Safer neighbourhoods update

Report: 7
Date: 13 December 2007
By: Assistant Commissioner Territorial Policing on behalf of the Commissioner

Summary

This report builds on the report presented in March 2007 and provides an update on some key aspects of the MPS Safer Neighbourhoods programme. It includes:· A brief account of improvements made to the Safer Neighbourhood Performance Framework;· Details of Safer Neighbourhood performance to date;· Details of good practice and areas for improvement, and how these are disseminated;· Describes the impact and effectiveness of Safer Neighbourhoods; and· An explanation of how Safer Neighbourhood Panels operate.

A. Recommendation

That Members note the contents of this report.

B. Supporting information

1. Brief account of improvements made to the Safer Neighbourhoods Performance Framework: The MPS Safer Neighbourhood Performance Management Framework (PMF) enables activities (outputs) undertaken by Safer Neighbourhood Teams (SNT) to be tracked to relevant outcome areas. This tracking system is known as ‘EPIC’, (an acronym for ‘Enforcement, Prevention, Intelligence, and Communication’). Examples of the types of activity tracked by EPIC are: the number of pre-planned meetings held; public attendance at meetings; number of street briefings held; number of intelligence reports submitted; number of ASB letters sent; ASB home visits conducted; ABCs obtained; and arrests made, etc.

2. The Safer Neighbourhood (SN) monthly data return from SNTs, extracted from EPIC, has been reviewed recently and improved to more effectively capture the activities and successes of SNTs. The intervention and engagement categories are now more specific. It captures a wider range of work being conducted by the teams which takes into account the local needs of each ward. For example, we now specifically record data on school assemblies, school fetes / carnivals, engagement with faith groups, knife search operations, test purchasing, graffiti clear-ups and removal of abandoned vehicles. This will enable us to enhance the SN PMF and produce more detailed performance reports.

3. The further development of EPIC also now incorporates and tracks the core activities of Safer Transport Teams (STT).

4. The improvements and added functionality to EPIC will come into effect by January 2008. The changes will enhance the facility to link SNT activity (outputs) to the strategic outcomes contained within the SN PMF. Likewise, the changes will also enhance the facility to link STT activity to the strategic outcomes contained within the joint Transport for London (TfL) and MPS STT PMF.

5. Details of Safer Neighbourhood performance to date: The SN PMF is founded on the following six survey-based issues:

• Confidence in local policing (% who say their local police are doing an excellent/good job);
• Feeling safe (%) walking alone in their local area during the day;
• Feeling safe (%) walking alone in their local area after dark;
• Agreeing (%) that the local police understand the issues that affect their community;
• Agreeing (%) that the local police are dealing with the things that matter to people in the local community; and
• Worry about anti-social behaviour (% very/fairly worried).

6. The most recent data for the SN PMF comes from the MPS Public Attitude Survey (PAS), Quarter 2 (July to Sept 2007):

• The figure recorded for confidence in local policing is 58%, a significant improvement on the previous financial year and 4% up on Quarter 1 (April to June 2007);
• 96% of respondents indicated that they felt safe walking alone in their local area during the day; this figure has remained stable over time;
• 73% of respondents indicated that they felt safe walking alone in their local area after dark; this figure has remained stable over time;
• 65% of respondents agreed that the local police understand the issues that affect their community; a significant improvement on the previous year’s figure of 55%;
• 63% of respondents agreed that the local police are dealing with the things that matter to people in the local community; an improvement on the previous year’s figure of 59%; and
• Worry over ASB was recorded at 40% against a figure of 43% for the same period in 2006.

7. EPIC Performance Data: Current Performance data is as follows: There has been a significant increase in community engagement activity during the period of April to September 2007 compared with the same period last year. There were a total of 14,385 engagement initiatives used during 2007; this was an increase of 1,851 compared with the same period in 2006. SNTs participated and organised 6,270 pre-planned public meetings. A total of 105,474 people attended MPS led meetings in 2007, which was 10,748 more people than in 2006. The SNTs also held 547 more ward/neighbourhood panel meetings in 2007. The SNTs also recorded an increase in other engagement tactics that included, contact point and surgeries, which rose by 1,017 to 5,079 in 2007 and held 536 more street briefings.

8. The increase in activity (outputs) tracked by EPIC is indicative of SN bedding down, and becoming more effective and competent. It is also reflective of SNTs being sited and fully staffed in every Ward since the end of December 2006.

9. SNTs participated in the following tactics:

Tactics used by Safer Neighbourhood Teams
Tactic	2006	2007	Difference
Victim Visits	15,525	28,686	84.7%
Arrests	8,595	11,616	35.1%
Stop and Searches 81,156	81,156	142,461	75.5%
ASB Initiatives	13,113	14,279	8.9%
Letters Written	7,929	8,280	4.4%
Home Visits	3,520	4,349	23.5%
ABC’s	1,315	1,323	0.6% (8 ABC’s)
ASBOs	350	327	-6.5% (-23 ASBOs)

Table 1: Tactics used by Safer Neighbourhood Teams in 2006 and 2007

10. Intelligence reports have fallen over this period by 9,255 to 111,880; this is due to the implementation of the new ‘Crimint Plus’ system within the MPS, and is a change in volume in line with expectations, (i.e. focus is now on ‘intelligence’ entries rather than encompassing other activity related ‘information’).

11 SNTs have participated in 217 more ‘Community Payback’ projects since 2006, to a total of 974 this year. There are currently a 170 Community Payback Projects a week across London. The scheme forms part of the SN Programme and involves SNT Police Officers and PCSOs.

12. London Probation Interventions Team was successful in achieving an R4E European Excellence Award in April 2007. This prestigious award is a significant achievement and milestone in the development of interventions and was awarded for London Probations work in the Community Payback Scheme.

13. In October 2007 the SNTs and STTs set a total of 2,202 EPIC priorities; the top five priorities are as follows:

1. ASB by Youths - 476 teams
2. ASB (in general)  - 195 teams
3. Burglary - 176 teams
4. Theft from M/V - 160 teams
5. Drug use & drug dealing - 142 teams

14. The top five priorities have broadly remained the same over the last 12 months. However, these are generic headings or labels for areas of local concern and should not necessarily be expected to regularly change. SNTs have undertaken and resolved many problems within these generic priority headings. It is intended that methods of evaluating the volume and effectiveness of problem solving within generic local priorities set by Ward Panels will be considered as the SN PMF is further developed.1

5. The Central SN Unit are looking for example at a range of options to capture the way in which issues/problems are identified and resolved. One of these is a web base system that captures problem solving activity from within the MPS, but more importantly encourages partner activity. The system currently being looked at is the ‘Problem Resolution In Multi-agency Environments’ (PRIME) system that is used in Hampshire Constabulary. This is very early consideration and no decision about implementation within the MPS has been taken.

16. Details of good practice and areas for improvement, and how these are disseminated: The ‘Advisory Visit’ process is ongoing and these inspection style visits have been conducted on all boroughs. They have provided each BOCU Commander with a detailed report containing good practice and an action plan highlighting areas for improvement with support and guidance. Examples of good practice were highlighted and promulgated through the Crime Control Strategy Meeting (CCSM) Good Practice showcase attended by lead borough practitioners on the 17th of May 2007.

17. The Good Practice Showcase provided a tactical and strategic overview of SNs and how the effort of staff and partners contributes to overall SN PMF. Four Boroughs; Croydon, Barnet, Enfield and Waltham Forest provided presentations, in addition to the Civic Watch Partnership from Westminster. They collectively demonstrated how Boroughs hold the SNTs accountable whilst maintaining the `ethos` of the Safer Neighbourhood Programme. This included examples of best practice, recognising and raising awareness of good performance, identifying potential barriers, and integrating SNs more closely with other Borough Units. Further examples included how SNs has responded to joint tasking to focus on priority crime, and the marketing of SN through external agencies and the local media.

18. Borough action plans were periodically reviewed to ensure compliance and development of the plan. This was supported by further visits by the Central SN Unit who provided guidance and support on particular issues such as EPIC and generic Safer Neighbourhoods documents including ward profiles. Other examples of areas for improvement include the integration of Crime and Disorder Partnerships Joint Agency Group (JAG) Tasking Meeting processes into police tasking process. This area is an integral part of the topic for the present thematic Advisory Visit process which commenced in late November 07. The visits concentrate on performance and tasking of SNTs, and the integration of SNs within overall Borough performance. The visits also identify marketing and communication of SNs as an emerging issue to ensure that effective marketing is applied to inform the public of the work and successes of SNs.

19. Identified good practice and areas for improvement are collated and disseminated by the Central SN Unit and Problem Solving Team, before being communicated to SN Sergeants, Inspectors and SMT leads by regular newsletters, emails from Central SN Comms Team and quarterly forums. The Safer London Foundation (SLF) in partnership with the MPA and MPS holds annual Problem Solving Awards. SNTs can enter details of local problem solving initiatives targeted at identified local priorities and win cash prizes to reinvest back into their community. The top eight entries are showcased as good practice to other Boroughs and entered into the National Tilley Problem Solving Awards. This year for the first time, TfL is running a similar Problem Solving Award for the newly formed STTs. The top five entries will be selected and showcased in a similar fashion.

20. The impact and effectiveness of Safer Neighbourhoods: Confidence in policing is influenced by a number of factors, some of which are related to what police themselves do. A strategic approach to continuing to increase Londoners’ confidence in policing is underpinned by the ongoing research programme adopted by the MPS Strategic Research Unit (SRU).

21. A summary of what we have learned about public confidence in the police and policing is provided by the SRU, based on in-depth analysis of the MPS corporate surveys, Public Attitude Survey (PAS) and Safer Neighbourhoods Survey (SNS), as well as our bespoke qualitative research. This also includes current performance data from the Public Attitude Survey, British Crime Survey and EPIC. Confidence in the Metropolitan Police is influenced by what the SRU has termed the ‘Scotland Yard Effect’. This means that while the MPS has the highest level of confidence in local policing of our most similar forces, there is a higher level of people’s confidence in policing in London above that of local policing. This is a research finding that differs from the patterns of people’s confidence in policing across the rest of England and Wales. Elsewhere, people’s confidence in local policing is higher than in policing in general.

22. In respect to SN outcomes, this means that our performance outcome for the measure ‘confidence in policing in London’ is higher than that for the measure ‘confidence in local policing’. Our aspiration is raising the level of local policing to that of policing in general, and then raising both measures overall as confidence increases.

23. Fear of crime and perceptions about types of crime impact less on public satisfaction with local policing, than concerns about ASB, disorder and perceptions of social cohesion. This suggests that we should be looking to improve the outcome measures about ‘perception of ASB & disorder and monitoring how people feel about their neighbourhood. We also know that people who are worried about crime are more likely to have lower confidence in police because they are likely to feel the police should be doing something to reduce their worry about crime. In respect to SN, this means people expect the police to know about local problems and be doing something about them.

24. Out of the five Most Similar Forces, the MPS has the highest rating for ‘confidence in local police’ at 56.4%, which is 5% higher than the second ranked Force, Merseyside, (Home Office Iquanta data - June 2007).

25. An explanation of how Safer Neighbourhood Panels operate: SN Panels are an integral part of the SN Programme and provide locally determined priorities for the Safer Neighbourhoods Teams (SNT).

26. SN policing is delivered across London by using a well-tested seven-stage engagement model. Neighbourhood Panels have a role to play throughout the model, not only to choose priorities but to review police and partner activity across the seven stages of the model.

27. A SN Panel should be representative of the demographics of the neighbourhood and geographically spread across it. A typical Neighbourhood Panel comprises of at least 10 people and meets quarterly throughout the year. Panels are encouraged to have a ‘Constitution’ that has been agreed by Panel members and is in place to deal with any issue affecting the Panel. Panels are expected to have an independent chair elected for a fixed term by Panel members.

28. SN Panel members are in place to choose the priorities for the SNTs and/or partners. The SNTs are required to engage with communities across their neighbourhood and to identify public preferences (what matters and affects local communities). Once the preferences have been identified, they should be subjected to analysis and investigation before being presented with other relevant information, such as crime trends/statistics, to enable the Panels to determine the SNT/Partners most appropriate local priorities. Once the priorities are set the Panel is expected to review activity and close any priorities that have been successfully resolved or reduced, and then choose another local priority. The Panel are expected to review the methods used to engage with communities on their neighbourhood and to assist in communicating with them.

29. The Community Engagement Programme (CEP) is conducting two information seminars/training for Neighbourhood Panel members in four Boroughs across London. The programme is a tripartite Partnership between the MPS, MPA and SLF, and is in a ‘pilot’ phase, which is due to complete in November 07, followed by an evaluation shortly after.

30. A Training Needs Analysis of Neighbourhood Panel members and the views of a Community Advisory Group assisted to structure the content of the training. The programme will deliver four ‘Key’ subjects including:

• Introduction to Safer Neighbourhoods;
• Introduction to Problem Solving;
• Introduction to Partnerships and the extended policing family; and
• Introduction to Anti Social Behaviour.

31. Four additional subjects have been covered by using ‘Hand Outs’, and
material on an internet site and CDROM. The additional subjects are:

• How to Chair a meeting;
• Guide to Fundraising;
• Understanding Statistics; and
• Working with the media.

32. Additional information has been provided relating to the role of Neighbourhood Panels and guidance on how to conduct ‘street briefings’.

33. The seminars are being delivered by using Police Officer trainers who deliver the SN training to Police Officers and PCSOs.

34. The initial feedback from these seminars is extremely positive with 100% of respondents satisfied with the trainers and high levels of satisfaction for the four core subjects that are being delivered.

35. The seminars are being delivered to provide Panel members with information to assist them perform their role, explaining what the role is and the areas that their teams should be working in and towards. It provides Panel members with tools to scrutinise teams, and to ensure that the 7-stage model is at the heart of the delivery of SN in London.

C. Race and equality impact

1 There are no explicit equalities items addressed. The activities that form this report and the data content are arrived at with a regard to delivering SN policing services to an equal standard for all Londoners.

2 This performance update report should fully comply with equal opportunities policies and associated MPA/MPS Diversity issues.

3 Improved performance within SNTs will continue to provide improvement in service provision by the MPS and the diverse communities of London. This remains a key driver for ensuring that an effective SN PMF regime is further developed for SNs and that attention is paid to ensuring continual organisational learning.

4. The relationship between the priorities of local people and more traditional policing priorities/targets remains a complex one. Genuine empowerment of local neighbourhoods has already and will inevitably continue to result in the prioritisation of issues at a more local level than concerns at Borough level. However as mentioned in the last update paper local, BCU and MPS priorities are not inevitably separate and evidence continues to suggest that local communities are often identifying issues that are not separate but merely a different perspective on classic Borough performance issues. The benefits of focusing on local priorities are therefore not merely a mechanism to build confidence and community networks that can engage more effectively with police but are also, frequently, an indirect but nevertheless a best value approach to the classic problems of crime and disorder reduction that the MPS must also address.

D. Financial implications

1. SN PMF remains dependent on data from the Public Attitude Survey (PAS) which incurs no additional cost to the MPS.

2. However, the use of PAS data as a SN performance measure was a key consideration in the decision to expand the numbers of people surveyed in 2007/8. This increase adds value in two areas. First, the MPS will be able to acquire BCU performance information on a quarterly basis as opposed to the current position which relies on data aggregated over a rolling 12 months. This change will enable more accurate tracking of performance trends and of the impact of activity designed to improve performance. The second area of added value will be increased opportunity to track performance in smaller population groups (i.e. victims of crime).

3. This increase in survey numbers will increase the cost of the PAS. The additional funding required will be found from within existing resources.

4. The review and development of EPIC has been conducted within existing resources.

E. Background papers

None

F. Contact details

Report author: A/ Det Ch Supt Martin Stevens, 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