Policing Performance Assessment Framework

Report: 14
Date: 12 February 2004
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report updates the Planning, Performance and Review Committee on the development of PPAF, a policing performance assessment framework for England and Wales police forces.

A. Recommendations

That the report be noted.

B. Supporting information

1. Policing Performance Assessment Framework (PPAF) is an outcome focused performance measurement framework covering a broader range of policing activity than the current best value performance indicators. The model for PPAF shown overleaf is relatively straightforward, with resources, used to prevent and deal with crime and non-crime issues, impacting on user satisfaction and citizen trust in the police. The model includes the flexibility to include some elements of local performance.

2. At Appendix 1 is the list of proposed PPAF measures currently under consultation with police forces across the country, circulated by the Home Office in January 2004. The MPS is currently scrutinising the measures in terms of our ability to capture the data necessary to the appropriate standards.

3. It is not yet clear how the local domain will be populated. Two other domains of PPAF are intended for development in April 2005. These measures will include standardised non-crime incident rates; satisfaction of non-crime service users; satisfaction of witnesses; serious and organised crime and terrorism.

Chart 1: Policing Performance Assessment Framework (see supporting material)

4. MPS performance against PPAF measures will be compared with the average for the most similar force (MSF) group. For the MPS the MSF group comprises Merseyside, West Midlands, Greater Manchester Police and West Yorkshire. Whilst the MPS acknowledges that these are the designated most similar UK forces, it is essential that we and our stakeholders understand that they are not sufficiently similar for direct comparisons or target setting (the MPS itself is not included in any other force's MSF group). There are critical aspects of MPS business that are not captured within PPAF at present. Measures of more serious / organised crime and counter-terrorism have yet to be developed, for example.

5. Work is underway to align MPS definitions with those captured by PPAF. We have for example agreed to harmonise the MPS definition of 'gun enabled crime' with that of PPAF. (Indeed, the MPS was a significant influence in the setting of this definition.) The MPS is committed to bringing our information into alignment with the Home Office so that the reporting and accounting mechanisms will reflect figures reporting via the same definition. Planning panel's work has taken PPAF requirements into account in its work for the 2004/5 Policing Plan.

6. In line with the developments on citizen focus, the MPS is revising both its Public Attitude Survey and the Crime Victim Survey. As corporate tools, these surveys of people's, and especially users', experiences with policing are critical drivers toward improvement in the MPS under the citizen focus domain of PPAF.

Impact on the MPS

7. PPAF is a national framework for managing police performance. As such, it is a high level assessment using a limited number of indicators of the overall performance of the MPS, and for some measures, the performance of its BOCUs. PPAF is heavily (almost primarily) weighted to the delivery of frontline policing. It will not be able to measure a significant part of the MPS business performance - serious and organised crime and counter-terrorism. HMIC will be assessing forces for their capability and delivery of these two important business arenas. It will be important to discuss with the MPA the implications of this emphasis for the MPS assessment.

8. The MPS is committed to aligning its data and relevant measurement of objectives to the PPAF definitions. Work is underway to do this, and we feel confident that such an alignment will add clarity for the public to the MPS performance in the areas covered by PPAF. It will not always be an easy task. For example, the PPAF measure on frontline policing excludes PCSOs, who are a central plank in the MPS's improvement to visible policing. It is important to remind the public, however, that PPAF assesses a partial picture of overall MPS performance within specific measures as well as across all measures.

9. There is scope for influence by the MPA on the PPAF local priorities board. Both the MPA and the MPS have representatives on this board.

10. Work is underway on the National Incident Recording System. MPS is monitoring this development by the Home Office.

11. The MPS is already busy aligning definitions, data capture and its corporate surveys to bring the MPS into compliance with PPAF. We are confident that we are aware of the necessary adjustments and are changing our procedures and practice accordingly (take for instance the redesign of the corporate surveys).

C. Equality and diversity implications

The measures chosen for the fairness and equality element of PPAF will be used to assess the MPS against other forces and care will be needed to ensure that the unique nature of London's population is accounted for.

D. Financial implications

Where additional measures are being put in place, the financial implications of this data collection are considered as part of the measure assessment.

E. Background papers

None.

F. Contact details

Report author: Professor Betsy Stanko, 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