The Use Of Restorative Conferencing In The Police Complaints Procedure.

Report: 6
Date: 07 October 04
By: Commissioner

Summary

An initial report was presented to Professional Standards and Complaints Committee (PSCC) on 11 September 2003 and the initial report should be consulted for further information. This study commenced before the introduction of the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) and the attendant legislation. It was therefore completed under the ‘Informal Resolution’ procedures. The new findings are however, equally applicable to the new ‘Local Resolution’ process.

A. Recommendations

1.  Members note the contents of this report.
2. No further research should be carried out within the MPS into the use of restorative conferencing in dealing with complaints. It is clear that conferences are useful in some particular circumstances. These circumstances may be when the complainant will not agree to a resolution without such a meeting, where the possibility exists of providing closure in particularly difficult and sensitive cases or where there is important learning for officers that may be enhanced by the process.
3. The Thames Valley Police/Oxford University study of this area is due to report soon. It therefore seems sensible to await the publication of their report before proceeding further.
4. The guidance and good practice developed through this pilot should be formalised and restorative conferencing should be added to the Local Resolution Toolbox as an option for officers dealing with complaints to use in appropriate circumstances.
5. No further Internal Investigations Command (IIC) resources should be invested in restorative conferencing. The independence offered by facilitators from outside IIC also adds reassurance to officers considering taking part.

B. Supporting information

1. A report on this subject was presented to the PPRC on 11 September 2003. Although some detail is given below, the original paper should be consulted for further information on how the pilot was run. This study began before the introduction of the IPCC and the attendant legislation. It was therefore completed under the ‘Informal Resolution’ procedures. The findings are, however, equally applicable to the new ‘Local Resolution’ process.

2. It is clear that informal/local resolution is the most appropriate method of disposal for the vast majority of public complaints. In fact, it is the appropriate disposal for the majority of complaints that are fully investigated at the complainant’s request. It is also generally more satisfactory for the complainant, the officer, the MPS and the IPCC than a full investigation. In fact, in the short time since its introduction, the IPCC has made it clear that it would like to see a large increase in the proportion of complaints that are locally resolved. The Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabularies (HMIC) and the Home Office regard those forces with the highest proportion of resolutions among the disposals of their complaints as more successful in dealing with complaints.

3. Thus, Strand 2 of the IIC business plan for 2003 was, “To expand the use of informal resolution and limited investigation and identify alternative methods of disposal to ensure prompt resolution of complaints.” The use of restorative conferencing at appropriate points during the informal resolution process is one tactic that IIC hoped to use to support this objective.

4. This pilot therefore examined the effectiveness of restorative conferencing in assisting the informal resolution process.

Objectives and Scope.

Objectives.

5. The objectives of this pilot were to discover whether:

1. The use of restorative conferencing could increase the levels of informal resolution achieved by IIC.
2. The use of restorative conferencing could provide closure for complainants in particularly difficult and sensitive cases.
3. Informal resolutions achieved through conferencing were more effective in providing learning for officers and the organisation.

Methodology.

6. The Detective Chief Inspector (DCI) Operations at IIC NE assessed all complaints made on the eight Boroughs that comprise the North East quadrant before appointing an Investigating Officer (IO) and indicated whether a conference would be appropriate. The IO then discussed all the available options for dealing with the complaint with the complainant in the normal way. If the complaint was not resolved at that stage, the IO then explored with the complainant whether they were willing to participate in a restorative conference with the officer(s) involved. If they were, then the officers were approached. If all parties were willing to participate then a conference was arranged.
Scope.

7. Conferences were only attempted within the informal resolution process. Any complaint that was not suitable for informal resolution was dealt with outside the pilot. A conference was only explored once the normal attempts at informal resolution had failed. IIC NE is already successful at achieving informal resolutions. There would therefore be no business benefit from carrying out a resource intensive process such as a restorative conference to achieve a result that would be achieved anyway. It was intended that a conference would be arranged for all appropriate cases where no resolution was reached at the first meeting, provided all those involved were willing to participate.

8. The pilot ran for six months from 1 September 2003 to 29 February 2004.

Organisation.

ACPO Sponsors: Deputy Assistant Commissioner Roberts (Director of Professional Standards).

Project Director: Detective Superintendent Barron (on behalf of Detective Chief Superintendent Bussey, OCU Commander IIC).

Project Manager: Detective Chief Inspector Andy Dunn, IIC NE.

Results.

9. It can be seen that no conferences were in fact held within the terms of the pilot. Some were requested by complainants, some were agreed by officers but only in only one case did all parties agree to a meeting. In this case the complainant wanted the meeting to be chaired by the officers’ line manger rather than a trained mediator. At this meeting the officers accepted that they had made an error and apologised. The complainant was also compensated for the minor loss he suffered as result of their error. All parties expressed their satisfaction with the process and this conference can be considered to be a success.

10. Another conference was held outside the terms of the pilot. A complainant asked the Borough Inspector recording the complaint if he could meet with the officer. Guided by IIC, the Inspector arranged and facilitated the meeting. The complainant was satisfied with the officer’s explanation and withdrew his complaint. The officer was also positive about the process and indeed offered to act as an advocate for conferencing.

11. I have also been contacted to give advice on a small number of other conferences that have been held outside the pilot in other parts of the MPS. Where I was able to get the result, all were successful and positive feedback was received from officers and complainants.

Conclusions.

12. Objective 1 - A great deal of work has been done within IIC over the last two years to improve both the number of informal resolutions achieved and the quality of the process itself. It appears that our skill at resolving complaints is now so well developed that any complaint that can be resolved is being resolved through normal process. Therefore, as far as objective one is concerned, it is clear that the use of restorative conferencing will not increase the levels of informal resolution achieved by IIC.

13. Objective 2 - It is unfortunate that none of the conferences that were held resulted from “particularly difficult and sensitive cases”. One complainant in such a case did consider a conference but decided against it. The interesting fact to note is that the officers involved were unwilling to expose themselves to what could have been a difficult meeting and which would potentially have little benefit for them. Informal discussion with Federation representatives also suggests that this is likely to be a common view. Therefore, no conclusions can be drawn with regard to objective two and to pursue it further would require a much larger scale exercise.

14. Objective 3 – Over the last two years, work has been carried out within IIC to try to improve the capture of learning for the organisation arising from public complaints. This has coincided with the work described above on improving the process of informal resolution. A new report template has been developed containing specific sections on organisational learning, which along with new training and guidelines on report writing should ensure that any learning is highlighted. A ‘Prevention and Reduction Team’ has been set up within IIC to ensure such learning is acted on. Through further new training, IIC officers are encouraged to feed learning arising from informal resolutions into this process also. It is unlikely that restorative conferences per se will have any impact on this area.

15. However, a further part of improving the quality of the resolution process was to try to change the perception of officers that informal resolution is a negative process that simply accepts the complainant’s word and criticises them unjustly. Continuing efforts are being made to try to get officers to see that comments made by complainants are in fact the most useful ‘feedback’ on their policing skills that they are likely to get. Probationer training has for some years concentrated on developing personal skills through the use of feedback, as have selection and promotion procedures. There is therefore some hope that continual reinforcement of this message may have an impact, but the process is likely to be slow.

16. This message is being spread through work undertaken under the IIC Business Plan. An ‘Informal Resolution Toolbox’ (now the Local Resolution Toolbox) has been developed that captures a range of approaches and tactics that officers can employ to achieve resolution of complaints. This has been delivered, along with a specific training package emphasising the ‘feedback’ message, to every officer in IIC Borough Support. Each IO within Borough Support has in turn delivered the Toolbox and the package to the officers on their Boroughs that deal directly with members of the public making complaints. This training is reinforced every six months. Each time an informal resolution is achieved the officer dealing is asked to discuss the meaning of informal resolution with the officer concerned and try to get them to consider it as a learning experience.

17. However, it does seem likely that the impact of a conference will be more effective in achieving learning than a message passed on second hand by another police officer. The officers that apologised following the conference described above have stated that they have learned from the process. However, setting up a conference is a time and resource intensive process. The fact that it may improve the learning experience for officers does not justify the extra effort required to deal with a complaint by way of a conference when a ‘normal’ resolution process is acceptable to the complainant. This is particularly true considering the efforts described above to capture the learning arising from the normal process.

C. Equality and diversity implications

1. Implementing the recommendations is unlikely to have any equality or diversity implications. Conferences will be offered in particular circumstances, regardless of the background and status of those involved. It may be that some disproportionality will emerge in the relative numbers of conferences actually arranged involving complainants from different communities. It is likely that this will reflect the current reluctance of some communities to engage with the complaints process and police service in general.

2. Every effort will be made to encourage all complainants in suitable cases to participate in a conference. It is hoped that this will counter any suggestion of either deliberate or unwitting discrimination. It is also hoped that as conferences start to take place, the willingness of the police service and police officers to engage in direct dialogue with dissatisfied members of the public, to be open to criticism and to learn from their mistakes, will in fact increase confidence and trust in the police service. It is possible that this will be most impactive where that confidence and trust is lowest.

D. Financial implications

Resources.

1. No additional resources will be required.

Costs.

2. Any extra costs will be negligible. Implementing the recommendations will be part of the regular review and delivery of training and support to IIC Staff and by IIC staff to their colleagues on Boroughs.

3. TP has offered to provide facilitators at no cost to IIC. Their facilitators are MPS staff so no extra cost to the MPS will be incurred.

Benefits.

4. Potential benefits are:

• Early closure of some difficult and sensitive cases, leading to a saving in resources.
• More impactive learning opportunities for officers, potentially leading to service improvement and a reduction in complaints.
• Greater public satisfaction with the complaints process.

Constraints, Assumptions and Risks.

Constraints.

5. The use of conferencing will be constrained only by the low number of appropriate cases and the reluctance of those involved to participate.

Assumptions.

6. It is assumed form the large body of research on restorative conferencing generally that it is a valid process that is capable of resolving some disagreements and is safe to use. Although the benefits of restorative justice have yet to be properly quantified and no assessment has been made of their durability, this is a relatively safe assumption. There is considerable agreement that restorative conferences are at least of some benefit in some situations.

7. It is also assumed based on the limited results described above and the information that has been released by the Oxford/Thames Valley Police (TVP) study, that this technique can be safely and effectively applied to complaints in some particular circumstances.

Risks.

8. The MPS Directorate of Legal Services reviewed the proposals for the pilot and no legal risks were identified. As the recommendations simply make the procedures used in the pilot more widely available, no new risks are created.

9. The Police Complaints Authority (PCA) also reviewed the pilot and agreed the proposals, again identifying no risks. The IPCC have not been consulted at this stage, as it is clear that while they are establishing themselves they are not in a position to contribute usefully at this stage. They will undoubtedly become more involved in such processes as part of their guardianship role in the future.

10. It is possible that no conferences will be held because officers are not willing to participate. This will be managed by training and liaison with the Police Federation. Using restorative conferencing strictly within the Local Resolution Regulations will protect officers’ rights. Both officers and complainants will be asked to sign the Form 3352, Record of Complaint, that they are willing for the complaint to be locally resolved and officers will be served with the appropriate notice. This will place the process firmly within the regulations. This provides officers with the guarantee that nothing that they say during the process can be used as evidence during any subsequent misconduct proceedings. This the procedure used by TVP.

11. That the process will be discredited amongst officers by complainants requesting full investigations despite participating in a conference. This risk can be partially managed by the use of trained facilitators to guarantee the quality of the conferences. However, the risk will remain, as the conference must take place within the Local Resolution Regulations. This is essential to comply with Police Regulations and to protect officers. The Home Office was consulted at an early stage by TVP and was not prepared to allow any flexibility within the Regulations.

12. That conferences will not result in resolution but will further entrench the positions of officers and complainants. This is a risk because complaints are different to the situations that conferences are normally used in. Conferences are most effective when used in situations where there is an ‘offender’ who has harmed a ‘victim’. Indeed research has shown that that the more serious the harm, the more successful the conference is likely to be; reparation is more likely to be agreed and the victims desire for vengeance is more likely to be reduced. There is no clear offender/victim relationship in most complaints. If there were and especially if serious harm had been done, local resolution would not be appropriate.

13. This risk will be managed by ensuring through clear, written guidelines that all participants have a clear understanding of the process and their role within it. Unless it is clearly appropriate, no offender/victim relationship will be set up, explicitly or implicitly. Conference will be aimed at resolving a disagreement between two parties. The TVP experience has shown that this is feasible.

E. Background papers

‘The Use of Restorative Conferencing in the Police Complaints Procedure’ Report PSCC, tabled at meeting on 11 September 2003. Agenda item 8 refers.

F. Contact details

Report author: Detective Chief Inspector Andy Dunn.

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback