Complaints management information

Report: 4
Date: 13 July 2006
By: Commissioner

Summary

This report includes data for the 12 months to May 2006. It focuses on the key changes or exceptions within the data, as trends are slow to change.

Workload

There has been an increase of 16% in the number of public complaint allegations being recorded over the past 12 months from a monthly average of 482 to 572. Recently, that rise was fuelled by the allegations made regarding the perceived lack of police action at the protests by the Muslim community into the 'Danish Cartoons'. (750 such allegations have been recorded).

The number of conduct matter allegations recorded over the same period has stabilised and the monthly average is now 85.

Timeliness

The average number of days to complete a public complaint investigation remains well below the national benchmark of 120-days. It reduced by 25% from 106 days in June 2005 to 80 in May 2006.

The average number of days to complete an investigation into a conduct matter continues to improve and it also remains below the benchmark of 120 days. It reduced by 30% from 117 days in June 2005 to 82 in May 2006.

The average number of days between the decision to hold a misconduct hearing or final disposal is considerably below the target of 120 days at 91 days in May 2006.

A. Recommendations

1. Appendix 1 contains data relating to Borough or Operational Command Unit performance.
2. Appendix 2 contains diversity information in respect of the Borough or Operational Command Units.

B. Supporting information

MPS/DPS performance

Table 1: Allegations Recorded - Public Complaints and Conduct Matters (see supporting material)

3. There has been an increase of 16% in the number of public complaint allegations being recorded over the past 12 months from a monthly average of 482 to 572. The peak in February & March 2006 was caused by the allegations recorded in respect of the perceived lack of police action at the protests involving sections of the Muslim community into the Danish newspaper cartoon. This event generated approximately 750 additional allegations.

4. The overall average increase in the 12-months to May 2006 is not proportionate across all allegation categories. Using the actual 12-month rolling average figures, covering a two year period, it was possible to see that there was an distinct upward trend for certain types. The most significant trend appears with rises in Failures in Duty, Malpractice and to a lesser extent, Discriminatory Behaviour and Incivility.

5. This rise in Discriminatory Behaviour can be traced back to the introduction of the IPCC when there was a widening of the definition of such allegations to include Religion, Gender and Sexuality etc. This category also incorporates the new type of allegations made about ‘Fairness and Impartiality’ bought in by the Commission in April 2004. Although there has been a numerical rise in these types of allegations, as a proportion, they have reduced from 7% of the total in 2004/05 to 6% at the end of 2005/06. For 2006/07, to the end of May, this allegation type is 5% of the total.

6. Failure in Duty allegations continue to rise steadily. At the end of 2005/06 such allegations had risen by 1000 and represented 38% of all allegations recorded against 27% in both 2003/04 and 2005/06. The rise has continued into 2006/07 with 42% of all allegations being in this category at the end of May. Since the inception of the IPCC, DPS are investigating a higher proportion of failure in duty allegations that have come via the Commission. It is possible that, before the IPCC, some of these issues may not have been bought to the attention of DPS.

7. Incivility allegations have also risen in numerical terms since the inception of the IPCC in April 2004 but have reduced as a proportion of all allegations from 22% of the total in 2003/04 to 17% in 2005/06. At the end of May 2006, they represented 16% of all allegations.

8. Oppressive Behaviour allegations that had previously risen significantly due to the ‘Pro-Hunt’ demonstrations now appear to be on the decline as a proportion of the overall total. In 2004/05 they represented 38%, which reduced to 30% in 2005/06. This has carried through to 2006/07 when, at the end of May, they were 28% of the total.

9. Table 2 illustrates the number of public complaints recorded over the period June 2005 to May 2006. It is also broken down by type, calculated per 100 officers and the period split into 3-month periods.

Table 2: The number of public complaints recorded over the period June 2005 to May 2006 (see supporting material)

10. Period 1, June to August 2005, sees a higher proportion of oppressive behaviour and other type allegations. This is in part due to the last of the Pro-Hunt cases being forwarded to the MPS, by the IPCC, in June 2005. Period 3 and 4, December 2005 to May 2006, shows the rise in Failure in Duty allegations resulting from the Danish Newspaper Cartoon protests.

11. The table below illustrates the numbers of allegations by type and whether a period is above the MPS period average in which case the figures will be in both blue and bold text. The MPS total number of allegations, per 100 officers, over the 12-month period is also shown for comparison.

12. Over the 12 months to May 2006, the average number of conduct matter allegations recorded each month has stabilised at 85.

Timeliness - Public Complaints

Table 3: Average days taken to complete full investigation & all other results (see supporting material)

Meeting target: investigating complaints within the national 120-day target. (80 days)

13. The average number of days to complete a public complaint has levelled at 80 days and has been such for the past three months. Although there is no change, it still remains considerably below the national 120-days benchmark.

14. It is believed by Investigations Command, that a plateau has now been reached making it unlikely that any further reductions are possible. The challenge will be in ensuring that current performance is sustained.

15. Since June 2005, the average number of days taken to complete an investigation has reduced by 25% from 106 days to 80 in May 2006.

Missing target: a month on month reduction in the average number of days to complete an investigation (0% increase on the previous month)

16. There were no monthly reductions in the average number of days taken to investigate a complaint in either April or May 2006.

17. The impact of the events of July 2005 is filtering through to the timeliness 12-month rolling averages causing the stabilisation of the average number of days to investigate and lack of a ‘month-on-month’ reduction.

18. The Investigations Command continues to clear the backlog of complaints and conduct matters, over 120-days old, which accumulated following these events, as illustrated in the Table 4.

Table 4: Percentage of cases over 120 days old – Public Complaints/Conduct Matters (see supporting material)

Meeting expectation: a reduction in the percentage of public complaint cases over 120-days old.

19. Following the impact of the significant incidents in July 2005 and the subsequent increase in the percentage of public complaint cases over 120-days old, DPS have since reduced this from a peak of 27% in October 2005 (179 of 667 cases) to 21% (173 of 811 cases) in May 2006. Although the trend remains downwards, there is still some way to go to achieve pre-July 2005 levels of between 14% and 17%.

Conduct matters

Meeting target: the average number of days to complete an investigation (82 against a 120 benchmark)

20. The average number of days to complete a conduct matter investigation remains well below the target of 120-days. It reduced by 30%, from 117 days in June 2005 to 82 in May 2006.

Meeting expectation: a reduction in the percentage of conduct matter cases over 120-days old

21. Following the significant impact of the incidents in July 2005, Conduct Matters over 120-days old rose from 36% (48 of 133 cases) in June to a peak of 60% (64 of 107 cases) in November 2005. However, since then, the trend is downward and at 32% (36 of 114 cases) in May 2006 is at its lowest since monitoring of this indicator began in 2001.

22. Overall, timeliness in respect of investigations into public complaints and conduct matters has improved due to the reviewing of processes and systems and a robust performance management regime within the Investigations Command.

Misconduct

Table 5: Misconduct – Average number of days from decision to hearing or final disposal (see supporting material)

Meeting target: average days to reach Misconduct decisions (91 against 120 target)

23. The average number of days between the decision to hold a misconduct hearing or reach a final disposal remains below the target of 120-days.

External partners – CPS decision making

Table 6: Average number of days from report to receipt of decision from CPS (see supporting material)

24. Table number 6 illustrates the timeliness of the CPS decision-making in respect of the Specialist Investigation work, such as Deaths Following Police Contact and Discharge of Police Firearms and the more routine complaint and conduct investigations of the Borough Support Units.

External partners – IPCC decision making

Table 7: Average number of days from report submission to receipt of decision from IPCC (see supporting information)

25. The chart above reveals improvements in the 12-month rolling averages in respect of decisions made by the IPCC in requesting either a Dispensation or Discontinuance.

26. In line with member’s expectations, we plan to include IPCC appeal data in the next report. A validation of appeal data is currently taking place between the IPCC and DPS to facilitate this.

Outcome trends

Table 8: Public Complaints Finalised allegation by result (see supporting information)

27. The average percentage of local resolutions has reduced in the 12-month period from 37% in May 2005 to 31% in May 2006 and remains considerably below the target of 50%. Whilst the proportions of the other outcomes affect this figure it is likely to remain low until BOCUs are able to take on more responsibility for the resolution of their own complaints and undertake lower level investigations.

28. The Local Resolution policy is currently being rewritten. The new policy will not require the officer to be served with notice that he/she is under investigation. It is anticipated that this change will lead to an increase in the number of local resolutions and the time it takes to achieve them. Officers can sometimes withdraw their cooperation in the process if they feel they are under investigation. The policy change seeks to remove this barrier.

29. The decline in Dispensations granted by the IPCC, from 18% to 12%, suggests DPS are being required to conduct more investigations. This has contributed to a 7% increase in complaints being classified as unsubstantiated’. The outcome is that the public are getting more complaints investigated although the number of complaints substantiated remains unchanged at 2%.

30. The number of allegations shown as not recorded as public complaints, under the Police Reform Act, has reduced since DPS now register and deal with more minor issues raised by members of the public. However, there is a slight increase in the current 12-month period, which is due to the majority of the Danish newspaper cartoon being resulted as such.

Borough (BOCU) / Operational Command Unit (OCU) Performance – Public Complaints: allegations and people.

31. At each PSCC members will be presented with a comparative analysis of public complaint data relating to groups of (B)OCUs in relation to MPS professional standards matters.

32. The BOCU groupings are made using the Territorial Policing Performance Focus Meeting (TP PFM) cluster.

33. These families have been grouped together based on demographics and volume crime within the boroughs in question. Both of these factors are likely to affect complaints. By using these family groups and converting actual numbers of complaints recorded into a ‘per 100 officers’ figure enables more accurate comparisons to be made.

34. This information provides a benchmark against which the Authority will be able to judge DPS’s prevention and reduction capability in the future by looking for variations in performance from this report to the next occasion the same family group appears.

35. Variations in performance of each of the boroughs when compared to their peers are highlighted in both blue and bold text. Variations could be for any number of reasons such as a particular operation/initiative being run on the borough or environmental factors such as the number of licensed premises, entertainment venues or shopping centres. The demographics in relation to both the resident and transient population and the length of service and experience of the officers concerned will also be relevant factors.

36. It should be noted that, once the ‘per 100 officers’ element is introduced to the data, some of the numbers are small which makes it difficult to draw any significant conclusions from them.

37. Because a Borough is different from their peers does not automatically mean that they are worse.

38. Where significant variations are noted, DPS will work with the boroughs to discover the potential causes by drilling down into the data to establish the exact nature and likely cause of the variation. Where appropriate action will be taken by the borough in partnership with DPS to bring closer to them closer to the average of similar boroughs in their group.

39. The group of boroughs under focus for this period are from TP PFM family group 5. The data and associated analysis is presented in Appendix 1.

C. Race and equality impact

Appendix 2 includes MPS data in respect of diversity relating to both complainants and officers that is compared against the family of Boroughs or Operational Command Units in focus.

D. Financial implications

None

E. Background papers

None.

F. Contact details

Report author(s): Michael Clark and Andrew Campbell, 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