South Wales Police: Crime Data Integrity inspection 2017

Please note: This inspection was carried out before 19 July 2017, when HMIC also took on responsibility for fire & rescue service inspections and was renamed HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services. The methodology underpinning our inspection findings is unaffected by this change.

References to HMICFRS in this report may relate to an event that happened before 19 July 2017 when HMICFRS was HMIC.

Overall judgment

South Wales Police has made concerted efforts to improve crime-recording accuracy since HMICFRS’ 2014 Crime Data Integrity inspection report. Importantly, we found a commitment to ethical crime recording that is victim-focused and free from performance pressures of any kind. We found that the force:

• records nearly all reports of crime reported directly to its public protection teams;
• achieves high levels of recording accuracy for reported sexual offences;
• records most reports of crime within 24 hours of the report, as required by the crime-recording rules;
• makes good decisions when considering whether or not to cancel a recorded crime;
• has implemented all of the recommendations set out in our 2014 report; and
• has made good progress against a national action plan developed to improve crime recording by police forces.

These are very encouraging findings. Nonetheless, based on the findings of our examination of crime reports for the period 1 November 2016 to 30 April 2017, we estimate that the force fails to record over 11,000 reported crimes each year. This represents a recording rate of 90.2 percent (with a confidence interval of +/- 1.73 percent). The 9.8 percent of reported crimes that went unrecorded are particularly affected by the under-recording of violent crime and public order crime. We also found that the force had not recorded all reported crimes of rape. Further improvements are therefore required in some areas.

We believe that these failures generally occur when crime-recording decisions are not taken at the point of report, and in such instances there is a subsequent lack of oversight to ensure that the correct crime-recording decisions are later taken.

Summary of inspection findings

The force has improved its crime-recording processes since HMICFRS’ 2014 report. In particular, we found that the force has:

• set up a crime integrity team responsible for the review and validation of all recorded crime and of incidents containing reports of crime, to ensure that these reports are recorded and that all victims receive the service and support they deserve;
• improved knowledge and understanding of crime-recording requirements among officers and staff within the force’s public protection teams;
• improved the supervision of its use of out-of-court disposals to ensure that they are being used appropriately and ethically;
• an effective process for providing feedback to staff and officers who make poor crime-recording decisions;
• developed and provided training to address those areas where officers and staff regularly make the same crime-recording mistakes;
• implemented all of the recommendations set out in our 2014 report; and
• made good progress against a national action plan developed to improve crime recording by police forces.

We also found that the force crime registrar (FCR) – responsible for oversight and audit of crime-recording requirements – has completed a national College of Policing course for FCRs and is fully accredited for the role. The FCR is supported by a deputy FCR and the crime integrity team. Additional audit capacity is provided by staff in the corporate development department.

Despite those advances, the force’s performance in respect of crime-recording could be better in the following areas:

• The force is currently under-recording:
  • violent crimes (including some arising from domestic abuse incidents);
  • public order crimes; and
  • on occasion, rape crimes where there are multiple allegations made by the same victim.

The force must improve the accuracy of the recording of these reports.

• The force must improve the extent to which it collects information regarding the effect of criminality on identifiable groups within communities. In particular, groups with identifiable protected characteristics (e.g. gender, sexuality or ethnicity).

We consider that these failures generally occur when crime-recording decisions are not taken at the point of report, and in such instances there is a subsequent lack of oversight to ensure that the correct crime-recording decisions are later taken.

Improvements are required in these areas.

How effective is the force at recording reported crime?

Overall crime-recording rate

The force has further work to do in order to ensure it records all reports of crime in accordance with the Home Office Counting Rules (HOCR). We examined reports of crime which the force received, and for which an auditable record was created. The force informed HMICFRS that all crime that is recorded (excluding fraud) came through an auditable crime-reporting route.

We found that the force recorded 90.2 percent of these crimes (with a confidence interval of +/- 1.73 percent). We estimate that this means the force is not recording over 11,000 reports of crime each year. Those failings are depriving many victims of the services to which they are entitled.

Of a total of 1,117 reports of crime that we audited, we found 246 that we assessed to be crimes related to domestic abuse. Of these 246 crimes, the force had recorded 213. The 33 offences not recorded included offences involving violence, such as actual bodily harm, common assault and sexual offences.

We found that many of these reports involved the reporting of a crime at the first point of contact with the force, but these crime reports went unrecorded with little rationale to explain why.

However, we found that when domestic abuse crimes had not been recorded, safeguarding requirements and an investigation had been undertaken in the vast majority of cases. This is welcome; however, to ensure the force has a full picture of the crimes it is dealing with it should work to ensure these crimes are always recorded.

Of significance in the under-recording of crime are offences of public order. These are not being identified and recorded as such at the earliest opportunity, and when this occurs there is a subsequent lack of oversight to ensure that the correct crime-recording decisions are later taken.

Factors contributing to the force’s under-recording of crimes are some deficiencies in its crime-recording processes and, on occasion, lack of oversight of crime-recording decisions.

Some deficiencies in the crime-recording processes need to be addressed. In particular, we found that on occasion:

• reports of crime are not always being recorded at the point of report even when there is sufficient information to do so;
• where a crime-recording decision has not been taken prior to officers being deployed to deal with a report of crime, the full details of the victims report are not always passed on to officers attending the crime, despite this information being recorded on the incident log. This means the attending officer does not always have the full information on which to base a crime-recording decision;
• when officers are required to make crime-recording decisions they do not always make the correct decision, or provide sufficient information to explain why a crime record is not required; and
• where officers attended reports of crime they sometimes failed to record additional crimes disclosed during the investigation.

We note, in concluding this section, that the force responded immediately to our findings and is already taking action to address these concerns.

Violence against the person

We found that 89.8 percent of violent crimes reported to the force are recorded (with a confidence interval of +/- 2.87 percent). This is lower than the overall crime recording rate noted above. By our estimate, this means the force fails to record over 3,300 violent crimes that are reported to it each year. As violent crime can be particularly distressing for the victim, this is an area in which the need for better recording of reported crime is particularly important.

In the majority of cases, where violent crimes were not recorded, we found the principal causes to be as described earlier, namely:

• some deficiencies in the processes currently in place for the recording of a reported crime; and
• on occasion, a subsequent lack of oversight to ensure that the correct crime-recording decisions are later taken.

Victims of violent crime and, in particular, victims of more serious violence, often require substantial support. This support should come not only from the police, but from other appropriate agencies such as Victim Support. In those circumstances, crime-recording takes on a heightened importance. Failing to properly record a violent crime can result in Victim Support receiving no notification that a person has become a victim of violent crime. That in turn, may deprive victims of the support they need and deserve.

Sexual offences

We found that the force records 93.7 percent of sexual offence crimes (including rape) that are reported to it (with a confidence interval of +/- 3.03 percent). We estimate that this means the force fails to record over 180 reported sexual offence crimes each year.

This recording rate is encouraging and better than many forces that we have inspected to date. This is illustrative of the improved scrutiny given to reports of sexual offences since our 2014 report. This is particularly important in respect of sexual offence crimes, many of which are very serious in nature and cause significant harm to their victims.

We found that the majority of sexual offences that are unrecorded are where additional offences are disclosed during the investigation of already recorded crimes. While this means that investigations of the unrecorded crimes are taking place, the failure to record them is indicative of gaps in officers’ understanding of the crime-recording requirements, and a lack of supervision of their crime-recording decisions. We found that the crime integrity team also missed opportunities to correctly record these crimes.

Rape

Rape is one of the most serious sexual offence crimes a victim can experience. Therefore, the accurate recording of such reports is especially important; it allows the police to identify the nature and extent of sexual violence in their local area. In turn, this enables the police to operate with the highest practicable levels of efficiency to identify and deal effectively with perpetrators. We found that although a crime may not always have been correctly recorded, South Wales Police provided support and safeguarding in all of these cases, including referrals to partner organisations when appropriate, and carried out an investigation in all.

Of the 92 reports of rape that should have been recorded, we found 88 had been recorded. Two of the missing reports were in cases where one rape was recorded but a second was missed. One was incorrectly classified as a sexual assault and the final one was a victim of modern slavery who reported multiple rapes by different offenders, one of which had not been recorded.

The force also generally made proper use of the Home Office classification N100. Introduced in April 2015, the N100 is a record created to explain why reported incidents of rape or attempted rapes, whether from victims, witnesses or third parties, have not been immediately recorded as a confirmed crime. This can include instances where additional information confirms the rape did not occur, or where the rape occurred in another force area and was therefore transferred to the relevant force to record and investigate.

We found five incident reports for which the force should have applied an N100 classification; but, it was only applied on two occasions.

Separately, we also reviewed 22 sample records where an N100 classification had been applied. Among these, we found five reports that were correctly converted into crimes of rape and two reports that were correctly converted into crimes of sexual assault. The remaining fifteen records were all correctly recorded as N100s rather than being converted into a recorded crime.

At the time of our inspection the force was using a manual process to classify N100 records which was proving to be cumbersome and time-consuming. However we note that, in response to HMICFRS feedback the force has immediately adopted best practice and has automated the process by making the N100 classifications a routine part of its crime recording system.

As with other sexual offences, the recording of a report of rape is important. Victims generally require significant support from the outset and any delay in providing support can be detrimental to both the recovery of the victim and to any investigation. This, in turn, can negatively influence future judicial proceedings. It is therefore to the credit of the force that its crime-recording arrangements for these offences are good.

However, we also found that some frontline officers, including some investigators, had no knowledge of N100 classifications. It is important that the force works to improve its frontline officers and staff’s understanding of N100 classifications if it is to fully satisfy itself that the correct recording decisions are always taken in regard to reports of rape.

How efficiently do the systems and processes in the force support accurate crime recording?

Crime reports held on other systems

In order to be confident that vulnerable victims always receive the support they need, it is important that crimes reported directly to its public protection teams are always recorded. We were pleased to find that the force works hard to ensure that this is the case. In particular, since our 2014 report, the force has improved its crime-recording processes in public protection units to ensure that those additional crimes disclosed during multi-agency conferences are being recorded wherever possible at the point of disclosure.

We examined 50 vulnerable victim records on the force’s vulnerable victim recording system, Niche. Of these, we found that 48 crimes should have been recorded, of which 43 had been. The missing 5 crimes were all against children and included 1 assault occasioning actual bodily harm, 1 inciting sexual activity with a child, 1 of taking, making and distributing an indecent image of a child and 2 child cruelty offences.

Importantly, however, we found that although these crimes may not have been recorded, the force provided support and safeguarding to the victims of these crimes and carried out investigations in all but one of them. The force has now recorded all of these crimes.

Overall, this is good performance and demonstrates that South Wales Police seeks to provide a good service to the most vulnerable of victims.

Modern slavery

Offences relating to modern slavery are an important and recent addition to the crimes that forces must record and investigate. We therefore reviewed the recording of reports of modern slavery offences. We also examined the force’s understanding of the origin of such reports.

We found that the force has good crime-recording arrangements in respect of modern slavery crimes. Our audit showed that all 19 modern slavery crimes identified had been correctly recorded.

The force had also correctly recorded seven additional rape crimes and four other crimes which comprised of one each of sexual activity with a child, common assault, assault occasioning actual bodily harm and sexual assault.

However, three additional crimes were not recorded: one each of rape, grievous bodily harm and assault occasioning actual bodily harm. Importantly, we found that although these additional crimes may not have been recorded, the force provided support and safeguarding to the victims of these crimes and carried out investigations in respect of all of them. The force has now recorded all of these crimes.

We also found seven occasions where modern slavery crimes were over-recorded.

In addition, we examined 17 modern slavery referrals received from other agencies. From these, two modern slavery crimes and one rape crime should have been recorded and all were correctly recorded.

The force has an identified lead for modern slavery who works at force, regional and national levels with other forces, partner organisations and national police organisations. This is good practice.

We also found that officers and staff have a good, basic knowledge of modern slavery offences, and a good, basic knowledge of their respective responsibilities in relation to the recording of such offences and of where they can find further information.

Timeliness

The HOCR require that reports of crime are recorded within 24 hours of the receipt of the report. We found that, of the reports of crime that had been recorded by South Wales Police, 78 out of 83 reports of rape (not including those correctly converted to a crime from the initial N100 classification), 355 out of 379 reports of violent crime and 196 out of 207 sexual offences had been recorded within 24 hours of the receipt of the report.

This means that when the force makes correct crime-recording decisions, its recording procedures are generally effective at ensuring the crime is recorded within 24 hours, as permitted by the rules. This timely recording enables the force to make early referrals to its victim support hub for those victims in need of the support that is available. This is the best timeliness performance of the forces that we have inspected to date.

Cancelled crimes

Where additional verifiable information (AVI) is obtained to show that a recorded crime did not occur, the crime record can be cancelled.

We reviewed 20 cancelled recorded crimes each of rape, violence and sexual offence crimes (excluding rape) and robbery crimes. Of these, we found that the FCR had correctly cancelled all 20 crimes of rapes. Other crime cancellation decisions are the responsibility of designated staff, known as designated decision makers (DDMs). The DDMs had correctly cancelled all 20 sexual offences, 19 out of 20 violence offences and 17 out of 20 robbery offences. These findings demonstrate that the force has an effective process for dealing with crime cancellations.

The small number of cancellation decisions that were incorrect related to the absence of sufficient AVI to demonstrate that the crime did not occur. We found that while frontline supervisors understood what amounts to AVI for the purpose of cancelling a recorded crime some officers and investigators did not.

Where a crime has been cancelled or transferred to another force for investigation, a victim should always know the status of his or her reported crime. In the case of a decision to cancel a recorded crime, the very least the victim should expect is an explanation of the reason for this decision. We found that of the 61 victims who should have been informed of the transfer/cancellation, 54 had been.

Code of Practice for Victims of Crime

The Code of Practice for Victims of Crime (Document) provides clear guidance to police forces regarding the service that should be provided to all victims of crime. We have concluded that the force is aware of its responsibilities under this code.

All victims of crime whose reports are recorded by South Wales Police (except victims of domestic abuse, rape and serious sexual offences who are referred to other more specialist services) are offered the services of Victim Support and can receive the relevant information by text, email or letter. These communications contain information about individual victims’ cases and, in addition to directing them to the services of Victim Support, also provide them with details of other relevant organisations that can provide them with support.

Victim Support is also provided with the details of victims of crime to enable them to make direct contact with these victims to make their services available.

In addition, officers complete a form with every victim which contains the basic details of the crime, contact details of the investigating officer and an agreed victim contact contract.

Equality

HMICFRS found that the force must improve in its collection of information regarding crimes affecting identifiable groups within communities.

Protected characteristics, such as gender, sexuality, disability, ethnicity, religion and age do not necessarily increase the vulnerability of an individual to the risk of crime. However, it is important that the force records information regarding the characteristics of victims of crime in order to identify any patterns which may exist between different community groups and their vulnerability to (or their relative likelihood to report) different types of crime.

We found that the force records equality information in relation to the victim such as age and gender on every occasion, but only records other protected characteristics where these are determined to be relevant to the offence.

So long as the force fails to record such information, it will be unable to understand clearly whether its crime-recording decisions are consistent across different community groups. This is, therefore, an area for improvement.

Officer and staff survey

We conducted a survey of officers and staff in South Wales Police of their experience in respect of crime recording. Some 91 respondents completed the survey. We were pleased to find that officers understand their responsibilities regarding ethical crime recording and that they are not under any pressure that prevents them from recording crimes when they should.

Furthermore, the vast majority of respondents stated that the chief officer team encourages officers and staff to challenge activities or behaviours that are unethical, unacceptable or unprofessional in respect of the recording of reported crime.

How well does the force demonstrate the leadership and culture necessary to meet the national standards for crime recording?

The culture and leadership with regard to crime-recording in the force is outstanding.

We found that the force has strong leadership and a clear commitment to get crime recording right. We also found good evidence that the current arrangements in the force are supporting crime recording and examples of good interventions by the crime integrity team to ensure that correct crime-recording decisions are made.

Staff within the crime integrity team also provide feedback and identify trends in practice or force processes which may affect crime recording integrity. They also assist with the development and provision of staff briefing and training sessions to support good crime recording. HMICFRS was impressed by the effectiveness of the feedback and governance provided by the crime integrity team, a view supported by many officers and staff.

We also found evidence of strong governance at senior level. There is an annual audit plan and regular audits are carried out in accordance with the guidance manual. The FCR and the assistant chief constable have regular meetings to discuss crime-recording audit findings and these audit results are reported through regular performance meetings.

The force has made good progress with implementing all of the recommendations made in our 2014 report, and with the national action plan, developed by the national lead on crime statistics following our 2014 report.

Conclusion

We conclude that South Wales Police has made good progress in its crime-recording processes since 2014. There is, however, room for further improvement.

The very strong leadership and positive approach among officers and staff toward victims is welcome. However, the force is still failing some victims of crime. It needs to address this by ensuring that its staff and officers fully understand the crime-recording standards expected of them, and that these standards are supervised effectively.

What next?

HMICFRS expects the force to make progress against the areas for improvement we identify in this report. We will monitor this progress.

The force, as with all police forces, may be subject to a further unannounced crime data integrity inspection at any time.

Sylwer: Cynhaliwyd yr arolygiad hwn cyn 19 Gorffennaf 2017, pan gymerodd HMIC gyfrifoldeb am arolygiadau gwasanaeth tân ac achub ac fe’i hailenwyd yn Arolygiaeth Heddluoedd Ei Mawrhydi a Gwasanaethau Tân ac Achub. Nid yw’r newid hwn yn effeithio ar y fethodoleg sy’n sail i’n canfyddiadau arolygu.

Gall cyfeiriadau at HMICFRS yn yr adroddiad hwn ymwneud â digwyddiad a ddigwyddodd cyn 19 Gorffennaf 2017 pan oedd HMICFRS yn HMIC.

Mae’n bosibl y bydd rhai o gysylltiadau we’r adroddiad hwn yn eich cyfeirio at wybodaeth uniaith Saesneg. Os hoffech gyfieithiad Cymraeg o’r wybodaeth hon, e-bostiwch contacthmicfrs@hmicfrs.gov.uk

Dyfarniad Cyffredinol

Mae Heddlu De Cymru wedi gwneud ymdrechion pendant i wella cywirdeb cofnodi troseddau ers Uniondeb Data Troseddu 2014 HMICFRS. Yn bwysig, fe wnaethom ganfod ymrwymiad i gofnodi moesegol o droseddau sydd yn canolbwyntio ar y dioddefwr ac yn rhydd o bwysau perfformiad o unrhyw fath. Canfuom fod y llu:

• yn cofnodi bron pob adroddiad am drosedd a adroddir yn uniongyrchol wrth ei dimau diogelu’r cyhoedd;
• yn cyflawni lefelau uchel o gywirdeb cofnodi ar gyfer troseddau rhywiol a adroddir;
• yn cofnodi’r rhan fwyaf o adroddiadau am droseddau o fewn 24 awr o’r adroddiad, fel sy’n ofynnol gan y rheolau cofnodi troseddau;
• yn gwneud penderfyniadau da wrth ystyried a ddylid canslo trosedd a gofnodwyd neu beidio;
• wedi gweithredu’r holl argymhellion a gyflwynir yn ein hadroddiad ar gyfer 2014; a
• wedi gwneud cynnydd da yn ôl cynllun gweithredu cenedlaethol a ddatblygwyd i wella cofnodi troseddau gan heddluoedd.

Mae’r rhain yn ganfyddiadau calonogol iawn. Serch hynny, yn seiliedig ar ganfyddiadau ein harchwiliad o adroddiadau troseddau am y cyfnod rhwng 1 Tachwedd 2016 a 30 Ebrill 2017, rydym yn amcangyfrif bod yr heddlu’n methu â chofnodi dros 11,000 o droseddau a adroddir bob blwyddyn.(Saesneg) Mae hyn yn cynrychioli cyfradd cofnodi o 90.2 y cant (ag ysbaid hyder o +/- 1.73 y cant). Mae’r 9.8 y cant o droseddau a adroddwyd a aeth heb eu cofnodi yn cael eu heffeithio’n arbennig gan dangofnodi troseddau treisgar a throseddau trefn gyhoeddus. Gwelsom hefyd nad oedd yr heddlu wedi cofnodi pob trosedd o drais rhywiol. Felly mae angen gwelliannau pellach mewn rhai meysydd.

Credwn fod y methiannau hyn yn digwydd yn gyffredinol pan na chymerir penderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau ar adeg yr adroddiad, ac mewn achosion o’r fath mae diffyg goruchwyliaeth ddilynol i sicrhau bod y penderfyniadau cywir ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau’n cael eu cymryd yn nes ymlaen.

Crynodeb o ganfyddiadau’r arolygiad

Mae’r llu wedi gwella’i brosesau cofnodi troseddau ers adroddiad HMICFRS 2014. Ynarbennig, canfuom fod gan yr heddlu wedi:

• sefydlu tîm uniondeb troseddu sy’n gyfrifol am adolygu a dilysu pob trosedd a gofnodwyd ac am ddigwyddiadau sy’n cynnwys adroddiadau am droseddau, er mwyn sicrhau bod yr adroddiadau hyn yn cael eu cofnodi a bod yr holl ddioddefwyr yn cael y gwasanaeth a’r gefnogaeth maent yn eu haeddu;
• gwella gwybodaeth a dealltwriaeth o ofynion cofnodi troseddau ymysg swyddogion a staff o fewn timau diogelu’r cyhoedd y llu;
• gwella goruchwyliaeth ar ei ddefnydd o warediadau y tu allan i’r llys i sicrhau eu bod yn cael eu defnyddio’n briodol ac yn foesegol;
• trefnu proses effeithiol ar gyfer rhoi adborth i staff a swyddogion sy’n gwneud penderfyniadau gwael ynghylch cofnodi troseddau;
• datblygu a darparu hyfforddiant i fynd i’r afael â’r meysydd hynny lle mae swyddogion a staff yn gwneud yr un camgymeriadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau’n rheolaidd;
• gweithredu’r holl argymhellion a gyflwynwyd yn ein hadroddiad yn 2014; a
• gwneud cynnydd da yn ôl cynllun gweithredu cenedlaethol a ddatblygwyd i wella cofnodi troseddau gan heddluoedd.

Hefyd fe wnaethom ganfod bod cofrestrydd troseddau’r heddlu (FCR) – sy’n gyfrifol am oruchwylio ac archwilio gofynion cofnodi troseddau – wedi cwblhau cwrs Coleg Plismona cenedlaethol ar gyfer FCRs ac wedi’i achredu’n llawn ar gyfer y rôl. Cefnogir yr FCR gan ddirprwy FCR a’r tîm uniondeb troseddu. Darperir capasiti archwilio ychwanegol gan staff yn yr adran ddatblygu corfforaethol.

Er gwaethaf y datblygiadau hynny, gallai perfformiad yr heddlu mewn cysylltiad â chofnodi troseddau fod yn well yn y meysydd dilynol:

• Ar hyn o bryd mae’r heddlu’n tan-gofnodi:
  • troseddau treisgar (gan gynnwys rhai sy’n deillio o ddigwyddiadau cam-drindomestig);
  • troseddau trefn gyhoeddus; ac
  • ar adegau, troseddau treisio lle ceir llu o honiadau gan yr un dioddefwr.

Rhaid i’r llu wella cywirdeb cofnodi’r adroddiadau hyn.

• Rhaid i’r llu wella i ba raddau mae’n casglu gwybodaeth ynghylch effaith troseddoldeb ar grwpiau adnabyddadwy o fewn cymunedau. Yn benodol, grwpiau â nodweddion gwarchodedig adnabyddadwy (e.e. rhywedd, rhywioldeb neu ethnigrwydd).

Rydym yn ystyried bod y methiannau hyn yn digwydd yn gyffredinol pan na chymerir penderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau ar adeg yr adroddiad, ac mewn achosion o’r fath mae diffyg goruchwyliaeth dilynol i sicrhau bod y penderfyniadau cywir ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau’n cael eu cymryd yn nes ymlaen.
Mae angen gwelliannau yn y meysydd hyn.

Pa mor effeithiol mae’r heddlu wrth gofnodi troseddau a adroddir?

Cyfradd gyffredinol ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau

Mae gan y llu waith pellach i’w wneud er mwyn sicrhau ei fod yn cofnodi pob adroddiad am drosedd yn unol â Rheolau Cyfrif y Swyddfa Gartref. (HOCR)(Saesneg) Fe wnaethon ni archwilio adroddiadau am droseddau a dderbyniwyd gan y llu, ac y crëwyd cofnod archwiliadwy ar eu cyfer.(Saesneg) Hysbysodd y llu HMICFRS fod yr holl droseddau a gofnodwyd (ac eithrio twyll) wedi dod trwy lwybr archwiliadwy ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau.

Canfuom fod y llu wedi cofnodi 90.2 y cant o’r troseddau hyn (ag ysbaid hyder o +/- 1.73 y cant). Rydym yn amcangyfrif bod hyn yn golygu nad yw’r llu’n cofnodi dros 11,000 o adroddiadau am droseddau bob blwyddyn.(Saesneg) Mae’r methiannau hynny’n amddifadu llawer o ddioddefwyr o’r gwasanaethau mae ganddynt hawl iddynt.

O gyfanswm o 1,117 o adroddiadau am droseddau a archwiliwyd gennym, canfuom 246 a aseswyd gennym fel troseddau cysylltiedig â cham-drin domestig(Saesneg). O’r 246 o droseddau hyn, roedd y llu wedi cofnodi 213. Roedd y 33 o droseddau nad oedd wedi’u cofnodi’n cynnwys troseddau sy’n ymwneud â thrais, megis gwir niwed corfforol, ymosod cyffredin a throseddau rhywiol.

Canfuom fod llawer o’r adroddiadau hyn yn cynnwys adrodd am droseddau yn y cyswllt cyntaf gyda’r heddlu, ond ni chafodd yr adroddiadau hyn am droseddau eu cofnodi heb fawr o resymeg i esbonio pam.

Fodd bynnag, canfuom, pan nad oedd troseddau cam-drin domestig wedi cael eu cofnodi, fod gofynion diogelu ac ymchwiliad wedi digwydd ym mwyafrif helaeth yr achosion. Mae hyn i’w groesawu; fodd bynnag, er mwyn sicrhau bod gan y llu ddarlun llawn o’r troseddau mae’n delio â hwy, dylai weithio i sicrhau bod y troseddau hyn bob amser yn cael eu cofnodi.

O arwyddocâd yn y broses o dangofnodi troseddu mae troseddau trefn gyhoeddus. Nid yw’r rhain yn cael eu nodi a’u cofnodi fel y cyfrywar y cyfle cynharaf, a phan yw hyn yn digwydd, mae diffyg goruchwyliaeth ddilynol i sicrhau bod y penderfyniadau cywir ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau’n cael eu cymryd yn nes ymlaen.

Ffactorau sy’n cyfrannu at dan-gofnodi troseddau gan y llu yw rhai diffygion yn ei brosesau cofnodi troseddau ac, ar adegau, diffyg goruchwyliaeth ar benderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau.
Mae angen mynd i’r afael â rhai diffygion yn y prosesau cofnodi troseddau. Yn arbennig, canfuom ar adegau:

• nid yw adroddiadau am droseddau bob amser yn cael eu cofnodi ar adeg yr adroddiad hyd yn oed pan yw digon o wybodaeth i wneud hynny;
• lle na chymerwyd penderfyniad ynghylch cofnodi trosedd cyn i swyddogion gael eu hadleoli i ddelio ag adroddiad am drosedd, nid yw manylion llawn adroddiad y dioddefwr bob amser yn cael eu trosglwyddo i swyddogion sy’n mynychu’r trosedd, er bod y wybodaeth hon yn cael ei chofnodi ar log y digwyddiad. Mae hyn yn golygu nad yw’r swyddog sy’n mynychu bob amser yn meddu ar y wybodaeth lawn y gall seilio penderfyniad ynghylch cofnodi trosedd arni;
• pan fydd gofyn i swyddogion wneud penderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau, nid ydynt bob amser yn gwneud y penderfyniad cywir, nac yn darparu digon o wybodaeth i esbonio pam nad oes angen cofnod o’r trosedd; a
• lle’r oedd swyddogion yn mynychu adroddiadau am droseddau, weithiau methwyd â chofnodi troseddau ychwanegol a ddatgelwyd yn ystod yr ymchwiliad.

Trais yn erbyn y person

Fe wnaethon ni ganfod bod 89.8 y cant o droseddau treisgar a adroddir wrth yr heddlu yn cael eu cofnodi (ag egwyl hyder o +/- 2.87 y cant). Mae hyn yn is na’r gyfradd gofnodi troseddau gyffredinol a nodir uchod. Yn ôl ein hamcangyfrif, mae hyn yn golygu nad yw’r llu’n cofnodi dros 3,300 o droseddau treisgar a adroddir wrtho bob blwyddyn. Gan fod trosedd treisgar yn gallu bod yn arbennig o ofidus i’r dioddefwr, mae hwn yn faes lle mae’r angen am ddull gwell o gofnodi troseddau yn arbennig o bwysig.

Yn y mwyafrif o achosion, lle na chofnodwyd troseddau treisgar, canfuom fod y prif achosion yr un ag sydd wedi’u disgrifio’n gynharach, sef:

• rhai diffygion yn y prosesau sydd ar waith ar hyn o bryd ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau a adroddir; ac
• ar brydiau, diffyg goruchwyliaeth ddilynol i sicrhau bod y penderfyniadau cywir ar gyfer troseddau’n cael eu cymryd yn nes ymlaen.

Mae dioddefwyr troseddau treisgar ac, yn arbennig, dioddefwyr trais mwy difrifol, yn aml angen cefnogaeth sylweddol. Dylai’r gefnogaeth hon ddod nid yn unig gan yr heddlu, ond gan asiantaethau priodol eraill megis Cymorth i Ddioddefwyr. O dan yr amgylchiadau hynny, mae cofnodi troseddau’n dod yn fwyfwy pwysig. Gall methu â chofnodi troseddau treisgar yn briodol olygu na fydd Cymorth i Ddioddefwyr yn derbyn unrhyw hysbysiad bod rhywun wedi dioddef trosedd treisgar. Gall hynny, yn ei dro, amddifadu’r dioddefwyr o’r gefnogaeth maent ei hangen a’i haeddu.

Troseddau rhywiol

Canfuom fod y llu’n cofnodi 93.7 y cant o droseddau rhywiol (gan gynnwys treisio) a adroddir wrtho (gydag egwyl hyder o +/- 3.03 y cant). Rydym yn amcangyfrif bod hyn yn dal i olygu nad yw’r llu’n cofnodi dros 180 o droseddau rhywiol a adroddir bob blwyddyn.

Mae’r gyfradd gofnodi hon yn galonogol ac yn well na llawer o luoedd rydym wedi’u harolygu hyd yn hyn. Mae hyn yn arddangos y craffu gwell a roddir i adroddiadau am droseddau rhywiol ers ein hadroddiad ar gyfer 2014. Mae hyn yn arbennig o bwysig o ran troseddau rhywiol, gan fod llawer ohonynt yn ddifrifol iawn ac yn achosi niwed sylweddol i’w dioddefwyr.

Canfuom mai’r mwyafrif o droseddau rhywiol nad ydynt wedi’u cofnodi wedi digwydd pan ddatgelir troseddau ychwanegol yn ystod y broses o ymchwilio i droseddau a gofnodwyd eisoes. Er bod hyn yn golygu bod ymchwiliadau i’r troseddau heb eu cofnodi’n digwydd, mae’r methiant i’w cofnodi’n dangos bylchau yn nealltwriaeth swyddogion o’r gofynion cofnodi troseddau, a diffyg goruchwyliaeth o’u penderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau. Canfuom fod y tîm cywirdeb troseddau hefyd wedi colli cyfleoedd i gofnodi’r troseddau hyn yn gywir.

Treisio

Mae treisio’n un o’r troseddau rhywiol mwyaf difrifol y gall dioddefwr ei brofi. Felly, mae cofnodi adroddiadau o’r fath yn gywir yn arbennig o bwysig; mae’n caniatáu i’r heddlu nodi natur a maint trais rhywiol yn eu hardal leol. Yn ei dro, mae hyn yn galluogi’r heddlu i weithredu â’r lefelau effeithlonrwydd mwyaf ymarferol i nodi a delio’n effeithiol â chyflawnwyr. Canfuom, er nad yw troseddau wedi cael eu cofnodi’n gywir bob amser, fod Heddlu De Cymru’n darparu cefnogaeth a mesurau diogelu ym mhob un o’r achosion hyn, gan gynnwys atgyfeiriadau i sefydliadau partner pan fo’n briodol, ac yn cynnal ymchwiliad ym mhob un.

O’r 92 o achosion o dreisio y dylid wedi’u cofnodi, fe wnaethom ganfod bod 88 wedi eu cofnodi. Roedd dau o’r adroddiadau ar goll mewn achosion lle cofnodwyd un achos o dreisio ond methwyd yr un arall. Dosbarthwyd un yn anghywir fel ymosodiad rhywiol ac roedd yr un olaf yn dioddefwr caethwasiaeth fodern a adroddodd am achosion lluosog o dreisio gan wahanol droseddwyr, un ohonynt heb ei gofnodi.

Yn gyffredinol, roedd y llu hefyd yn gwneud defnydd priodol o ddosbarthiad N100 y Swyddfa Gartref. Wedi’i gyflwyno ym mis Ebrill 2015, mae’r N100 yn gofnod a grëwyd i esbonio pam mae achosion o dreisio neu geisiadau i dreisio a adroddwyd, boed hynny gan ddioddefwyr, tystion neu drydydd partïon, heb eu cofnodi ar unwaith fel trosedd wedi’i gadarnhu. Gall hyn gynnwys achosion lle mae gwybodaeth ychwanegol yn cadarnhau nad oedd y treisio wedi digwydd, neu pan ddigwyddodd y treisio mewn ardal llu arall ac felly wedi’i drosglwyddo i’r llu perthnasol i’w gofnodi a’i ymchwilio.

Canfuom bum adroddiad digwyddiad y dylai’r heddlu fod wedi gweithredu dosbarthiad N100 ar eu cyfer; ond, dim ond ar ddau achlysur y’i gweithredwyd.

Ar wahân, rydym hefyd wedi adolygu 22 o gofnodion enghreifftiol lle roedd dosbarthiad N100 wedi’i weithredu. Ymhlith y rhain, canfuom bum adroddiad a droswyd yn gywir yn droseddau treisio a dau adroddiad a droswyd yn gywir yn droseddau ymosodiad rhywiol. Cofnodwyd y pymtheg o gofnodion sy’n weddill yn gywir fel N100s yn hytrach na’u trosi yn droseddau cofnodedig.

Ar adeg ein harolygiad, roedd y llu’n defnyddio proses law i ddosbarthu cofnodion N100 a oedd yn profi i fod yn anodd ac a oedd yn cymryd llawer o amser. Fodd bynnag, rydym yn nodi, mewn ymateb i adborth HMICFRS, bod yr heddlu wedi mabwysiadu arfer gorau ar unwaith ac wedi awtomeiddio’r broses trwy wneud y dosbarthiadau N100 yn rhan arferol o’i system gofnodi troseddau.
Fel â throseddau rhywiol eraill, mae cofnodi adroddiad o drais yn bwysig. Yn gyffredinol, mae angen cymorth sylweddol ar y dioddefwyr o’r cychwyn cyntaf a gall unrhyw oedi wrth ddarparu cymorth fod yn niweidiol i adferiad y dioddefwr ac i unrhyw ymchwiliad. Gall hyn, yn ei dro, ddylanwadu’n negyddol ar achosion barnwrol yn y dyfodol. Felly, mae’r llu’n haeddu canmoliaeth bod ei drefniadau cofnodi troseddau ar gyfer y troseddau hyn yn dda.

Fodd bynnag, canfuom hefyd nad oedd gan rai swyddogion rheng flaen, gan gynnwys rhai ymchwilwyr, wybodaeth o ddosbarthiadau N100. Mae’n bwysig bod y llu’n gweithio i wella dealltwriaeth ei swyddogion rheng flaen a staff o ddosbarthiadau N100 os yw’n mynd i ymfodloni’n llawn bod y penderfyniadau cofnodi cywir bob amser yn cael eu cymryd ynghylch adroddiadau am dreisio.

Pa mor effeithlon mae’r systemau a phrosesau yn y llu’n cefnogi cofnodi troseddau’n gywir?

Adroddiadau am droseddau a ddelir ar systemau eraill

Er mwyn bod yn hyderus bod dioddefwyr sy’n agored i niwed yn derbyn y gefnogaeth sydd ei angen arnynt bob amser, mae’n bwysig cofnodi troseddau a adroddir yn uniongyrchol i’w dimau diogelu’r cyhoedd bob amser. Roeddem yn falch o weld bod y llu’n gweithio’n galed i sicrhau bod hyn yn wir. Yn benodol, ers ein hadroddiad ar gyfer 2014, mae’r llu wedi gwella ei brosesau cofnodi troseddau mewn unedau diogelu’r cyhoedd er mwyn sicrhau bod y troseddau ychwanegol hynny a ddatgelir yn ystod cynadleddau aml-asiantaeth yn cael eu cofnodi lle bynnag y bo modd ar yr adeg datgelu.

Fe wnaethon ni archwilio 50 o gofnodion dioddefwyr sy’n agored i niwed ar system gofnodi dioddefwyr agored i niwed y llu, Niche. O’r rhain, canfuom y dylai 48 o droseddau wedi eu cofnodi, ac roedd 43 ohonynt wedi bod. Roedd y 5 trosedd ar goll i gyd yn erbyn plant ac roeddent yn cynnwys 1 ymosodiad yn achosi gwir niwed corfforol, 1 yn ysgogi gweithgarwch rhywiol gyda phlentyn, 1 o dynnu, gwneud a dosbarthu delwedd anweddus o blentyn a 2 drosedd creulondeb i blentyn.

Yn bwysig, fodd bynnag, canfuom, er efallai na chofnodwyd y troseddau hyn, fod y llu wedi darparu cefnogaeth a chamau diogelu i ddioddefwyr y troseddau hyn ac wedi cynnal ymchwiliadau ym mhob un ond un ohonynt. Mae’r heddlu bellach wedi cofnodi’r holl droseddau hyn.

Yn gyffredinol, mae hwn yn berfformiad da ac yn dangos bod Heddlu De Cymru’n ceisio darparu gwasanaeth da i’r dioddefwyr mwyaf agored i niwed.

Caethwasiaeth fodern

Mae troseddau sy’n ymwneud â chaethwasiaeth fodern yn ychwanegiad pwysig a diweddar i’r troseddau mae’n rhaid i luoedd eu cofnodi a’u hymchwilio. Felly, fe wnaethom adolygu’r broses o gofnodi adroddiadau am droseddau caethwasiaeth fodern. Hefyd fe wnaethon ni archwilio dealltwriaeth y llu o darddiad adroddiadau o’r fath.

Canfuom fod gan yr heddlu drefniadau cofnodi troseddau da mewn cysylltiad â throseddau caethwasiaeth fodern. Dangosodd ein harchwiliad fod yr holl 19 o’r troseddau caethwasiaeth fodern a nodwyd wedi’u cofnodi’n gywir.

Hefyd roedd yr heddlu wedi cofnodi saith trosedd treisio ychwanegol yn gywir a phedwar trosedd arall oedd yn cynnwys un gweithgaredd rhywiol gyda phlentyn, ymosodiad cyffredin, ymosodiad yn achosi gwir niwed corfforol ac ymosodiad rhywiol.

Fodd bynnag, ni chofnodwyd tri throsedd ychwanegol: un o dreisio, niwed corfforol difrifol ac ymosodiad yn achosi gwir niwed corfforol. Ynbwysig, fe wnaethom ganfod, er nad oedd y troseddau ychwanegol hyn wedi’u cofnodi efallai, bod y llu wedi darparu cefnogaeth a mesurau diogelu i ddioddefwyr y troseddau hyn ac wedi cynnal ymchwiliadau mewn cysylltiad â phob un ohonynt. Mae’r llu bellach wedi cofnodi’r holl droseddau hyn.

Hefyd fe wnaethom ganfod saith achlysur lle gor-gofnodwyd troseddau caethwasiaeth fodern.

Yn ogystal, fe wnaethon ni archwilio 17 o atgyfeiriadau caethwasiaeth modern a dderbyniwyd gan asiantaethau eraill. O’r rhain, dylai dau drosedd caethwasiaeth fodern ac un trosedd treisio wedi cael eu cofnodi ac roedd pob un wedi’i gofnodi’n gywir.

Mae gan y llu arweinydd a penodedig ar gyfer caethwasiaeth fodern sy’n gweithio ar lefelau llu, rhanbarthol a chenedlaethol gyda lluoedd eraill, sefydliadau partner a sefydliadau cenedlaethol yr heddlu. Mae hwn yn arfer da.

Canfuom hefyd fod gan swyddogion a staff wybodaeth dda, sylfaenol o droseddau caethwasiaeth fodern, a gwybodaeth sylfaenol dda o’u cyfrifoldebau priodol mewn cysylltiad â chofnodi troseddau o’r fath ac o ble y gallant ddod o hyd i ragor o wybodaeth.

Amseroldeb

Mae’r HOCR yn mynnu bod adroddiadau am droseddau’n cael eu cofnodi o fewn 24 awr ar ôl derbyn yr adroddiad. Fe wnaethon ni ganfod, o’radroddiadau am droseddau a gofnodwyd gan Heddlu De Cymru, bod 78 o 83 o adroddiadau am dreisio (heb gynnwys y rhai hynny wedi’u trosi’n gywir i drosedd o’r dosbarthiad N100 cychwynnol), 355 allan o 379 o adroddiadau am droseddau treisgar a 196 o 207 o droseddau rhywiol wedi’u cofnodi o fewn 24 awr o dderbyn yr adroddiad.

Golyga hyn, pan fydd yr heddlu’n gwneud penderfyniadau cywir ar gyfer troseddau, mae ei weithdrefnau cofnodi’n effeithiol ar y cyfan o ran sicrhau bod y trosedd yn cael ei gofnodi o fewn 24 awr, fel y caniateir gan y rheolau. Mae’r cofnodi amserol hwn yn galluogi’r heddlu i wneud atgyfeiriadau cynnar i’w ganolfan cymorth i ddioddefwyr ar gyfer y dioddefwyr hynny sydd angen y cymorth sydd ar gael. Dyma berfformiad amseroldeb gorau’r lluoedd rydym wedi’u harolygu hyd yn hyn.

Troseddau a ganslir

Lle ceir gwybodaeth wiriadwy ychwanegol (AVI) i ddangos nad oedd trosedd wedi’i gofnodi, gellir canslo’r cofnod trosedd.

Adolygwyd 20 o droseddau a gofnodwyd ac a ganslwyd i bob grŵp o droseddau treisio, trais a throseddau rhywiol (ac eithrio treisio) a lladrad. O’r rhain, canfuom fod yr FCR wedi canslo pob un o’r 20 o droseddau treisio’n gywir. Cyfrifoldeb staff dynodedig sy’n gyfrifol am benderfyniadau ynghylch canslo troseddau eraill, a elwir yn wneuthurwyr penderfyniadau dynodedig (DDMs). Roedd y DDMs wedi canslo pob un o’r 20 o droseddau rhywiol, 19 o’r 20 o droseddau trais a 17 o’r 20 o droseddau lladrad. Mae’r canfyddiadau hyn yn dangos bod gan y llu broses effeithiol ar gyfer ymdrin â chanslo troseddau.

Roedd y nifer fach o benderfyniadau canslo a oedd yn anghywir yn gysylltiedig ag absenoldeb AVI digonol i arddangos nad oedd y trosedd wedi digwydd. Fe wnaethon ni ganfod, er bod goruchwylwyr rheng flaen yn deall yr hyn sy’n gyfystyr ag AVI at ddiben canslo trosedd a gofnodwyd, nad oedd rhai swyddogion ac ymchwilwyr yn deall hynny.

Lle mae trosedd wedi’i ganslo neu ei drosglwyddo i lu arall i’w ymchwilio, dylai dioddefwr bob amser wybod statws y trosedd a adroddwyd ganddo/ganddi. Yn achos penderfyniad i ganslo trosedd a gofnodwyd, y lleiaf oll y dylai’r dioddefwr ei ddisgwyl yw esboniad o’r rheswm dros y penderfyniad hwn. Canfuom fod y 61 o ddioddefwyr a ddylai wedi cael eu hysbysu o’r trosglwyddo/canslo, roedd 54 wedi’u hysbysu.

Cod Ymarfer ar gyfer Dioddefwyr Troseddau

Mae’r Cod Ymarfer ar gyfer Dioddefwyr Troseddau (Document)(Saesneg)yn rhoi cyfarwyddyd clir i heddluoedd ynghylch y gwasanaeth y dylid ei ddarparu i bawb sy’n dioddef troseddau. Daethom i’r casgliad bod yr heddlu’n ymwybodol o’i gyfrifoldebau o dan y cod hwn.

Cynigir gwasanaethau Cymorth i Ddioddefwyr i bob dioddefwr trosedd mae Heddlu De Cymru’n cofnodi eu hadroddiadau (ac eithrio dioddefwyr cam-drin domestig, treisio a throseddau rhywiol difrifol a gyfeirir at wasanaethau eraill sy’n fwy arbenigol) a gallant dderbyn y wybodaeth berthnasol trwy negeseuon testun, e-bost neu lythyr. Mae’r cyfathrebiadau hyn yn cynnwys gwybodaeth ynghylch achosion dioddefwyr unigol ac, yn ogystal â’u cyfeirio at wasanaethau Cymorth i Ddioddefwyr, maent hefyd yn rhoi manylion sefydliadau perthnasol eraill iddynt a all roi cymorth iddynt. Hefyd darperir manylion dioddefwyr troseddau i Gymorth i Ddioddefwyr i’w galluogi i wneud cysylltiad uniongyrchol â’r dioddefwyr hyn er mwyn sicrhau bod eu gwasanaethau ar gael.

Yn ogystal, mae swyddogion yn cwblhau ffurflen gyda phob dioddefwr sy’n cynnwys manylion sylfaenol y trosedd, manylion cyswllt y swyddog ymchwilio a chontract cyswllt â dioddefwyr y cytunir arno.

Cydraddoldeb

Canfu HMICFRS fod rhaid i’r heddlu wella yn ei ddull o gasglu gwybodaeth ynghylch troseddau sy’n effeithio ar grwpiau adnabyddadwy o fewn cymunedau.

Nid yw nodweddion gwarchodedig, megis rhywedd, rhywioldeb, anabledd, ethnigrwydd, crefydd ac oedran o reidrwydd yn cynyddu bregusrwydd unigolyn i’r perygl o droseddu. Fodd bynnag, mae’n bwysig bod yr heddlu’n cofnodi gwybodaeth ynghylch nodweddion dioddefwyr troseddau er mwyn nodi unrhyw batrymau a allai fodoli rhwng gwahanol grwpiau cymunedol a’u bregusrwydd i (neu eu tebygolrwydd cymharol o adrodd am) wahanol fathau o droseddau.

Canfuom fod yr heddlu’n cofnodi gwybodaeth ynghylch cydraddoldeb mewn cysylltiad â’r dioddefwr megis oedran a rhywedd ar bob achlysur, ond dim ond yn cofnodi nodweddion gwarchodedig eraill lle penderfynir bod y rhain yn berthnasol i’r trosedd.

Cyn belled â bod y llu’n methu â chofnodi gwybodaeth o’r fath, ni fydd yn gallu deall yn glir a yw ei benderfyniadau ynghylch cofnodi troseddau’n gyson ar draws gwahanol grwpiau cymunedol. Felly, mae hwn yn faes i’w wella.

Arolwg o swyddogion a staff

Fe wnaethon ni gynnal arolwg o swyddogion a staff yn Heddlu De Cymru o’u profiad mewn cysylltiad â chofnodi troseddau. Cwblhaodd rhyw 91 o ymatebwyr yr arolwg. Roeddem yn falch o ganfod bod swyddogion yn deall eu cyfrifoldebau ynglŷn â chofnodi troseddau moesegol ac nad ydynt o dan unrhyw bwysau sy’n eu hatal rhag cofnodi troseddau pan ddylent.

Ymhellach, dywedodd mwyafrif helaeth o’r ymatebwyr fod y tîm y prif swyddog yn annog swyddogion a staff i herio gweithgareddau neu ymddygiadau sy’n anfoesegol, annerbyniol neu’n amhroffesiynol mewn cysylltiad â chofnodi troseddau a adroddir.

Pa mor dda mae’r llu’n arddangos yr arweinyddiaeth a’r diwylliant sydd eu hangen i ddiwallu’r safonau cenedlaethol ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau?

Mae’r diwylliant a’r arweinyddiaeth o ran cofnodi troseddau yn yr heddlu yn rhagorol.

Fe wnaethon ni ganfod bod gan y llu arweinyddiaeth gref ac ymrwymiad clir i gael y broses o gofnodi troseddau’n iawn. Gwelsom hefyd dystiolaeth dda bod y trefniadau presennol yn y llu’n cefnogi cofnodi troseddau ac enghreifftiau o ymyriadau da gan y tîm uniondeb troseddau i sicrhau bod penderfyniadau cywir ynghylch troseddau’n cael eu gwneud.

Mae staff o fewn y tîm cywirdeb troseddau hefyd yn darparu adborth ac yn nodi tueddiadau mewn ymarfer neu brosesau’r llu a allai effeithio ar uniondeb cofnodi troseddau. Maent hefyd yn cynorthwyo â datblygu a darparu sesiynau briffio a hyfforddi staff i gefnogi proses dda o gofnodi troseddau. Cafodd HMICFRS argraff dda gan effeithiolrwydd yr adborth a’r llywodraethu a ddarperir gan y tîm uniondeb troseddau, barn a gefnogir gan lawer o swyddogion a staff.

Gwelsom hefyd dystiolaeth o lywodraethu cryf ar lefel uwch. Mae cynllun archwilio blynyddol ac mae archwiliadau rheolaidd yn cael eu cynnal yn unol â’r llawlyfr cyfarwyddyd. Mae’r FCR a’r prif gwnstabl cynorthwyol yn cynnal cyfarfodydd rheolaidd i drafod canfyddiadau archwilio ynghylch cofnodi troseddau ac adroddir y canlyniadau archwilio hyn trwy gyfarfodydd perfformiad rheolaidd.

Mae’r heddlu wedi gwneud cynnydd da o ran gweithredu’r holl argymhellion a wnaed yn ein hadroddiad ar gyfer 2014, a chyda’r cynllun gweithredu cenedlaethol, a ddatblygwyd gan yr ystadegau cenedlaethol ar drosedd yn dilyn ein hadroddiad ar gyfer 2014.

Casgliad

Rydym yn casglu bod Heddlu De Cymru wedi gwneud cynnydd da yn ei brosesau ar gyfer cofnodi troseddau ers 2014. Fodd bynnag, mae lle i wella ymhellach.

Croesewir yr arweinyddiaeth gref iawn a’r ymagwedd gadarnhaol ymysg swyddogion a staff tuag at ddioddefwyr. Fodd bynnag, mae’r llu’n dal i fethu rhai dioddefwyr troseddau. Mae angen iddo fynd i’r afael â hyn trwy sicrhau bod ei staff a’i swyddogion yn deall yn llawn y safonau cofnodi troseddau a ddisgwylir ganddynt, a bod y safonau hyn yn cael eu goruchwylio’n effeithiol.

Beth nesaf?

Mae HMICFRS yn disgwyl i’r llu wneud cynnydd yn ôl y meysydd ar gyfer gwella rydym yn eu nodi yn yr adroddiad hwn. Byddwn ni’n monitro’r cynnydd hwn.

Gall y llu, fel gyda phob heddlu, fod yn destun arolygiad uniondeb data trosedd dirybudd arall ar unrhyw adeg.