National Crime Recordings Standard Update

Report: 13
Date:12 July 2004
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report is intended to provide an update to the Planning, Performance and Review Committee (PPRC) on the current position with implementing the National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS) within the MPS.

A. Recommendations

That the progress made by the MPS in implementing NCRS be noted.

B. Supporting information

1. The Home Office introduced NCRS to the Police Services of England and Wales for implementation from April 2002. In March 2003 the MPS reviewed its arrangement for implementing NCRS. This review resulted in the consolidation of the role of Force Crime Registrar (FCR) from being a secondary role for two people, to a priority role for one. This recognised the importance of achieving compliance. To support the newly appointed Registrar a small team, the Crime Integrity Team, was created. At that stage it was impossible to accurately assess the amount or extent of work required by the Registrar and his team and a small initial establishment of 6 people was authorised, subject to review. Initially based in temporary accommodation the unit was finally re-sited in November 2003 to Kings Cross Road Police Building.

2. As part of the Home Office drive to ensure compliance across all Forces the Policing Standards Units (PSU) have a brief to ensure the quality of the data that feeds the various Domains of the Police Performance Assessment Framework. Crime data is one of those strands. In 2003 the PSU employed the Audit Commission to carry out an audit of crime recording in all the police forces in England and Wales. That audit resulted in the MPS being awarded an overall AMBER grading. This was fully reported to the PPRC in July 2003. The audit also identified an agreed Action Plan. An update on progress of that plan was given to PPRC in February 2004. A copy of the Action Plan, with the current position of each of the strands, is attached at Appendix 1.

3. The 2003 crime recording audit was always part of a three year plan to ensure the introduction of the NCRS was fully embedded into the day to day business of Forces. As such the Audit Commission have now begun the Year 2 audit. This year’s audit is, in part, predicated on the results of last year’s. For the MPS, an amber result last year subjects us to only an examination of our crime recording decision making process at the very first level, that of deciding whether an incident should result in a crime being recorded. The Year 2 audits will also examine the degree of compliance of “No Crimes” with HOCR and NCRS rules. There is a greater emphasis this year on the management arrangements in place at a Borough level to supervise, manage and oversee crime recording issues. This is being examined by visits and interviews being conducted at 10 OCUs. The Audit Commission will also report on the position the MPS has made with last year’s Action Plan.

4. The auditors started the audit in May this year and in addition to the data examination and OCU visits they will interview the FCR, Deputy Assistant Commissioner (DAC) Richard Bryan (ACPO-Crime Recording Lead) and Mr Richard Sumray from the MPA.

5. One of the main failings identified by the 2003 audit was a lack of training within the MPS for NCRS. This was examined and due to the current changes taking place with the implementation of C3i and METCALL, and already overcrowded training schedules, it was not deemed possible to introduce NCRS training into the current timetable. To offset this delay and to ensure training was available a training package was created by the Crime Integrity Team and circulated to all OCU Commanders for local delivery.

6. The Crime Integrity Team (CIT) has audited various areas of crime performance and TP HQ has also undertaken audit/inspection work in liaison with the FCR. A number of findings emerged around the quality of crime data, for example, Operation Asgard Territorial Policing Headquarters (TPHQ) discovered a potential problem with the accuracy of Motor Vehicle crime database seemingly due to over recording. In order to take a high profile lead on these issues, and to ensure NCRS/HOCR compliance is driven across the various Business Groups, DAC Bryan has introduced, and chairs, a Crime Report Information System (CRIS) Coordination group. This has representatives from all relevant stakeholders. Its terms of reference include directing the examination and resolution for such issues as CRIS ownership, crime recording policy and training issues.

Problems/Successes

7. The implementation of sufficient training across all levels of staff in the MPS is a problem and has been raised in previous reports. The CRIS Coordination Group has now prioritised a Training Needs Analysis to examine, report and make recommendations on all levels of crime recording training. This is being led by TPHQ and the Internal Consultancy Group.

8. The work and role of the Crime Integrity Team was reviewed in February 2004 and sought an increase in staff establishment. However, that increase currently awaits the results of an overall re-evaluation of staffing levels throughout the Deputy Commissioner’s Command (DCC) Business Group.

9. Operation Asgard identified problems with the Motor Vehicle crime database partly due to over recording of crime. A small team of experts, including CIT staff, was formed under the CRIS Co-ordination Group, to improve the accuracy of that database. As a result of its work the MPS was able, at year end (March 2004), to present a motor vehicle crime database that not only achieved the reduction target required by Government but also had an increased confidence level in the accuracy of the figures.

10. Leading on from Operation Asgard a process has been put into place that spreads good practice in correcting the crime database to include all other types of crime. This gives Operational Command Units (OCUs) more ownership of their data and the responsibility to identify errors. These errors are flagged to the CIT who undertake review and correction as required. The next stage of development of the process is intended to stop these errors occurring. This process is already allowing a greater degree of confidence in its crime databases.

11. The introduction of the CRIS Co-ordination Group chaired by an Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) member has given the issue of the accuracy of crime data a very high profile. It also demonstrates the MPS commitment to ensuring compliance with NCRS and HOCR.

C. Race and equality impact

1. The NCRS victim oriented approach to crime recording is a highly positive step for vulnerable and minority groups. NCRS makes it easier for third-party reporting of crime on a victim’s behalf, and requires the acceptance of a crime report unless the circumstances do not amount to an offence, or there is credible evidence that a crime did not occur. This removes pressure from victims to “prove” they are a crime victim.

2. NCRS will mean a more accurate recording of crime. This can only lead to more effective police deployment and ultimately a safer London through more effective crime fighting and reduction strategies.

D. Financial implications

1. If an increase in the establishment of the CIT is agreed it will obviously impact on operating costs. However any growth is highly likely to be achieved by the re-allocation of DCC posts rather than augmentation of establishment.

2. Pending the results of the Training Needs Analysis it is not possible to estimate the additional training costs that will necessarily be incurred. However, dependent on the type of training needs identified and the solutions proposed, this could have not only financial implications but also opportunity costs due to abstractions from operational policing duty to attend training.

3. A major financial consideration is dealing with the physical CRIS database. Any changes required are authorised by the CRIS Changes Board which is chaired by an MPS Commander. This has a budget of £1.4 million but has already assigned £800,000 for work outstanding until today. Every change is incredibly costly, for example changing just one entry to a mandatory field forcing the inputter to make an entry costs in the region of £250,000. Therefore every effort is made, and will continue to be made, to reduce the number of changes required.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report Author: Inspector Colin Duncan (Deputy Crime Registrar)

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback