Professional Standards Support Programme

Report: 6
Date: 12 October 2006
By: DAC John Yates on behalf of the Commissioner

Summary

With the inception of the Prevention and organisational learning command in April 2006, the MPS Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) undertook to move from a position of reacting to events to one of seeking to prevent failures in professional standards through supporting MPS staff, providing guidance and encouraging a learning organisation which accepts genuine mistakes and seeks to prevent repetition.

The programme is due to commence in January 2007 with visits to every Borough Operational Command Unit (BOCU) and those specialist OCUs already the subject of monitoring by the Metropolitan Police Authority Professional Standards and Complaints Committee. The pilot will be in the first week of November 2006 at Croydon and the programme will be officially launched by the Deputy Commissioner on 27 November 2006.

By using the data provided to the MPA bi-monthly on MPS family groups as a starting point the programme will be relevant, timely and, most importantly monitored.

A. Recommendations

That

1. Members note the programme proposed in this report and, in particular, the timing for visits to their link boroughs. Members are invited to work with their individual borough Commanders to help persuade them of the benefits of engaging with the Programme;
2. Members agree that their presence during those visits would be beneficial to ensuring that issues are understood and monitoring is apparent; and
3. Members note the launch date of 27 November 2006 at 11.30 am in the New Scotland Yard 5th Floor Briefing Room.

B. Supporting information

1. Appendix 1 PowerPoint presented to the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) on 17 August 2006.

2. Appendix 2 Initial MPS Professional Standards Support Programme (PSSP) meeting and visit structure for 2007.

3. The MPS PSSP has been developed to ensure that the data gathered for the MPA is used constructively by proving the evidence on which to base structured visits to OCUs. Within the DPS a range of preventative activities are already undertaken – most notably in the fields of custody and civil actions. These needed co-ordinating and, equally importantly, other elements of the MPS and our external partners given an opportunity to contribute.

4. The concept is simple – DPS will move a proportion of its resources from being an investigative “threat” to that of a preventative guide and supporter. Of course some elements of behaviour will still require robust challenge and this will be unaffected by this programme.

5. A large proportion of complaints or conduct matters that are referred to the DPS and, onwards to the IPCC, are capable of local resolution or by means of management action. This will, with the inception of the Taylor reforms proposed for July 2007, be the preferred route unless “serious misconduct” is alleged. The major factor that appears to prevent such “early intervention” is the level of confidence in supervisors and their knowledge of the processes and the expectations of those who oversee those processes.

6. It is for this reason that the PSSP will be delivered within the workplace and will be face to face with interactive discussions and group learning. By way of example, if an officer were to use a racist word, many supervisors would report that and expect DPS to deal. Under the current guidance, DPS would refer that to the IPCC. To do this investigation would have to take place and every opportunity for early resolution will have been lost. Invariably, unless the officer was a repeat offender or the language used very serious the IPCC would return the matter to the MPS. The officer might eventually get words of advice some months after the event. Within the PSSP, both the DPS and IPCC can directly give the message that it is the initial supervisor who owns the behaviour – it is not merely a matter of reporting. Words of advice at that point and a recording of that event will invariably be sufficient and enable monitoring. All parties can move on. The MPS staff organisations support this stance.

7. The PSSC will deliver to each OCU with the family group a series of core messages which will be the basis of “ownership” of professional standards, based on previous experience and our expert knowledge. These visits will be undertaken during the two-month timeframe that fits with the MPA monitoring. It is essential that all OCUs are visited to prevent the PSSP being seen as an indication of failure by just one borough. This general programme will, however, be insufficient to address the concerns raised when the MPS family data is collated.

8. Within each such family group one or more OCUs will stand out and their performance will require explanation. In order to assist with this the PSSC will hold a tasking meeting and determine which OCU to concentrate on during the two months reporting period. That borough will then have a detailed analysis undertaken which will include the MPA data to which will be added DPS intelligence, Accident Claims data and vehicle performance, officers of concern and a more detailed borough profile. This evidence will enable the PSSP to constructively discuss with the OCU commander the needs of their OCU before any visit is undertaken. The programme will then be tailored to support the OCU but also address the areas of concern.

9. It is also possible that a number of boroughs will have similar problems and that a thematic approach is required for example to address use of force or incivility. The PSSC will be flexible enough to accommodate this. By the same token the PSSP tasking group will meet each month and so have the opportunity to divert resources to a different OCU within the family group or even, if needed, to a high priority OCU elsewhere. In each case an audit trail will exist to show what problems were considered and why resources were allocated.

10. The PSSP have recognised that the issue of Professional Standards is far greater than DPS. To that end Leadership, Diversity, Together and Human Resources have all been approached and informed of the DPS intent. Agreement in principle is that where these other MPS units – in particular Leadership – can assist they will be invited to provide staff and join the delivery of co-ordinated messages.

11. The detailed analysis of Croydon is still being undertaken and, if available will be tabled at the October 2006 meeting. As this is the first such package it has required considerable effort in setting up analysis programmes and the interpretation of data. A provisional first sight by the Borough Commander has been encouraging in that it provided him with additional valuable information on the basis of which he could fully justify the need for the PSSP programme.

12. Once the visits have been undertaken, the monitoring will be through the PSCC data and by presentation to the MPA. It is appreciated that with the collection of data by means of rolling 12 month samples, the PSSP will take some time to become visible. In this context, the linking of the visits to the MPA oversight will ensure both longevity of the programme and continual monitoring.

13. It should be noted that the PSSP is not the only work that DPS is undertaking to support OCUs in the ownership of problems. In September the MPS Professional Standards Steering Committee approved an Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) on dealing with officers about whom there are concerns and this, through an open meeting chaired by DPS, addresses the issues and makes decisions to protect the MPS and the individual, whilst providing the best opportunity for the individual to continue to contribute towards MPS aims. This ratified a process that the DPS have been developing since 2004 and of which the staff associations are entirely supportive - indeed they would seek to see its remit extended to those officers who fail vetting. This new SOP will be published in October.

14. In terms of vetting the DPS continues to maintain the case for a strong initial vetting process, co-ordinated across the whole of the MPS and under one command. The process of creating this was reported to the MPA PPRC on Thursday 14 September 2006 in a report submitted by Assistant Commissioner House on behalf of the Commissioner.

Abbreviations

BOCU

Borough Operational Command Unit

DPS

Directorate of Professional Standards

IPCC

Independent Complaints Commission

PSSP

Professional Standards Support Programme

PSSC

Professional Standards Support Committee

SOP

Standard Operating Procedure

C. Race and equality impact

As outlined above, an important aspect of this programme is to enable misconduct to be dealt with confidently and at the earliest opportunity. The ownership at a local level of most conduct will reduce the need for protracted investigations – a feature outlined in the Morris enquiry. DPS seeks to encourage proportionality and to support local supervisors in decision making.

D. Financial implications

There are none. This programme has been funded by a reallocation of DPS resources and tight control of the DPS budget.

E. Background papers

None.

F. Contact details

Report author(s): Andrew Campbell, Temporary Detective Chief Superintendent, DPS Prevention and Organisational Learning, 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