Operational policing measure

Report: 7
Date: 9 October 2003
By: Commissioner

Summary

The Operational Policing Measure (OPM) has been developed to monitor the level of visible operational policing in the MPS. This report explains the OPM and its purpose. It updates MPA members on implementation progress and explains the management information developed to date.

A related initiative is the Home Office, “Frontline Policing Measure” (FLPM). This is a measure across all forces, of the percentage of Police Officer time spent on frontline duties. This report explains the FLPM and identifies issues that may arise from the use of two different measures.

A. Recommendations

That

1. the report be noted.
2. the proposal to continue to promote the OPM as a viable alternative to the Home Office Frontline Policing Measure be noted; and
3. the level, detail and format of the management information provided by the OPM team for future monitoring be agreed.

B. Supporting information

Description and purpose

1. The Operational Policing Measure (OPM) has been developed primarily to monitor the level of visible operational policing in the MPS. Data for the measure is abstracted from the Computer Aided Resource Management duty planning system (CARM). This provides information about the planned hours worked by staff in different roles as well as major abstractions for police and police staff in operational units.

2. As part of the OPM, standard sets of categories have been developed based on HMIC role codes. The OPM code places every member of the MPS, both Police and police staff, in one of four OPM categories reflecting their main role – visible operational, non-visible operational, operational support or organisational support.

3. The OPM provides a comprehensive picture of the numbers of police and police staff employed in different roles across the organisation. It also provides a realistic overview of the time spent undertaking visible and non-visible policing, together with support functions.

What will the OPM tell me?

4.

• How the MPS is meeting the 2003/4 Service priority of increasing visible police presence by 4%.
• The total number of police and police staff attached to each Borough (BOCU) or Business group.
• Abstraction information (e.g. sickness, leave, aid, court, recuperative duty, training etc) providing the means both locally and corporately, to compare and manage abstraction levels.
• The number of Police Community Support Officers (PCSO’s) moving onto Boroughs and their level of visibility.
• The number of Special Constables on Borough and their level of visibility.
• The means to analyse police visibility and compare that visibility with performance against policing objectives, the fear of crime and actual levels of crime.
• Staff employed across the organisation by their post. e.g. 800 staff within Borough intelligence units.

Recent developments

TP Borough’s

5. The main focus of OPM team activity has been ensuring successful implementation of the measure at Borough level. An internal target has been set for 2003/2004, to have 10% or less of visible operational uniformed police and police staff time unallocated on the computerised duty planning system. Until compliance reaches that level, the data cannot be deemed reliable and accurate for management information purposes. Performance in this area has improved by 43% during the last quarter; Borough average is currently at 7%. (See appendix 1).

Territorial Policing pan-London units

6. Work to review compliance within Territorial Policing pan-London units has also recently commenced. An important area for OPM development is being able to provide management information about the level of activity and support these units provide to MPS Boroughs. The Territorial Support Group (TSG) are comprehensively duty planning and are capturing activity in two hour periods. No other pan-London unit is as well advanced.

Management information

7. Since March 2003, OPM performance information has been published within the Territorial Policing Monthly Management Report (TPMMR) and on METSTATS. More detailed data is published on the OPM intranet site, which is available for all staff to view. The data is presented in a range of formats including data tables, charts and pivot tables.

Workforce strengths

8. The OPM is able to demonstrate where police and police staff are deployed across the MPS. It measures staff numbers and roles on each OCU or Business Group. This enables comparisons to be made on OCU strengths and make up and will help monitor changes brought about by organisational growth.

9. Workforce strength performance information reveals Borough percentage and numerical increases or decrease in visible workforce numbers. This shows that between March 2003 and July 2003 there was a 3% increase in the number of Borough staff in the uniform operational police and police staff category. (Appendix 2).

10. For the MPS as a whole, between March 2003 and July 2003 the number of police officers in uniform operational roles has increased by 1.2%. Over the same period, the numbers of uniform operational police staff has shown an increase of 13%. This rise is mainly attributable to the increased numbers of Police Community Support Officers.

11. Information on staff numbers for all Business groups is provided. There is also a pivot table produced that allows for the creation of tables that compare and contrast numbers of staff engaged in different roles across the MPS.

Visibility

12. Monthly data is currently produced to show the proportion of time spent “visible” by;

• Uniform Operational Police – Police officers who work in uniform and are principally visible to the public e.g. core teams, community beat officers, schools officers and street duties.
• Uniform Operational Police and Police Staff. (PCSO’S and Station Reception Officer)

13. A note of caution in respect of ‘visibility levels’. Whilst the level of information being entered on CARM about staff duties is increasing, the level of activity detail still falls somewhat short of an exact figure. To overcome this, a proxy figure has been developed utilising existing Home Office paper based activity analysis. The proxy figure captures additional time spent by uniform operational Police Officers away from public visibility. It includes activities such as refreshments, dealing with prisoners and crime reporting. The proxy figure is currently set at 20%.

14. For July 2003, the MPS Borough average visibility figures for Uniform Operational Police Officers and Police Staff was 52%. Data for each Borough is produced. (Appendix 3).

15. During the last quarter on BOCU’S, the average visibility for Uniform Operational Police and Police Staff was 55%.

Territorial Support Group

16. Operational Policing Measure data is used to generate Management Information in respect of TSG deployments. In the future, information about the activity of all pan London units will be captured.

17. The data is still being refined but broad trends can be identified; 65% of TSG deployment is directed patrol, 14% is spent on public order duties, 12% on OCU initiatives and 7% on other OCU work. Directed patrol includes legion patrols, Safer streets and CBRN. OCU initiatives include Surveillance, Observations and proactive tasking. Other OCU work includes Polsa and security patrols. (Appendix 4)

18. Amongst the Boroughs, Lambeth received the most support, with an average of 11,250 officer hours per month (April 2003 – July 2003). At the other end of the scale Barnet averaged just 15 hours.

Frontline Policing Measure (FLPM)

19. The Home Office has been required to develop a measure of frontline policing to monitor a requirement within Public Sector Agreement 2 (PSA2);

20. There will be three national performance measures utilising FLPM data;

• Percentage of Police Officer time spent on frontline duties. (Headline Measure)
• Percentage of time spent on frontline duties (including crime prevention activity) by all police staff.
• Percentage of Police officer time spent on visible patrol.

21. The intention of the headline measure is to focus on police officers and frontline activities that should not be carried out by “support staff”. In their definition, community support officers are not included.

22. The exact methodology for combining the data had still to be finalised. Much emphasis will be placed on activity analysis information collected during activity based costing exercises.

23. The key concerns relate to fairness, it has been suggested that for those roles not covered by AA data (e.g. many central roles) the measure will use HMIC code data and make the assumption that all time spent by staff in these roles would count as front-line policing time.

Issues arising from the use of two different measures

24.

• Difficult to explain to stakeholders why visibility levels promoted within MPS, MPA and GLA, using OPM data as the source, differ from annual HO FLPM figures.
• The OPM is a forward thinking, I.T based measure, which can detail levels of visibility across the MPS, all of the time.
• The FLPM provides no long-term picture of what activity analysis might look like in 5 years time.
• The FLPM provides an annual two-week snapshot of visibility across a narrow band of staff, based on paper based activity analysis whereas the OPM has the potential to give activity data for all staff all the time.
• The data provided by the FLPM will be a dip sample. The OPM will provide more passive data across the breadth of the organisation.
• The FLPM discusses options of narrow, medium or wide options of measurement. The OPM can do all of this now.
• The MPS would not wish to duplicate activity analysis returns, year on year with the ongoing development of the OPM

Future development

25. We continue to meet with the FLPM team to achieve greater clarity about the development of each measure and to sell the virtues of the OPM. It is also possible for us to map FLPM activities and roles to OPM data. The HO is aware that the MPS measure could provide clarity around activities conducted by staff in frontline roles, for whom detailed AA have not been conducted. It is anticipated that the methodology for producing FLPM data will be made available to Forces in October 2003.

26. It is a key objective of the OPM team that the benefits of the MPS measure be communicated to both the Home Office and other forces. To that end presentations are being made to the ACPO technical committee and to a meeting of most similar forces.

27. The OPM and ABC teams will work with the Metduties project to look at how to capture data directly from Metduties in future, to minimise the need for separate activity analysis exercises.

How can the OPM be used by the MPS and its stakeholders to influence policy?

28. OPM policy was published in Notices 19/03 on 7 May 2003. Since that date, an enormous amount of work has taken place to ensure compliance and to improve data accuracy. However it needs to be made clear that the OPM is still at an early stage of development.

29. As data becomes more reliable, the OPM can;

• Contribute to the debate on the relationship between Police visibility and performance.
• Be used for “modelling” to see the impact that variations in the mix of Police and Police Staff have on visibility.
• Organisational growth – By providing information about the workforce numbers and Police/Police Staff mix by business group, assist in decisions about the strategic direction of the MPS.
• Provide management information about the contribution made by pan London units. The MPS will be able to target resources to where they will have maximum impact on delivery of policing goals and annual objectives.
• By providing a comprehensive measure of staff numbers within each Business group, assist stakeholders in making budgetary decisions.
• By quantifying the proportion of time spent by uniformed officers on “aid”, supports the development of policy around charging external organisations for Policing.

Proposed level, detail and format of OPM MI to be provided to members for future monitoring.

30. OPM management information is produced in excel spreadsheet and pivot table format. This is then published on the OPM intranet website. It is proposed that members receive management information in the same format. The level and detail is explained below;

It is proposed to supply monthly data at Borough level for;

• Levels of unallocated hours - See Appendix 1.
• Levels of visibility – See Appendix 3.

It is proposed to supply monthly data at MPS Business group level for;

• Workforce Strengths – See Appendix 2.

It is proposed to supply monthly data at Borough level for;

• Territorial Support Group deployments - See Appendix 4.

31. As OPM data develops, it is suggested that the OPM joint working group continue to meet on a quarterly basis to review the range of management information available. This forum enables the MPA and GLA to suggest improvements and to provide feedback as to the type of information, which is of relevance to their respective roles.

C. Equality and diversity implications

Through ongoing development of the Operational Policing Measure the MPS and its key stakeholders will have a clearer picture of the workforce numbers, male/female balance and ethnicity. It is also possible to provide information as to the number of part - time staff employed across the MPS and details of the roles they are currently undertaking.

D. Financial implications

1. The OPM Team will prepare the management information package. This function will be absorbed within current staffing levels. There are therefore only minimal financial implications in the preparation and circulation of the data proposed. However, should demand for additional information or analysis be sought, there is every likelihood that additional resources would be required.

2. In order to comply with OPM policy, every OCU CARM unit has had an increase in workload. That cost is hard to quantify in financial terms, however it should be borne in mind that some of the extra inputting was necessary to prepare the service for C3(i).

E. Background papers

• Operational Policing Measure – MPA Finance, Planning and Best Value Committee paper, 29 May 2002.
• Update on Implementation of Activity Based Costing (ABC) in the MPS – finance Committee paper, 15 September 2003.

F. Contact details

Report author: Chief Inspector Oonagh Vyse, Reform and Growth DCC2(2), 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