Borough Performance: 2005/06 financial year (April to August)

Report: 13
Date: 13 October 2005
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report reflects the requirements outlined by members following the Borough Performance Report presented to PPRC on 14 July 2005. It provides an overview of key volume crime indicators in each borough for the financial year to date i.e. April 2005 to August 2005 compared with April 2004 to August 2004. Where mentioned, Home Office iQuanta data is only currently updated to July 2005. Comment is made on some of the factors influencing performance, on the central support provided to under-performing boroughs, the methods of sharing good practice and on the relative benefits of analysing performance data using iQuanta or other bases of comparison.

A. Recommendation

That members note the report.

B. Supporting information

Total Notifiable Offences (TNOs) (Appendix 1)

1. By the end of August, TNOs across the whole of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) were down 2.1%, nearly 9,000 fewer offences in the first five months of the financial year. The number of offences in August was the lowest monthly total this financial year and the lowest August figure of the last five years.

2. On the Home Office iQuanta tables, the MPS is still showing in the ‘worse than peers’ category (three months to July) with no apparent change. This equates to a victimisation rate of 34.8 crimes per 1,000 population, with the next highest of our most similar forces being Merseyside on 31.6.

3. Any boroughs that are showing in the ‘worse than peers’ and deteriorating category on the iQuanta overview chart may be at risk of Policing Standards Unit (PSU) attention or intervention. At the end of July, no MPS borough fell into this category for TNOs, though four were in the ‘worse than peers’ position and either improving or showing no apparent change. These were Haringey, Islington, Lambeth and Westminster.

4. Twenty boroughs have recorded fewer TNOs so far this year. Boroughs of note in terms of larger reductions are Hammersmith and Fulham (-14%, 1.6k offences), and Tower Hamlets (-16%, 2.6k offences). These reductions follow on from –5% and –7% reductions respectively in 2004/05.

5. Total crime has risen in the financial year on twelve London boroughs, though only on three is this increase greater than 5%. These are Newham (+8%, 1.2k offences), Waltham Forest (+8%, 0.9k offences) and Bexley (+7%, 0.5k offences). All three recorded reductions in excess of -5% in 2004/05.

6. Newham’s increase stems from a rise in all three of the old priority crime areas with Robbery up 42%, residential burglary up 48% and Vehicle Crime up 12%. This accounts for an extra 906 offences, over three quarters of their TNO increase. On iQuanta Newham are currently shown as ‘in line with peers’ but deteriorating.

7. Similarly on Waltham Forest and Bexley there have been increases in robbery, residential burglary and vehicle crime (an extra 583 and 333 offences respectively). On Waltham Forest a further increase of 551 offences in violence against the person is also significant. The bulk of this relates to a 71% increase in harassment offences, partly but certainly not exclusively due to the introduction of Penalty Notices for Disorder (PNDs). iQuanta shows Waltham Forest as ‘in line with peers’ whilst Bexley are shown as ‘better than peers’, with no apparent change in either.

8. Most notable reduction on Hammersmith and Fulham has been in vehicle crime where there have been 770 fewer offences this year.

9. Good performance on Tower Hamlets is being driven by reductions in almost all volume crime types, with residential burglary the only exception of note. Tower Hamlets is the only Borough Operational Command Unit (BOCU) to have rolled out Safer Neighbourhood teams to all wards.

Robbery (Appendix 2) and Street Crime (Appendix 3)

10. Across the MPS robbery to the end of August was up by 16.2%, an additional 2,539 offences. After three successive years of robbery reductions up to last year, the April to August volume this year is the highest since 2001. There are signs of improvement however, with robbery levels in August having fallen against rising levels at the same time last year.

11. In the three months to July, iQuanta shows the MPS as the poorest performer against its most similar forces. With a victimisation rate of 1.5 offences per 1,000 population, this is well above the West Midlands who are placed next on 0.8 offences per 1,000 population.

12. Just five boroughs are currently recording a reduction in robbery offences, with the only one of real note being Camden (-17%, 105 offences). This follows three successive years of robbery reductions on Camden, having now nearly halved the number of offences since 2001.

13. Camden identify the concentration of intelligence and analysis on drugs markets, zero tolerance targeting of robbery nominals and the pressurising of partners to engage in the strategic and tactical approach as the recent critical success factors.

14. Robbery has risen by more than 30% this year on eight boroughs, including on Haringey (+61%, 307 offences), Waltham Forest (+42%, 290 offences) and Newham (+40%, 302 offences). On Haringey, the increase follows three successive years of reductions and current levels are below those recorded between 2001 and 2003. This is not the case on Waltham Forest and Newham, both of whom are recording five year highs, both for the financial year as a whole, and for the month of August.

Street crime

15. Street crime (personal robbery + snatch theft) is currently up by 10% across the MPS, an additional 2,156 offences. The historical trend is similar to total robbery, with three years of reductions up to last year, but unlike robbery, street crime is currently still below that recorded in the three years prior to 2004. There is some suggestion that the robbery figure is being distorted by variation in classification practises in relation to personal robbery and snatch theft. By measuring street crime as a whole, this possibility is removed presenting a more reliable comparison.

16. The same borough exceptions feature for street crime as they do for robbery with Camden (-18%, 162 offences) the best of the nine boroughs recording reductions. Though Haringey (+45%, 332 offences), Newham (+28%, 298 offences) and Waltham Forest (+25%, 234 offences) still have the most significant rises, the percentage increases are less severe than those for total robbery.

Residential burglary (Appendix 4)

17. Residential burglary is up 1.6% (405 offences) in the current year, leaving the MPS well short of the 4% reduction target. However, this follows a long period of burglary reductions, and levels are still well below those of the 6 years prior to 2004.

18. The MPS is below its most similar force average on iQuanta, with a victimisation rate of 4.4 offences per 1,000 households, only bettered in the group by the West Midlands (4.1 per 1,000 households).

19. The most notable reductions have been on Wandsworth (-26%, 311 offences) Barking and Dagenham (-20%, 101 offences) and Lambeth (-16%, 214 offences). All are maintaining levels of offending consistently below last year, and being high volume contributors, have had a significant positive effect on the MPS total.

20. On Lambeth, Safer Neighbourhood officers have been prioritised to focus upon residential burglary. This combined with partnership crime prevention schemes and crack house closures have been highlighted as major contributors to the reductions on the borough.

21. Wandsworth cite the robust systems they have in place to deal with the turn around of forensic dockets as a key factor in their success this year. The relentless pursuit of prolific burglars has achieved a substantial number of offenders brought to justice.

22. The most significant increases this year have been recorded on Newham (+46%, 318 offences), Tower Hamlets (33%, 230 offences), Ealing (25%, 255 offences) and Waltham Forest (24%, 166 offences). In the case of Newham and Tower Hamlets, the August totals were the highest monthly volume this financial year and the highest August volume for five years. These are all high volume contributors to total residential burglary and so are impacting on the ability of the MPS to meet the overall reduction target.

Motor vehicle crime (Appendix 5)

23. With a 14% reduction and the lowest levels in over 6 years, Motor Vehicle crime was an area of key success for the MPS in 2004/05. Although there has been no further reduction this year, last year’s levels have been just about maintained (+0.1% For Year To Date (FYTD) change).

24. Despite good performance over the last few years, the MPS still sits worst against its most similar forces, with a victimisation rate of 4.7 offences per 1,000 population, though this is only a little higher than the group average of 4.3 per 1,000 population. West Midlands are placed best in the group with a rate of 3.5 per 1,000 population.

25. Hammersmith and Fulham (-34%, 770 offences), Ealing (-19%, 591) and Camden (-17%, 391) have recorded the best reductions this year, all building on good performance over the previous two years. Collectively they account for 3,341 fewer motor vehicle offences compared with the same period in 2002.

26. On Hammersmith and Fulham a dedicated team who are accountable for performance cover everything from crime prevention and partnership through to pro-active operations. They work to clearly defined systems and processes.

27. Ealing has a small Motor Vehicle squad who work closely with probation officers and primarily target known offenders. A coordinated approach ensuring that the work of the PCSOs and the Motor Vehicle squad complements each other has also been effective.

28. Much of the success in Camden has been attributed to the set-up of a dedicated Motor Vehicle crime team. Activities of this team included:

• Re-examination of recent outstanding forensic cases against suspects and the national databases.
• Actively targeting prolific vehicle thieves.
• The setting up of a motor vehicle crime desk in the Borough’s intelligence unit.
• Working with partners, such as Camden council in order to provide more secure areas for car parking and bicycle racks.
• A forensic surgery where recent victims of car-crime brought their vehicle to the police station for further forensic testing.

29. Increases of over 25% this year on Barnet (+28%, 558 offences) and Islington (+26%, 510 offences). On Barnet, this would be the fourth successive increase in Motor Vehicle crime in as many years. Islington on the other hand achieved a big reduction in offences last year, and current levels are well below any of the previous 3 years.

30. Within vehicle crime, thefts of vehicles have continued to fall (-3.5% FYTD change). It is a rise in thefts from vehicles, the first increase in over 6 years, which is preventing an overall reduction so far this year. Though the MPS change is fairly small (+2.0% FYTD change), there have been increases on 22 boroughs, and in excess of 30% on Barnet, Bexley, Islington and Kingston.

Borough performance and iQuanta data

31. The MPS has for a number of years worked towards achieving targets, which are set on the basis of comparing the current financial year with the previous one. Performance during the year has therefore been measured mainly by comparing year-to-date figures with those for the previous year covering the same dates. Other performance indicators are noted, such as recent trends, but the performance year-to-date comparison is the one of which senior management takes the most account.

32. The process for setting these targets is a complex one, but “bespoke” targets exist for individual boroughs which, when aggregated, constitute the MPS corporate target. From the corporate perspective, the tendency has been to monitor performance information with a view to achieving the overall corporate target as detailed in the annual Policing Plan.

33. Every borough achieving each and every one of its bespoke targets would of course result in the MPS achieving its overall targets. However, in practice, borough performance varies, with some failing to achieve the target, but others achieving more than aimed for. From the corporate viewpoint therefore, certain boroughs will play a more important part than others. In the context of crime reduction, achieving an additional small percentage reduction on a high volume borough may be more valuable to the MPS as a whole than achieving a high reduction on a low volume borough, and management decisions about allocation of resources are influenced accordingly.

34. Boroughs may also be at different stages of the crime reduction cycle. Some BOCUs have achieved a steady level of crime reduction over several years with a flatter trend line than others who experience a more unpredictable and cyclical performance in reducing crime.

35. iQuanta, an internet based version of Quanta, the Home Office police performance analysis tool, offers a range of charts to illustrate performance at force, Basic Command Unit (BCU) and Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership (CDRP) level. The analysis gives an impression of how particular units compare with units deemed to be “most similar”, shows “significant” change in recent performance, and tracks progress towards Public Service Agreement (PSA) targets to be achieved by 2005/6 as determined by central government in 2002. Crime trends based on 3, 6 or 12 months can be projected, and other methods of comparison both with “most similar” units and with a unit’s own performance hitherto are possible.

36. Different ways of assessing performance can appear to be conflicting, because bases for comparison are different. For example, iQuanta may assess a borough’s performance as deteriorating in terms of recent change against historical bounds, and also as poor in comparison with its peers. However, iQuanta pays no regard to performance in comparison with the previous year, so the same borough might be deemed to be doing well if analysed solely with reference to the MPA Policing Plan.

37. The overall conclusion to be drawn from this is that iQuanta offers alternative perspectives of performance not available using data from the Performance Information Bureau of the MPS. However, it cannot be used readily to assess performance against MPA targets. For boroughs, iQuanta can be contrary with the emphasis in MPS terms upon bespoke borough targets. Indeed, BOCU commanders’ personal objectives are focused clearly on their bespoke targets.

Central support for under-performing boroughs including how best practice is shared between similar boroughs

38. When a BOCU is facing a performance challenge in one or more crime types there is a range of central support available. This support can be mobilised by the BOCU but more often the performance issue will be identified by the Territorial Policing Performance Unit (TPPU) and the support process initiated.

39. The performance information produced by the TPPU highlights BOCUs which are either not meeting targets or who are showing a negative performance trend. This information, supported by discussions with the link commanders, informs how central support is allocated to the BOCUs on a priority basis.

40. The Performance Unit has the capability to carry out extensive performance analysis by remote interrogation of corporate databases. The field team holds meetings with the key senior managers on the BOCU in order to gain their strategic overview.

41. The field team product is an objective report with recommendations for improvement that is delivered to the link commander who will discuss the findings with the BOCU commander and agree an action plan. These reports will normally be revisited after three months to establish the progress of the action plan. The Performance Unit has recently been deployed in a number of situations ranging from a one-day event to several weeks of deployment on a BOCU.

42. For example, sanctioned detections for street crime in Wandsworth were clearly identified by performance information as being a major issue. This resulted in central support being deployed on this single issue as Wandsworth were performing well in most other areas. The result was a realignment of resources on the BOCU and a new detection plan for street crime being created.

43. A hierarchy of performance interventions and visits has been established within TP:

• Monthly link commander’s performance meetings (supported by data and analysis from TPPU).
• Scheduled performance visits of individual boroughs by link commanders.
• Focused TPPU field visits to specific boroughs or units on behalf of link commanders.
• Focused visits to selected boroughs by DAC TP.
• Focused visits to selected boroughs by Assistant Commissioner TP (supported by TPPU pre-visit and analysis).

44. Support for BOCUs is also available from the Territorial Policing Crime Directorate. They can, for example, deploy staff (TP Crime Squad) to deal with specific crime problems. They can advise on tactics and intelligence management or on dealing with complex investigations and cross-border crime.

45. Departments like Operation Emerald and Forensic Services can provide support and information on criminal justice and forensic management respectively. Correct management of these issues can deliver substantial improvement on BOCUs with low detection rates.

Together tasking system

46. Central support is offered to boroughs through the Together tasking process. This is the organisation’s way of delivering operations in a co-ordinated manner in order to ensure that tactical resources are delivered as effectively as possible.

47. From the borough command unit (BCU) perspective, many operations are planned and paid for locally using borough personnel and resources only. A Proactive Tasking Proforma (PATP) is produced for all planned operations. This document is the reference point for the operation. It summarises the problem and the supporting analysis, outlines the operational plan and objectives, identifies and estimates the cost of resources to be used, and gives proposals on how the operation is to be funded.

48. If a bid for central TP or Central Operations (CO) units is proposed within the PATP, the PATP is forwarded to the TP core desk where it is assessed against competing bids. The core desk then makes recommendations as to which PATPs should receive TP/CO funding and resources. These recommendations are amended and ratified at the TP Crime Operations and Tasking meeting every Friday fortnight chaired by the Deputy Assistant Commissioner (DAC) for TP. Resources under DAC (TP)’s control can then be allocated as decided at the meeting.

49. The TP meeting decisions are presented at the fortnightly Thursday Together tactical meeting, where decisions on the allocation of CO resources are made.

50. The quality of the support is assessed using a feedback form. The BCU which requested resources for a PATP completes this form and returns it to CO in order to:

• confirm that the staff and equipment were provided as agreed.
• assess the quality of briefing for the central units.
• measure success against objectives.

51. Each PATP also has a closing report which:

• summarises the operational results (e.g. arrests, stops, property recovered, assets seized).
• assesses whether the objectives were met.
• summarises operational risks.
• provides an analytical assessment of the operation.
• details the actual costs and funding.

52. In the current financial year to date (14 September 2005), the tactical tasking process has seen over £4 million allocated from TP, and over £2 million from Central Operations, in support of bids received from boroughs. The amounts allocated per borough are shown in Appendix 6. These tables show that boroughs identified as “struggling” are receiving a preponderance of central support.

53. Recently, CO organised a focused week of action (05.09.05 to 11.09.05) with a substantial level of central resource being deployed across four BOCUs (Brent, Ealing, Lambeth and Southwark) resulting in a positive impact on crime.

Good practice

54. TP themed performance focus meetings (based on the former Crime Control Strategy Meetings) were set up in June 2004. The intention was that a particular theme (e.g. violent crime) would be chosen and boroughs would have an opportunity to discuss the successful solutions they use, the barriers that prevent them from achieving their aims and the emerging issues that may affect them in the future.

55. Boroughs are split into “most similar” groups for these meetings, which are also attended by central units who can advise on good practice.

56. Past themes have included hate crime and rape, sanctioned detections, gun enabled crime, safer neighbourhoods, persistent and other priority offenders, violent crime, and forensics. The next meetings will concentrate on citizen focus and responsiveness.

57. The notes made at the meetings are sent to participating boroughs and are posted on the TP Performance Review Unit website. Individual boroughs are expected to take on and report back on good practice through this process. The TP Performance Unit (TPPU) field team follows up the issues discussed at these meetings and the agreed actions.

58. TPPU are currently overhauling their good practice database to make it more user-friendly for OCUs. This is being supplemented by work to establish the efficacy of the themed performance meeting process to prove that it adds value and has a direct impact on crime reduction and systems improvement.

59. A similar process exists in the form of the “link” meetings held by Commanders for the boroughs under their geographical command. Performance is a standing item on the agenda, and best practice often emerges as a result of discussion sparked off by different sets of performance figures for each borough.

60. Central TP units also act as agents for sharing best practice amongst boroughs. For example:

• Operation Emerald provides assistance in the field of investigation and criminal justice.
• The Problem Solving Unit assists boroughs in eliminating or reducing the seriousness of problems identified by crime analysis.
• Project Sapphire promotes best practice in investigating rape and serious sexual assaults.
• The Safer Neighbourhoods Unit assists the relatively new safer Neighbourhood teams on boroughs with good practice gleaned from early experience and pilot schemes.

61. Central support is also available from units in other business groups. Specialist Crime Directorate spreads best practice with regard to homicide, child abuse, economic crime and other serious and specialist forms of crime. CO is also available to provide a wide range of specialist tactical advice.

62. The Crime Analysts Forum on the MPS intranet has proved a popular and useful way of sharing best practice in the field of crime analysis. The wide range of subjects discussed, with illustrative examples of good practice, includes crime mapping, crime pattern analysis, and how to obtain data and information from internal and external sources.

Other factors influencing borough performance - Operation Theseus

63. Since the London bombing TP Performance Unit has charted daily TNO allegations and daily Hate Crime allegations in order to monitor levels of crime reporting.

64. Total TNO allegations did not increase after the events of 7 July 2005. During June 2005 the MPS averaged 2,807 daily allegations, whereas in the 18 days post 7/7 average daily allegations were a little below this at 2,658. Over the last few weeks, total allegations have actually fallen further (see Appendix 7).

65. There is some evidence that boroughs had to reduce their local proactive capability to meet central London aid demands, e.g. Hammersmith Robbery Squad, Merton Motor Vehicle Squad and Crime Squad, all temporarily returned to uniform.

66. Public Order (CO11) abstraction levels have been up to approx. 700 officers per day on central London reserve and crime scene duties, in addition to extra local security provision (tube stations, mosques, etc).

List of abbreviations

MPS

Metropolitan Police Service

TNO

Total Notifiable Offences

PSU

Policing Standards Unit

PND

Penalty Notice for Disorder

BOCU

Borough Operational Command Unit

FYTD

For Year To Date

PCSO

Police Community Support Officer

TP

Territorial Policing

BCU

Basic Command Unit

CDRP

Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership

CO

Central Operations

PATP

Proactive Tasking Proforma

TPPU

Territorial Policing Performance Unit

C. Race and equality impact

Although there were varying borough performances, the MPS remains committed to making the whole of London safer. Furthermore, implications of performance against individual targets are considered in the in-depth performance report throughout the year, which examine performance at the corporate level. Within the TP monitoring framework, there is recognition of diversity issues relevant to the basket of performance measures, where particular attention is paid to crimes against women and crime against specific communities receives significant consideration.

D. Financial implications

There are no financial or resource implications of the current work.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report author: Superintendent Craig Mitchell, Performance Unit, TPHQ.

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback