HMIC going local inspections

Report: 6
Date: 13 October 2005
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report identifies the benefits that have been realised during the inspection programme, and whether the process has provided ‘Value for Money’. It also provides a brief outline of the new ‘Going Local 3’ process, due to be launched nationwide in 2006/2007, and how the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) intends to respond to the process.

A. Recommendation

That members note the report.

B. Supporting information

1. In April 2001, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) embarked on a nationwide, five-year programme to inspect every Borough Command Unit (BCU) in England and Wales. To date, twenty-six MPS Boroughs have been inspected and of the remaining six, four are to be inspected before the end of March 2006. Merton and Bexley BCUs will not be inspected, as they have been risk assessed out of the process by HMIC.

2. In April 2006, the HMIC inspection process will change with the phased implementation of the new ‘Going Local 3’ (GL3) process. HMIC will pilot the new methodology in a number of BCUs countrywide before this date. Hammersmith and Fulham BCU have been identified as the MPS pilot site, a date for which is yet to be arranged.

Benefits to the MPS

3. The Going Local process provides local Borough Commanders with an in-depth assessment of their systems, processes and performance. Each Borough report outlines recommendations for improvement and good practice, copies of which are made available to the organisation through the MPS Intranet.

4. It is HMIC practice to follow up on the initial inspection, and of the 121 recommendations made in the twenty-five reports to date (the most recent awaits publication) all have been implemented to the satisfaction of HMIC.

5. In terms of organisational benefits, analyses of the reports show a number of repeated recommendations including:

• The need to introduce a Demand Management strategy was a recurring theme in the BCU inspections. This has also been the subject of a Best Value Review, with the recommendations being progressed by Territorial Policing (TP) Headquarters in consultation with the Metropolitan Police Authority. The subject has further been addressed by the introduction of MetCall Standard Operating Procedures (SOPS).
• The introduction, or further development of, Performance Management systems also was mentioned. This has been recognised in the Service Review, and the formation of a Performance Directorate will address this matter, further details of which appear later in this report.
• Implementation of the National Intelligence Model (NIM), and the use of tactical assessments were also mentioned on a number of occasions. The core NIM principles are now in place, with further development managed by the Intelligence Standards Unit, and the TP Performance Review Unit undertakes quarterly reviews of BCU strategic assessments.

6. There has been no formal review of the ‘Going Local’ process within the MPS.

Value for money/opportunity cost

7. In order to be able to give any answer to the questions of whether the process is ‘Value for Money’ or has an ‘Opportunity Cost’, DCC2(2) Directorate of Organisational Learning undertook to obtain feedback from Borough Commanders. In general terms, there was a positive attitude to the process because it allowed Boroughs to demonstrate their successes and to benchmark their performance against an external national standard and subsequently provided a focus for local senior management teams to galvanise activity around improvement plans. Recommendations were also seen as generally positive indicators, with BCUs accepting their relevance to their local needs. However, some were being repeated word for word and the process appeared to become quite generic.

8. Other comments included a negative view that on occasion the reports lacked overall depth and did not recognise fully the complexity or maturity of the command, especially in its partnership delivery.

9. In terms of opportunity cost, this was a clear disruption to Boroughs most notably during the resource intensive preparation time but on balance, it was felt that the positive outcomes were achieved as a direct result of the extra effort.

Future HMIC Inspection Framework

10. HMIC is currently drafting a document outlining their future inspection intentions. It is the MPS understanding that the GL3 process will be intelligence led, risk assessed, and integrated with Baseline Assessment.

11. HMIC operate a dedicated computer programme which allows them to identify strengths, areas for improvement, trends etc. The information from GL3 will also be entered on this system creating a direct link between the strategic (force) and local (BCU) assessment processes.

12. BCU Commanders will be sent a specially adapted questionnaire, using Baseline principles, which will incorporate the 27 Strategic Frameworks on which the Baseline Assessment is measured.

13. The process for GL3 will be as follows:

• BCU Commanders will receive a self-assessment questionnaire, and will be required to provide brief, but concise, information to provide HMIC with a local position statement. This information will be quality checked by the MPS before submission to HMIC.
• HMIC will check the BCUs performance data by using the Police Standard Units ‘iQuanta’ computer system, which records statistical information and allows comparison against similar forces and BCUs. They will then judge the BCU by measuring the iQuanta data (the results) against the BCU Commanders self-assessment (how they achieve results)
• HMIC will conduct a risk assessment of the information to determine those subjects requiring further investigation.
• Using the information supplied above, HMIC will determine whether an inspection of the BCU is required, and if so, the length of field visit.
• A report will be published as per the current Going Local process, containing recommendations, suggestions and good practice.
• A notional contract will be agreed with the BCU Commander and the ‘link’ Commander/Association of Chief Police Officers representative regarding the implementation of recommendations. This will include a mechanism by which, as a last resort, the Police Standards Unit will intervene in the event that recommendations are not implemented.

The Way Forward

14. It is recognised that the MPS does not have an adequate process for co-ordinating its response to the Service wide issues raised by ‘Going Local’ inspections. This has been recognised by Service Review and proposals for an infrastructure to ensure that appropriate levels of accountability and audit are applied and that the learning opportunities are exploited have been endorsed by Management Board and included within MPS Service Review consultation document ‘Moving Forward’ (September 2005).

15. These proposals include:

• Enhanced analysis through the Inspection Liaison and Analysis Unit (ILAU)
• Rationalisation of central inspection services
• Business groups undertaking some of their own inspection processes.
• Establishment of a corporate performance directorate to drive the exchange of good practice and corporate learning
• Cross Business Group tasking

All of which is to be overseen by the newly established MPS Performance Board.

16. The benefits of which might include:

• Better identification of Service-wide organisational learning opportunities
• The development of an intelligence led, risk-based inspection regime
• A more focussed approach to key strategic inspections, delivered by a centralised inspectorate
• Greater emphasis on self inspection by local management.
• Better alignment with HMIC ‘Going Local’ strategy

Key issues to be taken forward for discussion

17. The ‘Going Local’ process is currently focussed upon Territorial Policing within the MPS. This situation leaves other Business Groups outside the scope of the HMIC local inspection process. This has been a shortcoming right across the Police Performance Assessment Framework (PPAF)/baseline regime. However, the Going Local 3 programme is a generic process and can therefore can be used as the basis of a Service wide local inspection programme.

18. There are still concerns regarding the length of time between the inspection of the BCU and the publication of the report.

List of abbreviations

MPS

Metropolitan Police Service

BOCU

Borough Operational Command Unit

HMIC

Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary

BCU

Borough Command Unit

PPAF

Police Performance Assessment Framework

NIM

National Intelligence Model

SOPS

Standard Operating Procedure

ILAU

Inspection Liaison and Analysis Unit

C. Race and equality impact

Any diversity and equality implications will form part of HMIC’s inspection reports.

D. Financial implications

Any financial implications will form part of HMIC’s inspection reports.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report author: Stephen Greenfield, Directorate of Organisational Learning and Julie Buckingham, MPS Inspectorate.

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback