Complaints management information

Report: 8
Date: 17 January 2008
By: Assistant Commissioner Operational Services on behalf of the Commissioner

Summary

This report includes data for the 12 months to November 2007. It focuses on the key changes or exceptions within the data, as trends are slow to change. The majority of figures used are based on 12-month rolling averages, which ensure that the trends are less affected by natural variation.

Workload

There has been a decrease of 1% in the number of public complaint allegations being recorded over the past 12 months from a monthly rolling average of 710 to 703. The number of conduct matter allegations recorded over the same period shows only minor variation and the monthly average has reduced by 5% to 90 per month on average.

Timeliness

The average number of days to complete a public complaint investigation remains below the threshold of 90-days. It has remained at a similar level since December 2005 but reduced significantly to 73 days in November 2007.

The percentage of public complaint cases over 120-days old has reduced significantly over the past two months and stood at 15% at the end of November.

The average number of days to complete an investigation into a conduct matter continues to improve and it also remains below the threshold of 90-days. It reduced by 12%, from a peak of 83 days in October 2006 to 73 days in November 2007.

The percentage of conduct matters over 120-days was 33% at the end of November 2007. This has risen from a 12-month low in October 2007 of 26%. However, this increase should be set against a previous high of 48% recorded in May 2007.

The average number of days between the decision and the holding of a misconduct hearing or final disposal is additionally below the threshold of 100-days and, at 88 days in November 2007.

A. Recommendations

That members note the report and the illustration of trends in the report and the Borough performance information contained in Appendices 1 and 2.

B. Supporting information

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.

MPS/DPS Performance

3. Chart 3 (appendix 3) illustrates both the ‘actual’ number of allegations recorded each month together with the 12-month rolling averages. The rolling average smoothes out natural variation evident in the actual figures and is more indicative of the trends involved. Due to the process of recording allegations, it is possible that the latest ‘actual’ monthly figure for November may be between 10% and 15% too low.

4. There has been a 1% reduction in the number of public complaint allegations recorded over the past 12 months from a monthly average of 710 to 703.

5. These rolling averages contain data for 24 months in total and cover the two periods December 2005 to November 2006 and December 2006 to November 2007.

6. Over the 12 months to November 2007, the average number of conduct matter allegations recorded each month has stabilised at 90. This is 5% lower than the previous rolling 12-month average (95 allegations).

7. At the previous meeting, members requested an explanation why the MPS figures, relating to increases in public complaints appearing in the MPA PSCC report for November 2007 and those published in the IPCC report on police complaints in 2006/07 differed. The variance is due to a number of factors, each of which are correct. The reasons for the differences are outlined below:

• Different time periods: There is 6 months difference between each set of figures.
  • IPCC: Comparing 01/04/2005 – 31/03/2006 with 01/04/2006 – 31/03/2007
  • MPS: Comparing 01/10/2005 – 31/09/2006 with 01/10/2006 – 31/09/2007
• Different units counted:
  • IPCC: Counting cases
  • MPS: Counting allegations
• Different counting methods:
  • IPCC: Using ‘actual yearly’ totals
  • MPS: Using ‘average monthly’ totals (12-month rolling averages)
• Different factors being included:
  • IPCC: Data includes ‘extraordinary’ public order events e.g. the policing of parliament square and Danish cartoon protests.
  • MPS: Data excludes aforementioned events as they are outside the period.

8. When the MPA PSCC report (June 2007) is consulted, as it contains data closest to the end of 2006/07, the MPS reported similar rises to those of the IPCC at 13%, albeit at allegation level. Significantly, the conclusions drawn from both sets of data concur i.e. Failure in Duty and Incivility allegations account for the majority of the concerns raised by members of the public.

9. Failure in Duty allegations have risen steadily. At the end of 2005/06, such allegations had risen by over 1000 and represented 38% of all allegations recorded in comparison to 27% in both 2003/04 and 2004/05. At the end of 2006/07 such allegations represented 38% of the total. For the current financial year to date, failure in duty allegations account for 36% of all allegations.

10. Incivility allegations have also risen in numerical terms since the inception of the IPCC in April 2004, but reduced as a proportion of all allegations from 22% of the total in 2003/04 to 18% at the end of 2006/07. For the current financial year to date, incivility allegations account for 19% of all allegations.

11. 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 29% in 2005/06. This has carried through to the end of 2006/07 when they were 28% of the total. They are at a similar level of 29% for the current financial year to date.

12. Table 1 (appendix 3)  illustrates the ‘actual’ number of public complaints recorded, against the MPS, over the period December 2006 to November 2007 converted to a per 100 officers figure. It is also broken down by allegation sub-type, and split into quarterly periods.

13. Table 2 (appendix 3) illustrates the numbers of allegations, per 100 officers, 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.

14. Although there are allegation types that appear above the period averages they are not significantly so and do not indicate any immediate causes for concern.

Timeliness - Public Complaints

Chart 2 (appendix 3) shows the average number of days taken to complete full investigation & all other results.

Meeting target - Investigating complaints within the 90-day threshold (73 days)

15. The average number of days to complete a public complaint was 73 days in November 2007. Overall, the number of days has remained at a similar level since December 2005 and below the threshold of 90 days.

Meeting target - A month on month reduction in the average number of days to complete an investigation (5% decrease on the previous month)

16. There was a reduction of 5% in the average number of days taken to complete an investigation in November 2007 (77 to 73 days). This is the most significant reduction in the past 12 months. Where there has previously been a reduction it has only been by a maximum of 1%.

17. This target must be balanced against the risk that excessive speed will reduce quality and thus frustrate any gain by encouraging the dissatisfaction of the complainant and subsequent appeal to the IPCC.

18. The work being undertaken by DPS in respect of the changes to legislation brought about by the Taylor Review will afford another opportunity to review these practices. Current information suggests that the legislation will not now receive Royal Assent until Spring 2008 and the implementation throughout forces will be through negotiation between the Home Office and ACPO in the summer of 2008.

Missing Target - Submitting requests for Dispensations/Discontinuances to the IPCC within a 60 day target (68 days)

19. Chart 3 (see appendix 3) shows the Average Days Taken to Submit Dispensation/Discontinuance Requests to the IPCC.

Since December 2006, the average number of days taken to submit a dispensation or discontinuance request to the IPCC has remained fairly static ranging between 68 and 72 days.

Meeting target - Average days taken to achieve a Local Resolution within a 60 day Target (52 days)

20. Chart 4 (see appendix 3) shows the Average Days Taken to achieve a Local Resolution.

Since December 2006, the average number of days taken to achieve a local resolution remains fairly static varying between a maximum of 52 days and a minimum of 49 days. This is currently within the 60-day target.

21. Analysis of local resolutions reveals that, in the 12-months to December 2007, Boroughs themselves have achieved 54% of the local resolutions, the remaining 46% were by DPS staff. The proportion of local resolutions undertaken by DPS has decreased, when compared to the previous 12 months, where it was previously 57%.

Meeting expectation - A reduction in the percentage of public complaint cases over 120-days* old (3% decrease on the previous month)

22. Chart 5 (see appendix 3) shows the Percentage of cases over 120-days* old – Public Complaints / Conduct Matters.

(*This indicator will be changed to 90-days in later reports but to do so requires a programming change to the source system.  Work on this is currently ongoing as part of the TRIBUNE phase 3 upgrade)

DPS continue to make efforts to reduce the percentage of public complaint cases over 120-days* old. It remained fairly static varying between 21% in December 2006 and 24% in September 2007. Since October 2007, it has reduced significantly and at the end of November, stood at 15% (133 of 916 cases).

23. By drilling down into the figures it is apparent that the majority of the cases that now are over 120-days old are those that are the responsibility of either the Human Resources i.e. Police Staff investigations (59% or 64 cases), External/Outside force investigations (100% or 2 cases) or IPCC investigations (100% or 3 cases).

24. Human Resources continue to result and finalise police staff cases over 120 days and, although a high percentage still remain, they have made significant inroads into the backlog. Over November, the number of live cases has reduced by eight cases (117 to 109). The number of all live cases HR is responsible for has also reduced, by 17 cases (155 to 138). This is as a result of improving the chase up and monitoring process.

25. To illustrate the impact such cases have on this target, the performance of DPS Investigations Command has been illustrated separately on the chart. This shows that 11% of the cases (48 cases) within their responsibility are over 120-days old.

Conduct Matters

Meeting target - The average number of days to complete an investigation (73 against a 90 threshold)

26. Chart 6 (see appendix 3) shows the Average days taken to complete an investigation.

The average number of days to complete a conduct matter investigation, illustrated above, remains below the threshold of 90-days. It reduced by 12%, from a peak of 83 days in October 2006 to 73 in November 2006.

Missing expectation - A reduction in the percentage of conduct matter cases over 120-days* old (7% increase on the previous month)

27. Conduct Matters over 120-days has increased to 33% in November 2007 (41 of 125 cases). The increase has been contributed to by cases within the remit of DPS Borough Support, DPS Specialist Investigations and Human Resources.

(* This indicator will be changed to 90-days in later reports but to do so requires a programming change to the source system. Work on this is currently ongoing as part of the TRIBUNE Phase 3 upgrade.)

28. It is possible that the efforts that have gone in to significantly reducing the percentage of public complaint cases over 120-days old and improving the timeliness of such investigations have resulted in an adverse affect on the speed at which conduct matters have been dealt with over the same period.

29. Cases that are the responsibility of DPS Investigations have been illustrated on the chart (paragraph 19), which shows that 26% of cases (23 cases) that they are responsible for are over 120-days old.

* This indicator will be changed to 90-days in later reports but to do so requires a programming change to the source system. Work on this is currently ongoing as part of the TRIBUNE Phase 3 upgrade.

Misconduct

Meeting target - Average days to reach Misconduct decisions (88 against 100 threshold)

30. Chart 7 (appendix 3) shows the Average number of days from decision to hearing or final disposal

The average number of days between the decision to hold a misconduct hearing or reach a final disposal remains below the revised threshold of 100-days although it has risen since July 2007.

External Partners – CPS Decision making

31. The chart 8 (appendix 3), 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

32. The chart 9 (see appendix 3) reveals the average time taken for the IPCC to reach decisions in dispensation and discontinuance cases.

33. The chart 10 (appendix 3) shows the ‘average’ number of appeals made to the IPCC where a decision has been received from the Commission within the last 12 months. It illustrates the type of appeal being made and the validity of that appeal as determined by the IPCC.

34. Table 3 (appendix 3) illustrates the ‘actual’ number of appeals made to the IPCC where a decision has been received from the Commission within the last 12 months compared to the previous 12 months.

35. The number of appeals, receiving a decision by the IPCC in the last 12 months, has increased by 42% compared to the previous 12 months and the proportion that the Commission have upheld has risen from 16% of the total to 28% at the end of November 2007.

36. Upheld appeals have increased in respect of all categories but more so in respect of the ‘outcome of an investigation’. The term ‘upheld’ means that the IPCC have agreed with the complainants challenge to an MPS decision.

37. Work has commenced to improve data quality in this area and DPS have contacted the IPCC to request appeal data from their system so that our records can be reconciled with theirs. Once received, DPS will update the relevant ‘new’ Tribune fields.

Outcome Trends

38. The average percentage of local resolutions stands at 32% for November 2007 and has risen by 1% since November 2006. This remains considerably below the aspirational 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. (see Chart 11 – appendix 3)

39. There are however tensions between the desire to see more issues being dealt with locally e.g. Local Resolutions and the scrutiny DPS is under to improve timeliness. DPS investigators losing close control over a complaint being investigated/resolved on borough can adversely impact on their timeliness and the inclination is for them to recall the file and deal with it themselves.

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

40. At each PSCC, members will be presented with a comparative analysis of public complaint data relating to groups of BOCUs in relation to MPS professional standards matters.

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

42. There is a further group exception to this is what DPS have called Group 6, which consists of TP non-Borough based units and non-TP Operational Command Units.

43. The ‘actual’ figures appear in the Borough Support Management Information (BSMI) report, which is made available to the MPA as a separate document and which could be circulated to members if required by MPA officers.

44. This information provides a benchmark against which the Authority will be able to judge DPS’s Professional Standards Support Programme (PSSP) in the future by looking for variations in performance from this report to the next occasion the same family group appears.

45. 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. Because a Borough or Command Unit is different from their peers does not automatically mean that they are worse.

46. 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.

47. The Professional Standards Support Program (PSSP) incorporates a ‘tasking’ and ‘review’ process whereby information in relation to public complaints, conduct matters, civil actions and accident claims are assessed in order to ascertain what intervention activities are most appropriate to assist the boroughs with. The borough requiring the most assistance will have a ‘profile’ compiled on it based on all the information previously mentioned but in greater detail by drilling down into the data to establish the exact nature and likely cause of the variation.

48. The Prevention & Organisational Learning Command (POL) will then work with the borough in question, through the PSSP process, to define an action plan that may bring the BOCU closer to the average of similar boroughs in their group.

49. The group of boroughs under focus for this period are from Group 6. 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, Higher Performance Analyst
Hamish Campbell, Detective Chief Superintendent

For more information contact:

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

Send an e-mail linking to this page

Feedback