understanding of communities, cultural practices and how this translates amongst London’s communities. Community engagement is, and continues to be, an integral part of the development of policy, practice and partnership for the future.

49. Project Umbra is a standing agenda item at the CSU Managers meeting structure. The Boroughs are the best place for mainstream DV and Project Umbra to be marketed and for consultation to take place. In addition the CSU Service Delivery Team markets the project in presentations to internal and external stakeholders. It is recognised that the project needs to be marketed directly with community groups – there is currently a reliance on the views presented by the community’s strategic and frontline stakeholders. The MPS is satisfied that Community Safety Units market DV within the community, for example during much publicised proactive operations and marketing events (including Operation Athena events). The CSU Service Delivery Team DCI will develop a Communication Strategy (including marketing and consultation) for Project Umbra.

Performance

50. The Violent Crime Directorate (VCD) led by Commander Steve Allen manages the MPS’ DV strategic performance. Within the VCD rests the Community Safety Unit (CSU) Service Delivery Team. This consists of 1 Detective Chief Inspector, 1 Detective Inspector, 2 Detective Sergeants (DS) and 5 Detective Constables (DC). Vacancies exist for 1 Detective Constable and 2 members of police support staff. Those officers from the unit that have specific responsibility for DV consist of 1 DS and 2 DCs.

51. The overarching terms of reference for the CSU Service Delivery Team are:

• To develop, implement, monitor and review Domestic Violence and Hate Crime Policy.
• To improve service delivery and performance outcomes at the front end.

52. The following represents the core areas of business that the team work to in respect of operational delivery:

• The review, monitoring and intervention of critical incidents (any where the effectiveness of the police response is likely to have a significant impact on the confidence of the victim and/or family and/or community), high-risk offenders and serious cases by way of crime types (e.g. Murder, GBH, Rape, Threats to Kill, Kidnap to name a few). This will include fast time intervention, the development of strategic & tactical advice documents and participating in MPS Strategic Gold Group meetings (assisting in reviewing significantly impactive incidents occurring within the MPS).
• Linking with Borough Operational Command Units to allow a strategic overview of how they deliver services affecting the delivery of that service to DV victims, potential victims and perpetrators. In addition the Service Delivery Team support boroughs in a wide range of subject areas including resources, initial service delivery, auditing, intelligence, investigation, performance, access to funding streams, publicity, prevention of crime, training, technical support, occupational health, links with other internal units, links with external partners, identifying good practise, managing risk & dangerousness and finally acting as a conduit between boroughs and Territorial Police Head Quarters.
• Project work that is derived form a variety of sources. This will include work generated by Project UMBRA itself, recommendations from Gold Groups meetings, Internal reviews, DV Homicide reviews, Court requests, issues identified from the above 2 core areas and ACPO generated requests. The Service Delivery Team also lead and support the MPS & ACPO HBV working Groups (previously described), and is a key participant in the Pan London LGBT Strategic Group. The team leader also chairs one of this strategic group’s sub groups relating to ‘Recognising and professionalising the role of LGBT Liaison Officers’. This is essential given the impact on HBV and same sex domestic violence. The team also lead and support a plethora of other significant projects in other specialist fields.

53. The effectiveness of information capture and efficient communication lines is seen as vital as it informs appropriate decision making processes. Information is captured via a variety of MPS assets. This information can then be researched and analysed by dedicated DV analysts from the VCD’s Intelligence Unit and members of the Delivery Team.

54. Knowledge and information is imparted to operational delivery teams, be that at a strategic or tactical level via a variety of sources which includes senior management meetings, CSU managers meetings (32 BOCU CSU Detective Inspectors attend), CSU seminars, CSU Intranet site, e-mail system, Special Interest Groups, minimum tri-monthly visits to borough, individual crime reviews, strategic Gold review meetings and strategic reviews of individual boroughs response to DV.

55. Policy compliance is measured by the following:

• CSU Service Delivery Team and other performance teams intrusively review Boroughs for Policy compliance against set criteria as follows
• Volume of Domestic Violence Incidents
• Volume of Domestic Violence Crimes
• Types of crime committed
• Sanction Detection Volume and rate
• Types of Sanction Detections (e.g. charge or caution)
• Arrest volume and rates (Home Office Performance Indicator - SPI8a)
• Proportion of DV calls that result in a crime report (CAD to CRIS rates)
• Response times for DV calls
• Volume of DV suspects who are shown as wanted/missing for questioning
• Completion of the F124d and corporate risk assessment and management process.
• The Data Accuracy Team ensures full compliance with the Home Office Counting Rules and the counting rules for the National Standard for Incident Recording throughout the MPS, which includes all the above measurements (except persons shown as wanted/missing). This latter facet is robustly managed by Operation Emerald through the Warrant Management System.

56. As previously highlighted in this report, the VCD CSU Service Delivery Team will conduct focussed performance intervention work where Boroughs are failing to comply with MPS policy.

57. An equality impact assessment relating to Project Umbra will be completed as part of the review work being led by DCI Campbell. That said, it is important to recognise that the impact of equality and diversity, including the consultation process (and outcomes) are threaded throughout the Umbra work strands. It is recognised that this is an area for development, which will be prioritised by the CSU Service Delivery Team DCI.

58. The Criminal Justice Act 2003 amended section 37(A)(1)(a) of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984.

The key provisions and principles of this legislation are:

• Crown Prosecutors will determine whether a person is to be charged in all indictable only, either way or summary offences subject to those cases specified, which police may continue to charge. It is pertinent to note that the vast majority of offences perpetrated by DV abusers require Crown Prosecutors authority to charge.
• Charging decisions by Crown Prosecutors will be made following a review of evidence in cases and will be in accordance with their guidance.
• Prosecutors will provide guidance and advice to investigators throughout the investigative and prosecuting process e.g. lines of enquiry, evidential requirements etc. Crown Prosecutors should be proactive in identifying, and where possible rectifying evidential deficiencies.
• Where it is necessary, pre-charge bail arrangements will be utilised to facilitate the gathering of evidence, including key evidence on which the prosecution will rely, prior to the charging decision being taken.

59. Where domestic violence abusers are bailed in such circumstances, this can lead to a period of significant vulnerability for victims and witnesses. Depending on the suspect’s activity and interference with the victim (and the administration of justice) this may have a direct impact on whether the victim proceeds with an allegation of crime or not. Interference with the victim in this context doesn’t necessarily mean violence or the threat of violence - it may also mean promises to the future to ‘not do it again’ or to improve the victim and family’s quality of life etc. There are many cases recorded where further abuse has occurred during this stage of the criminal justice process. Suffice to say bail in these circumstances has a direct negative impact on repeat victimisation and attrition rates pre-charge.

60. In order to facilitate efficient and effective early consultations and make charging decisions, Crown Prosecutors are deployed, as Duty Prosecutors for such hours as locally agreed to provide guidance and make charging decisions. This service will be complemented by a centrally managed out of hours duty prosecutor arrangement to ensure a continuous 24 hour service.

61. All of the MPS’ charging centres are serviced by a Duty Crown Prosecutor. The MPS’s positive action policy rests hand in glove with the Crown Prosecution Service’s (CPS) positive prosecution (charging) policy in relation to domestic violence cases, subject to evidence meeting the Crown Prosecutor’s Test for Prosecution. With the enactment of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 there are now 3 aspects to this Test i.e. the Threshold Test, Evidential Test and finally the Public Interest Test. It is important to have an understanding of these tests as they have a direct and unmistakable bearing on whether a DV abuser is prosecuted or not.

Threshold Test

62. The Threshold Test applies where the case is one in which it proposed to keep the suspect in custody after charge (this should apply to a notable proportion of DV abusers) but the evidence required to apply the Full Evidential Test is not yet available.

Evidential Test

63. The Crown Prosecutor must be satisfied that there is enough evidence to provide ‘a realistic prospect of conviction’ against the defendant on each charge. A realistic prospect of conviction is an objective test.

64. Once satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to provide a realistic prospect of a conviction the prosecutor must consider and apply the Public Interest Test.

Public Interest Test

65. A prosecution will usually take place unless there are public interest factors tending against prosecution which clearly outweigh those tending in favour or it appears more appropriate in all the circumstances of the case to divert the person from prosecution. Crown Prosecutors need to balance factors for and against prosecution carefully and fairly. Some factors may increase the need to prosecute but others may suggest that another course of action would be better. There are a number of public interest factors, which would support a prosecution in DV cases:

• The victim of the offence was vulnerable, has been put in considerable fear, or suffered personal attack, damage or disturbance.
• The offence was motivated by any form of discrimination against the victim’s ethnic or national origin, disability, sex ………………… or the suspect demonstrated hostility towards the victim based on any of those characteristics.
• There are grounds for believing that the offence is likely to be continued if repeated, for example by a history of recurring conduct.

66. It is pertinent to note that the CPS doesn’t act for victims or the families of victims. Prosecutors act on behalf of the public. That said Prosecutors should always take into account the consequences for the victim of whether or not to prosecute and any views expressed by the victim or the victim’s family.

67. With the employment of Crown Prosecutors in all of London’s police charging centres there can be a disparity in charging and other decision-making. Although the CPS has trained their prosecutors about DV matters, there can be differences in prosecutors’ decisions. This is further exacerbated with officers liaising with prosecutors outside of normal office hours. This latter facility is conducted over the telephone with a prosecutor who can be located anywhere in England and Wales. Whilst I applaud the availability of this service to assist police officers and comply with statutory obligations under ‘Statutory Charging’ standards, there can be regional differences in how DV is viewed and managed, which impact negatively on decision-making. The CPS developed and published good practice guidance in November 2005 for information of its staff and partners. There is no doubt that the CPS and its current deployment of staff at charge centres has had an impact on current DV performance in relation to charges. FYTD 48.8% of the current sanctioned detection is charges.

68. There are many positives in driving forward the charging of perpetrators. This positive action manifests itself in a variety of ways including taking on the men of violence, reducing repeat victimisation, reducing offending rates in public & private places, if marketed effectively sends a clear signal to ‘would be’ perpetrators and to those suffering from domestic abuse. Some of the negative aspects of this charging process have been discussed at the commencement of this paragraph - disparity of CPS decision-making, but also includes the police staff abstractions for paperwork, court appearances, which have a further impact on budgets and the abstraction of front line officers and investigators from their respective duties.

69. London CPS have DV co-ordinators who are all prosecutors working within all their branch offices. The MPS meet with the DV co-ordinators on a tri- monthly basis to discuss issues around prosecution of DV offences, DV court presentation and management of DV court trials. These meetings are chaired by a CPS deputy director who has the London DV portfolio lead.

70. The MPS CSU Service Delivery Team is currently working with the CPS and exchanging performance management data to allow us to achieve a better mutual understanding of why cases have been discontinued or why DV prosecutions have been delayed or withdrawn as ‘Cracked’ or ‘Ineffective Trials’. Areas for improvement will be identified and proactively progressed. This is very much work in progress, and has the support of senior CPS staff.

For example, we are together reviewing 19 cases presented at a North East London Magistrates Court. Of this total there were thirteen Not Guilty verdicts. The review will take into consideration the quality of the police evidence, the CPS decision-making processes in relation to the charge decisions and the quality of the prosecutors’ presentation of evidence. In addition, the review will also consider the appropriateness of the Magistrate Court Bench’s decisions. This is an excellent example of good partnership work in progress, which must be seen as an opportunity to develop and not as a threat.

Abbreviations

ACPO

Association of Chief Police Officers

BME

Black and minority Ethnic

BOCU

Borough Operational Command Unit

CAIC

Child Abuse Investigation Command

CRIS

Crime reporting Information System

CPS

Crown Prosecution Service

CSU

Community Safety Unit

DC

Detective Constable

DCI

Detective Chief Inspector

DS

Detective Sergeant

FGM

Female Genital Mutilation

Form 124D

Domestic Violence Reporting Book

FORWARD

Foundation for Women's Health Research and Development

FYTD

Financial Year To Date

GBH

Grievous Bodily Harm

GLA

Greater London Authority

HBV

Honour Based Violence

IDAP

Integrated Domestic Abuse Programme

IT

Information Technology

LCJB

London Criminal Justice Board

LDVF

London Domestic Violence Forum

LGBT

Lesbian, Gay, Bi-sexual and Transgender

MPA

Metropolitan Police Authority

MPS

Metropolitan Police Service

NGO

Non-Governmental Organisations

OCU

Operational Command Unit

PIB

Performance Information Bureau

SMT

Senior management Team

SPECSS+

Separation & Child Contact, Pregnancy, Escalation, Community Isolation/Awareness, Sexual offences, Stalking, the + mental health, alcohol/drug abuse, threats to kills etc

TP

Territorial Policing

VCD

Violent Crime Directorate

C. Race and equality impact

1. The London DV Forum Steering Group is the strategic body with accountability for Project Umbra. That said as a key partner the MPS is mindful of any adverse impact or disproportionality that may occur as a result of the delivery of the project and in respect of all the strands their membership’s interpretation of their work streams.

2. As highlighted under paragraph 6 of Performance an equality impact assessment relating to Project Umbra will be completed as part of the review work being led by DCI Campbell. It's essential to recognise the impact of equality and diversity and ensures that such considerations are threaded throughout the Umbra work strands. This is an area for development, which will be prioritised by DCI Campbell

D. Financial implications

1. Costs are currently met from within the budget allocated to the Violent Crime Directorate.

2. To date the expenditure has been expressed in terms of opportunity costs for police staff and police officer input into the project, use of meeting room facilities and the provision of documentation.

3. There has been a small amount of disbursement in the provision of refreshments for meeting attendees.

4. To the future there will be an aspect of expenditure as the MPS seeks to find more permanent administrative support for the project. This particular aspect continues to be reviewed with partners. Pending full time recruitment, capability to provide part time administration support to progress all 6 strands of Project Umbra has been identified and is now implemented.

E. Background papers

1. Violent Crime Directorate Update MPA report of 26 October 2006.
2. A Review of Rape Investigations in the MPS published in November 2005

F. Contact details

Report author: DCI Gerry Campbell, 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