Robbery and street crime performance 2005/2006 financial year

Report: 6
Date: 14 July 2005
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report provides an overview of robbery and street crime performance for the current financial year, April 2005 to May 2005. Where comparisons are made, these are against the corresponding period, last year, April 2004 to May 2004.

The report structure is aligned with the performance headings set out in the Policing Performance and Assessment Framework (PPAF).

The document is to be read in conjunction with the Borough Performance report for the 2004/2005 Financial Year and the Corporate Performance Report July 2005, which contains the latest performance update for relevant Statutory Performance Indicators, Policing Plan Indicators and other areas of Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA) interest.

A. Recommendations

That members note the report.

B. Supporting information

Robbery: definition

1. “A person is guilty of robbery if he steals, and immediately before or at the time of doing so, and in order to do so, he uses force on any person or puts or seeks to put any person in fear of being then and there subjected to force”.

2. Robbery comprises the two distinct offences of robbery of personal property and robbery of commercial property. It does not include any other offences.

Street crime: definition

3. Street crime comprises the two offence categories, robbery of personal property and theft person (snatch). It does not include offences of robbery of commercial property or theft person (pickpocket). This definition was adopted by the ten forces nationally, which formed part of the Home Office Street Crime Initiative (SCI), of which the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) was one. It was used as a means of recording and reporting a clearer picture of ‘street crimes’ as opposed to distinguishing between crime types that occurred ‘in the street’.

Theft person/snatch: definition

4. ‘Theft person’ is a term used to describe the act of stealing something directly from the body of a person. Two distinct modus operandi can be used. Firstly, surreptitiously ‘picking the pocket’. Secondly, ’snatching’ an item (e.g. handbag) from the person and running off. Theft snatch occurs when a measure of force is used on the property but not on the victim.

Robbery/Street crime: measurement

5. Although Home Office Public Service Agreements (PSAs) traditionally refer to ‘robbery’, the MPS has preferred to measure both ‘robbery’ (personal and commercial) and ‘street crime’ (personal robbery and snatch)’.

6. The underlying rationale for the focus on the street crime are:

1. because theft snatch and robbery of personal property are often distinguished merely by the degree, or lack of force applied to the victim and
2. because both offences are often committed by the same perpetrator or groups thereof.

7. The Policing Performance Assessment Framework (PPAF) measures performance against robbery (personal and commercial). PPAF does not measure theft snatch.

8. Home Office Public Service Agreement 1 measures performance against a basket of ten crimes. Theft person (snatch and pick-pocketing combined) is one of the crimes included in the British Crime Survey (BCS) ‘basket’ of ten.

Robbery/Street crime: MPS performance

9. During April 2005, the number of reported robberies in the MPS rose by 19% compared to the same period in 2004. 22 MPS boroughs recorded more Robberies in April and May 2005 than in the corresponding period in 2004. This should be balanced against the fact that reported offences of theft person (snatch) fell by some 14% in the same period. This may be in some part due to interpretation of Home Office Counting Rules (HOCR) guidelines on classification of offences. The trend for street crime, the more reliable measure shows an increase during the same period of 9%. The number of robberies has therefore been inflated by classification issues and it should be noted by the committee that comparison of street crime over the last 12 weeks compared with the same period last year shows an overall increase of 1.6%.

10. Following consultation between the Crime Integrity Team (CIT), boroughs and the National Crime Recording Standards (NCRS) unit at the Home Office, the classification issues have been resolved. New guidance has been circulated to boroughs, which should improve consistency of recording standards across the MPS. The guidance has been agreed by the Director of Policing Policy at the Home Office, Stephen Rimmer, and will be incorporated into HOCR at the earliest opportunity.

Robbery: Borough performance

11. Boroughs of note in terms of highest volume increases in robbery are: Newham (198 offences); Southwark (173 offences, rise of 51%); Haringey (147 offences); Lambeth (138 offences, rise of 30%); and Westminster (117 offences, rise of 51%)

12. Robbery volumes in Newham and Southwark combined represent 28.6 % of the overall MPS increase; with the addition of Haringey they comprise 40% of the total increase; together with Lambeth they constitute 50.7% of the MPS rise; and, including Westminster, the top five Boroughs account for 59.7 % of the rise in robbery in the MPS.

13. Boroughs of note in terms of the highest percentage increases in robbery are: Newham (73%); Haringey (67%); Havering (64%, 44 offences); Kingston (63%, 29 offences); and Barking and Dagenham (62%, 60 offences).

14. Boroughs of note in terms of largest reductions in robbery are: Enfield (-23%, 55 fewer offences); Bromley (-28%, 44 fewer offences); Tower Hamlets (-16%, 42 fewer offences); Croydon (- 9%, 26 fewer offences); and Camden (-10%, 25 fewer offences).

15. Ten MPS Safer Streets Boroughs are showing increases in robbery, most notably: Newham (73%); Haringey (67%); Southwark (51%); Westminster (51%); and Islington (41%, 87 offences).

16. Five MPS Safer Streets Boroughs are showing decreases in robbery, most notably: Tower Hamlets (-16%); Camden (-10%, 25 fewer offences); and Croydon (-9%, 26 fewer offences).

Street crime: Borough performance

17. Boroughs of note in terms of highest volume increases in street crime: Haringey (171 offences); Southwark (141 offences); Westminster (132 offences); Lambeth (128 offences); and Islington (122 offences).

18. Boroughs of note in terms of highest percentage increases in street crime: Barking and Dagenham (62%, a rise of 68 offences); Haringey (54%); Greenwich (52%, a rise of 107 offences); Islington (37%); and Havering (35%, arise of 29 offences).

19. Leading Boroughs in terms of largest volume reductions in street crime: Croydon (94 less offences); Tower Hamlets (73 less offences); Camden (64 less offences); and Enfield (52 less offences).

20. Leading Boroughs in terms of largest percentage reductions in street crime: Croydon (-24%); Bromley (-23%, 40 less offences); Harrow (-23%, 39 less offences); and Tower Hamlets (-21%).

21. Nine MPS Safer Streets Boroughs are showing increases in street crime, most notably: Haringey (171 offences); Southwark (141 offences); Westminster (132 offences); and Lambeth (128 offences).

Detections: MPS performance

22. The sanction detection (SD) rate target for the MPS in 2005/06 in respect of robbery is 12%. In the first two months of the current financial year, the SD rate achieved by the MPS stands at 11.4%.

Detections: Borough performance

23. Ten Boroughs are currently exceeding their respective SD rate targets for robbery. Two Boroughs are achieving their targets while twenty-two Boroughs are not achieving their targets. The highest SD rates are 23% currently being posted by both Bromley (26 SDs) and Harrow (29 SDs). The lowest SD rates for 2005/06 are 3% at Waltham Forest (12 SDs), 5% at both Barnet (12 SDs) and Camden (12 SDs).

24. The Boroughs currently exceeding their targets by the greatest margin are Bromley (+12%) and Harrow (+11%). The Boroughs falling furthest short of their targets are: Waltham Forest (-6%); Newham (-5%); Tower Hamlets (-5%) and Sutton (-5%).

25. The Boroughs achieving the highest volume of SDs are Southwark (96), Lambeth (72), Islington (58) and Brent (48). The Boroughs with the lowest volume of SDs are Sutton (5), Havering (8), Merton (8) and Richmond (9).

Performance: emerging trends

26. The incidence of commercial robbery has increased by 71 offences, which corresponds to 5.5% of the overall rise in robbery.

27. As stated earlier, changes in MPS recording practices has resulted in a decrease in offences classified as theft snatch by 14%, which represents 399 fewer offences. Assuming that all these offences are now being classified as robbery the proportion of the increase therein attributable to Snatch would amount to 30.8%.

Factors impacting on performance

28. During the 2004/05 Financial Year Home Office Support for the Safer Streets Initiative in all MPS Boroughs amounted to total revenue funding of £13.4 million. Following the conclusion of the Street Crime Initiative (SCI) in March 2005 the funding arrangement for street crime in financial year 2005/06 totals £1.5 million for MPS initiatives and £1.35 million allocated to the National Mobile Phone Crime Unit located within the MPS

29. The reduced funding coincides with the setting of broader crime reduction targets under the new PSA 1. Therefore, although the MPS has agreed a 2% corporate reduction target for robbery, this target is in a context of competing Territorial Policing bespoke reduction priorities (burglary, motor vehicle crime, violent crime and gun-enabled crime) and comprises part of the basket of ten British Crime Survey-related reduction targets.

30. In 2004/2005 specific Home Office funding facilitated an MPS Robbery Task Force comprising 112 officers deployed within the high-volume Boroughs of Lambeth, Hackney and Newham. In 2005/06, reduction in funding has necessitated downsizing this Task Force to 27 officers, covering the Boroughs of Southwark, Hackney and Newham. However, these officers remain ring-fenced for anti-robbery initiatives, are additional to Borough staff and are consistently targeted to local robbery hotspots and prolific and priority offenders.

The way forward: improving performance

31. The MPS Safer Streets Strategy for 2005 is under the direction of: Deputy Assistant Commissioner Territorial Policing Operations Brian Paddick; Commander Territorial Policing Crime, Ian Delbarre and Commander Specialist Crime Operational Development, Andre Baker. Safer Streets is based upon the range of tactical options set out in the recent Home Office publication, ‘Problem Solving Street Crime’, a national best practice document to which the MPS made a significant contribution.

32. Safer Streets Retained Funding is an additional revenue stream allocated to enable Boroughs to submit bids to sustain local initiatives to tackle specific robbery problems supported by current intelligence reports and crime problem profile assessments. Total funding of £1.1 million has been reserved for this purpose during the Financial Year 2005/2006.

33. Since April 2005, MPS Boroughs have continued to receive significant support from Central Operations Pan-London Units. Deployments are reviewed at the bi-weekly Crime Operations’ ‘Together’ Tasking Meeting. Based upon the TP Tactical Assessment significant emphasis is currently being placed upon the tasking of Pan-London assets towards the recent rises in robbery classifications across London. The reclassification of previously recorded offences together with a lack of available data due to preparation of the year-end figures all impacted on the analysis of data and subsequent tasking. This has now been corrected and a comprehensive set of measures is now in place to drive the trend downwards further still.

34. The TP Strategic Analysis Unit is presently tasked with producing an MPS Problem Profile for robbery and street crime in accordance with the demands of the National Intelligence Model. This product is essential to determining tactical resolutions for the MPS.

35. Crime Control Strategy Meetings (CCSMs), organised by the TP Performance Review Unit (PRU) and chaired by Commander Simon Bray, bring together ‘similar boroughs’ to share good practice and jointly consider effective methods of solving common problems. These meetings are themed and the current round for June and July are focussing on the specific issue of sanctioned detections. The PRU is committed to supporting the TP performance framework through an enhanced ‘Field Team’ capability for Commanders with overall responsibility for the four geographic ‘link’ areas and Westminster.

C. Race and equality impact

Implications of performance against individual targets are considered in the Annual Borough and Business Group Plans as well as in detailed performance reports throughout the year. These reports note exceptions in strategic disproportional indicators where applicable.

D. Financial implications

The content of this report raises no additional financial implications beyond forecasts and estimates previously presented to the Authority.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report authors: Rob Harper, Chief Inspector, Crime Control Strategy Meetings (CCSM) Team, TP Performance Review Unit.

For more information contact:

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

List of abbreviations

MPS

Metropolitan Police Service

MPA

Metropolitan Police Authority

TP

Territorial Policing

CCSM

Crime and Control Strategy Meeting

PSA

Public Service Agreement

FME

Forensic Medical Examiner

PPAF

Policing Performance and Assessment Framework

SD

Sanction Detection

SCI

Street Crime Initiative

NCRS

National Crime Recording Standard

CIT

Crime Integrity Team

HOCR

Home Office Counting Rules

BCS

British Crime Survey

PRU

Performance Review Unit

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback