Leicestershire PEEL 2014
Does the force act with integrity and provide a service the public expects?
There is clear leadership from the chief constable who has set the tone in relation to standards of behaviour and professionalism using the ‘Our duty’ statement of values and standards. Most supervisors and line managers are positive role models, encouraging professional behaviour. Staff are prepared to challenge inappropriate behaviour and feel the organisation will support them when doing so, although some are concerned that they would not be supported by colleagues. The counter-corruption unit lacks a proactive capacity and the force vetting process needs strengthening.
Further insights on legitimacy
The Crime Survey for England and Wales (12 months to March 2013) found that the proportion of respondents who think that the force does an excellent/good job was greater than the figure across England and Wales. The same survey over the same period found that the proportion that agrees the force deals with local concerns was greater than the figure for England and Wales. The force’s own victim satisfaction survey (12 months to June 2014) found that the proportion of victims who were satisfied with their experience was broadly in line with the figure across England and Wales.
The crime data integrity inspection found that all victims of crime received a victim care contract which set out the frequency of contact from the police, and when they would receive updates on the investigation. The inspection on domestic abuse found that the force intelligence systems allowed staff to readily gather available information readily, including previous history of domestic abuse. Staff were trained effectively to gain as full a picture as possible and information was relayed to the officer attending the incident. Staff attending reports of domestic abuse had a good appreciation of the actions they needed to take to help protect the victim. However, there were weaknesses in the supervision of the risk assessment process which meant that the force could not be confident that accurate assessments were made of all victims.
As a result of the crime data integrity inspection, HMIC is concerned that a notable proportion of reports of crime are not being recorded by the force. This means that victims of crime are not receiving the service they should when they first report a crime.
However, HMIC is impressed with the accuracy of the decisions taken by the force when making no-crime decisions (cancelling a recorded crime), nearly all of which are correct.
To what extent does the force ensure that the workforce acts with integrity?
Policies have been developed around business interests and gifts and hospitality, and staff have knowledge of these policies. The force does not cross-check chief officers’ diaries or gifts and hospitality against the procurement register.
The police and crime commissioner conducts dip-samples of closed public complaints every three months. There is detailed assessment of misconduct cases which leads to a proportionate investigation, and general confidence across the force that cases and hearings are handled fairly.
The professional standards department (PSD) lacks capacity and work is not being completed in a timely manner. The PSD is involved in some training to prevent misconduct and protect staff from corruption, making use of the Independent Police Complaints Commission’s Learning the Lessons publication. Information on sanctions imposed on those who have behaved inappropriately is published for staff.
The force monitors social networking sites but it does not routinely monitor staff members’ personal social media use. Random and ‘with cause’ drug testing and intelligence-led integrity tests are carried out. There is some proactive gathering of intelligence but capacity within the counter corruption unit (CCU) means this is limited. There are low levels of intelligence being generated in relation to corruption. The CCU enjoys a positive working relationship with surrounding police forces and the National Crime Agency, and can call on these to provide specialist resources such as surveillance when required.
The force is working to meet the required national standards for vetting but has not yet achieved this.
What are the public perceptions of the force?
HMIC considers that there are two sources of data that give an insight into the public’s perceptions of their police force: the Crime Survey for England and Wales, and the Victim Satisfaction Survey.
The data for Leicestershire Police show that:
Crime Survey for England and Wales (12 months to March 2013)
- 67 percent of adults surveyed think that the police do an excellent/good job, which is greater than the figure across England and Wales of 61 percent.
- 65 percent of adults surveyed agree that the police deal with local concerns, which is greater than the England and Wales proportion of 60 percent.
Victim Satisfaction Survey (12 months to June 2014)
- 85.2 percent (± 1.9 percent) of victims were satisfied with their experience which is broadly in line with the figure across England and Wales of 85.0 percent (± 0.2 percent).
To what extent does the force respond to calls for service appropriately?
The value for money inspection found the force had set a clear performance standard for response times, and this had remained the same since 2010. The inspection found that during this time, the proportion of calls attended within these standards for both ’emergency’ and ‘priority’ calls had declined.
The crime data integrity inspection found that all victims of crime received a victim care contract which set out the frequency of contact from the police, and when they would receive updates on the investigation.
The domestic abuse inspection found that the force intelligence systems allowed staff to readily gather available information readily, including previous history of domestic abuse. Staff relayed this information to the officer attending the incident. There was room for improvement in the supervision of call-taking, to ensure appropriate oversight of the initial response to domestic abuse. Staff attending reports of domestic abuse had a good appreciation of the actions they needed to take to help protect the victim, and control room staff were trained effectively to gain as full a picture as possible. There were weaknesses in the supervision of the risk assessment process which meant that the force could not be confident that accurate assessments were made of all victims.
To what extent are the data and information provided by the force of a high quality?
The crime data integrity inspection examined 123 incident records and found that 115 crimes should have been recorded as a crime. Of the 115 crimes that should have been recorded, 100 were. Of those 100, all were recorded within the 72-hour limit allowed under the Home Office Counting Rules (HOCR), but three were wrongly classified.
The inspection also examined 83 no-crime records and found 74 records to be compliant with the HOCR and the National Crime Recording Standard (NCRS). The force had effective structures in place to manage the no-crime process; we found good compliance in the categories of violence and rape.