Police performance monitors

Report: 13
Date: 11 December 2003
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report updates PPRC regarding the publication of performance monitors for 2002-3.

A. Recommendations

That the report be noted.

B. Supporting information

1. October 2003 PPRC received a report outlining the developing policing performance assessment framework (PPAF), which aims to provide a more balanced assessment of performance than reliance on crime and clear-up figures. PPAF measures are grouped into six domains: resource usage; investigating crime; reducing crime; helping the public; promoting public safety; and citizen focus.

2. Later in October 2003 a set of performance monitors, based on interim performance measures covering performance in five of the six PPAF domains, were published by the Home Office. These show performance against most similar force (MSF) average and are attached for information (Appendix 1).

3. The MPS welcomes this latest step in attempts to monitor performance, as such measures can be helpful in setting targets and raising standards. As a public service the MPS recognises transparency is essential and improvements can only be identified by comparison with data from previous years. The MPS believe it is important that relevant information is available to the public so that it is accountable for its performance.

4. While the majority of this data has previously been released in annual crime statistics or the British Crime Survey, this presentation seeks to compare MPS performance against the four most similar forces in England and Wales: Greater Manchester; Merseyside; West Midlands; and West Yorkshire.

5. The 2002-3 performance monitors reflect our recent success in reducing domestic burglary, street robbery and vehicle crime, with the MPS’ domestic burglary rate the lowest in the group. Investigative performance has improved, while sickness levels for police officers have reduced by 7% and both police officer and police staff sickness remain well below the group average. Overall, the MPS is rated at least equal to the comparative forces in four of the five areas measured.

6. However the MPS has continuing concerns that these comparisons with other forces do not successfully reflect the particular challenges faced in London. Ideally the statistical ratio of difference in the various groups of forces should be about a factor of three, with anything up to a factor of eight being acceptable. However, London is between forty and forty-four times different from our four other most similar forces. This point is noted in an additional footnote to the MPS’ performance monitor in the Home Office publication.

7. We therefore accept that the forces selected may be the most similar in England, but their policing experience is not fully comparable with London’s and the MPS do not accept this group as suitable for absolute performance comparisons. The MPS are increasingly looking for international comparisons with police services in other major cities such as Paris and New York.

8. In particular these measures currently focus exclusively on only part of the wide range of tasks involved in policing, especially in a major capital city such as London. Resource usage, for example, is monitored solely using sickness levels. The danger is that pressure may be applied for resources to become centered on those areas that are measured; volume crime such as burglary, street and vehicle crime. While it is vital to reduce these crimes, it must not be to the detriment of all the other services the public expect the MPS to perform. These include ‘low-level’ issues where the MPS works in partnership with local authorities and others to tackle anti-social behaviour and quality of life crimes in particular communities, and dealing with distressed and vulnerable people in the street.

9. We also have specific challenges unique to London such as policing major demonstrations and handling governmental or royal events. At the most serious end of the scale, the service must maintain the current downward trend in gun crime, tackle the trafficking of drugs and people into London and vigorously continue our nationwide responsibility for counter-terrorism work. In between these two extremes sit a long list of other important tasks, all central to the role of the Metropolitan Police Service.

10. As a fuller range of policing activity becomes reflected in the monitors, the unique nature of London is likely to become more apparent in this presentation. The applicability of the most similar force analysis to the MPS will continue to need careful consideration as additional measures are developed.

11. Borough performance monitors, showing performance against comparator groups of Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships and Basic Command Units, will be produced next year when the necessary comparator groups have been agreed. As with the MPS performance monitor, London’s environment will be reflected to differing degrees in these monitors, and there will be a risk that resources will be shifted to activities with established measurement systems in place.

12. The MPS continues to work through the PPAF project structure to develop a fuller and more accurate picture of policing performance.

C. Equality and diversity implications

There are no equal opportunities and diversity implications arising from the publication of this information, as no fairness and equalities measures are yet in place.

D. Financial implications

There are no financial implications arising from the publication of this information.

E. Background papers

None.

F. Contact details

Report author: Carol McDonald, Corporate Performance Analysis Unit, 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