Information

1 Welcome and introductions.

Attendees:
PFCC Danielle Stone (DS)
DPFCC Marianne Kimani (MK)
Jonny Bugg (JB)
Paul Fell (PF)
CC Ivan Balhatchet (IB)
DCC Ash Tuckley (AT)
Stuart McCartney (SMc)

DS welcomed everyone to the meeting.

2 Minutes and decisions of previous meeting

The Minutes were agreed and the OPFCC Delivery Director provided an update on the work relating to Section 106 funds and suggested this should be raised at the Public Safety Board.

3 PART 1

Response Times

The Commissioner expressed her concerns relating to the force’s performance. She asked if the Force knew what the issue was and what actions is being taken to address them.

The Chief Constable responded and noted this was not a recent issue and explained the historical context. He then noted that the performance improvements seen in the control room were not being translated to response times overall. The Deputy Chief Constable noted that HMICFRS had noted this area of performance and whilst a lot of work is being undertaken, it was a difficult area to address. He explained that other areas of performance had improved but the challenges remain in response especially with staffing. The Commissioner then raised the issue of responding to Grade 1 calls specifically. The Deputy Chief Constable explained that one challenge was dealing with the volume of other calls and its impact on response times which is why the Force were looking at their demand model.

The Commissioner raised the issue of IT and technology and asked what work was being undertaken in relation of its use to reduce demand. The Chief Constable responded and noted the Force has AI and an AI working group but explained there were challenges to using it in the Control Room. He also explained the force currently did not have the right strategy to deliver on this. The Commissioner felt there was a gap between the strategy, decisions and implementation and asked how this could be addressed. She felt delivery on projects took too long and there needed to be a collective sense of urgency to drive improvements. The Deputy Chief Constable agreed but noted tthe issue was not with front line officers. The Commissioner responded and explained the importance of getting the infrastructure right to support the front line. The Deputy Chief Constable then explained how the force could improve response times through changes to how the force graded incidents, not leaving jobs on the system and making quicker decisions about the most relevant response to different incidents. He explained that a recent pilot project demonstrated that 80% of demand could be met in a different manner, potentially reducing demand on response officers, while providing a better service to callers and sending incidents to the most appropriate department.

The Commissioner asked how the control room triage calls and what happens to the calls. The Deputy Chief Constable explained there was no set definition of a Grade 1 response and other forces had differing approaches. He then set out how the control room manages calls. The Commissioner explained that victims of lower risk crimes don’t already want an officer deployed but just wanted contact with the force. The OPFCC Performance Director agreed that such a response was not always the most effective manner to respond

The Deputy Chief Constable explained that the new demand model needed to deliver improvements on grading calls. A central co-ordination team had also been established to look at resources on a day-to-day basis to better meet demand. The Chief Constable highlighted how better governance will mean that resources could be better deployed and the Deputy Chief Constable explained how the changes being implemented will improve the force’s capacity to meet demand over the summer. The Deputy Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner asked how confident the Force were in delivering this and what would happen if it could not be delivered. The Deputy Chief Constable explained this issue had been picked up by HMICFRS, but the force had recognised the need to improve management across the organisation. The Commissioner asked when improvements would be delivered. The Chief Constable conceded that there are risks involved but was hopeful that it will be seen in the data after the summer. The Commissioner noted the Fire and Rescue Service have mapped risk across the county and where they respond from. She asked the Force if they have undertaken a similar exercise. The Chief Constable agreed that the force could undertake some work on this. The OPFCC Performance Director noted the need to avoid Officers coming back to their base to complete work. It was important to have the right technology in place to get their role undertaken without spending time going back to a station. The Chief Constable explained that if time is freed up, it would provide capacity for investigation and should make officers more proactive when they are out and about. The OPFCC Performance Director highlighted the fact that other forces are meeting their response targets and in response the Deputy Chief Constable noted the force were looking at demand models and how they can improve response times. The Commissioner felt more assured on this issue and the fact that there was a timetable in place to deliver improvements.

ACTION – IB to consider a risk-based modelling process for response resources similar to that undertaken by Fire and Rescue as a part of the ongoing demand work

Assurance Statement
The Commissioner was clear that she considers the timely and effective response to emergency calls a key issue for the force and she was not content with the current performance of the force in relation to this, both in terms of the average response times or the percentage of times that the service level agreement of response to Grade 1 calls in urban locations was being met. The Commissioner welcomed the fact that the force was taking steps to be less risk averse in relation to deployment gradings and changing the shape of the response model as a part of the current demand work. She was assured that the Chief Constable had plans to improve matters over the summer months and into the autumn but made it clear that current performance levels were not acceptable and she required improvements to be made resulting from this ongoing work.

Robbery
In relation to Robbery, the OPFCC Performance Director suggested that this could be picked up outside of the meeting and he would ensure the Commissioner receives a briefing on the data.

ACTION – PF to write to DCC Tuckley with specific questions relating to this matter.

PART 2

Records Management

The Chief Constable briefed the Commissioner on the work being undertaken relating to the Force’s management of records and data. He explained that this area of work now sits under a Gold Command and additional resources have been allocated. The Deputy Chief Constable updated the Commissioner on the work being delivered and the challenges being faced. He noted that a new governance model was now in place that is helping to overhaul and improve this area of business. The Commissioner asked if the force understood the amount and types of data it held. The Deputy Chief Constable responded and noted that legacy IT systems were a challenge, but were now being addressed.

The OPFCC Performance Director raised the issue of core and non-core IT systems and what work had been undertaken to map what was held on them. The Deputy Chief Constable responded and explained that the Force’s data mapping exercise will cover that issue. The Commissioner asked what specialist IT support was available to support this area of work. The OPFCC Performance Director explained that meetings had taken place with a view of engaging with an external supplier to support this area of work. The Commissioner reminded the meeting of the importance of keeping a detailed record of what is being delivered to demonstrate the Force has understood and addressed all the issues involved. The OPFCC Performance Director agreed to provide an update on the work being undertaken on the review and the timescales involved.

ACTION – AT to provide a list to PF and PFCC of what constituted a core of a non-core system in regard to the records management paper.
ACTION – AT to confirm what paper records exist over and above the core and non-core systems
ACTION In the light of comments in the records, management paper IB to make sure a rapid assessment takes place of technology that could support the rectification of and improvements in this area.

Assurance Statement

The Commissioner made is very clear that she was not assured in relation to this matter. The paper that she had received was transparent and candid, which was an approach she welcomed. She had received assurances about plans but was deeply concerned about the here and now. She required additional assurances in relation to a number of aspects of the subject of this paper and would seek these outsides of the meeting, particularly relating to technological improvements and visibility of data and information. This was an area that required ongoing and rapid improvement.

Road Safety
The Chief Constable briefed the Commissioner on the work relating to road safety delivered in partnership with the Northamptonshire Road Safety Alliance and the challenges ahead. The Commissioner thanked the force for the level of detail in their briefing and noted her frustrations relating to the delivery of a wider Road Safety Plan. She also felt it was important to promote what had been delivered to residents and to ensure partners to better support this area of work. She asked if improved communications could be delivered on this issue. She also noted her disappointment that a recent operation against e-scooters was not promoted more in the media. The Chief Constable responded and noted the feedback and would follow this matter up. The OPFCC Performance Director updated the meeting in relation to the Community Speed Watch scheme and noted there should be a focus on reducing collisions. The Commissioner responded and noted that injuries and deaths should be examined when assessing accident hotspots. The OPFCC Performance Director asked what partners delivered in connection with red routes other than the speed enforcement undertaken by the Force. The OPFCC Chief Executive felt this was an area the OPFCC could help to coordinate and support through a dedication resource. The OPFCC Performance Director agreed to oversee this offer to help partner with and lobby the local authorities deliver on the road safety agenda.

Action – IB to consider how the force can better communicate its successes in relation to road safety and the delivery of positive interventions more widely.

Action – PF to consider a shared Police/OPFCC road safety post.

4 AOB

No further business was raised.