(a)

this version of the Plan was the final draft, and set out the priorities for Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly for the next three and a half years;

(b)

the PCC had worked closely with the Chief Constable on the Plan, and aimed to work with Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs),  Local Authorities, businesses and voluntary and charitable organisations;

(c)

transformation was required to create a more resilient, sustainable and effective police force, and the Strategic Alliance with Dorset Police was under way;

(d)

the focus of the plan was ‘Safe, Resilient and Connected Communities’ and the five priorities were –

·         Priority 1 – Connecting Communities and Policing

·         Priority 2 – Preventing and deterring crime

·         Priority 3 – Protecting people at risk of abuse and those who are vulnerable

·         Priority 4 – Supporting victims and witnesses and helping them to get justice

·         Priority 5 – Getting the best out of the police

(e)

the correct governance and accountability mechanisms needed to be in place to ensure that the force was sufficient, effective and making the best of resources to deliver high quality services;

(f)

the four key areas that would be used as performance indicators to measure the success of the Plan were –

·         public/victim experience surveying

·         performance metrics

·         service standards reporting

·         HMIC reporting

(g)

the PCC wanted to financially support a range of initiatives over the next three years including the following -

·         Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs)

·         Safeguarding Children Boards

·         Safeguarding Adults Boards

·         Sexual Assault Referral Centres (SARCs)

·         Youth Offending Service

·         Mental Health – Street Triage

(h)

the Police and Crime Plan would be formally launched in January 2017 in an easier to read format;

In response to questions, the Panel were advised  that –

(i)

the ‘delayed charging and diversion scheme’ was an innovative pilot scheme, the aim of which was to look at the issues that caused an offender to offend, to delay the point of charging and allow the offender to show that they can turn their life around.  The scheme is victim led and would only happen if the victim agreed.  This is an early restorative justice approach to help ensure that victims get justice and the offender does not offend again.  Only one other area in the country (Durham) has been using this scheme, and Devon and Cornwall have sought guidance from them.  Police Transformation funding of £750,000 was available for this initiative;

(J)

teams were in place to support victims of domestic abuse, and funding was available to recruit specialist lawyers to work closely with the Sexual Offence and Domestic Abuse Investigation Teams (SODAIT).  It was hoped that this expertise would improve the  ...  view the full minutes text for item 32.

(a)

·         sexual offences

·         domestic abuse

·         armed capability

·         terrorism and extremism

·         modern slavery, human trafficking and organised immigration crime

·         elder abuse

·         child sexual exploitation (CSE)

·         missing people

·         cyber crime

·         hate crime

·         honour based violence, female genital mutilation (FGM) and forced marriage

·         vulnerability and crime severity

·         local policing

·         connectivity and neighbourhood policing

·         HMIC inspection

, Human Trafficking and Organised Immigration Crime

In response to questions, the Panel were advised that –

(b)

an individual assessment was undertaken to determine if a person was classed as ‘missing’ -  their vulnerability, if they were expected to go missing,  if they were in a care home or had a medical condition were factors that were considered;

(c)

clear guidance, surrounding the areas of threat, risk and harm was available to police officers and control room staff to assess each potential ‘missing person’;

(d)

dealing with a missing person was very resource intensive, however the issue of safeguarding was paramount;

(e)

ARV (Armed Response Vehicle) units deployed to any incident (whether firearms related or not), in addition to roads policing across the force area;

(f)

there would be an uplift in the number of firearms officers from 130 to 170, however firearms officers were difficult to recruit, train and retain.

(a)

accessibility played an important role in building the public’s trust and confidence in the police, and involved improving public confidence in contacting the police to report crime and using the 101service, and expanding the ways that the public could report issues remotely to the police;

(b)

the action plan began to deliver improvements to average waiting times in March 2016.  The average answer delay for non-urgent 101 calls  –

·         was over 8 minutes in the six months to the end of February 2016;

·         in the six months to end of August 2016 improved to 4 minutes;

·         during the three months between March and June 2016 the average answer times were below 4 minutes, rising to between 4 and 5 minutes in the peak summer season of July and August;

(c)

there was now a real focus on the 101 service, however the improved performance of the service had not yet embedded;

(d)

by the end of March 2017 the Chief Constable would (in consultation with

the PCC) publish force wide service standards for the 101 non emergency

service, answering 999 calls, online contacts and correspondence;

(e)

101 calls were answered reasonably well on first pick up, however a delay occurred during the hand up to point of resolution;

(f)

further system developments were underway.  These would focus initially on the introduction of more effective workforce management systems that would allow resources to be better matched to demand, the introduction of webchat to divert further demand from the call centre and the introduction of IVR (an automated telephony system that interacts with callers, gathers information and routes calls to the appropriate recipient.);

(g)

the OPCC Chief Executive received a weekly report on the 101 service figures;

(h)

the OPCC recognised that the 101 service had been a problem for a number of years, and that it would be difficult to increase people’s confidence that the service had improved.

In response to questions, the Panel were advised that –

(i)

there was currently no message on the telephone system to advise waiting callers that there were alternative methods to get their message through to the police;

(j)

it was too early to see the impact of the considerable campaign on the online capability of the 101 service, however more e-mails were now being received (and e-mail performance was good);

(k)

there was now general investment available for the 101 service, and this week a significant sum had been approved to invest in the development of the webchat facility;

(l)

a wider piece of work was now taking place around a more integrated multi-channel approach and it was hoped that within 12 months there would be a more integrated omni (multi) channel available.

(a)

a new style Performance Report was being prepared which would reflect off the Police and Crime Plan once published;

(b)

some additional information had been received since the production of this report in relation to the reporting of instances of domestic abuse – Devon and Cornwall figures were higher than the national average (and 50% higher than the neighbouring force of Avon & Somerset) and it was uncertain whether this was the result of an increase in the crime or an increase in the reporting of it;

(c)

there was now increased opportunity for police action when a domestic abuse incident was reported.

In response to questions, the Panel were advised that –

(d)

the statistic relating to alcohol-related offences covered a whole range – and could relate to violence or self-inflicted harm (the data provided by hospitals did not differentiate between the two);

(e)

public campaigns were a good initiative and helped to improve public confidence in the police.

(a)

the PCC had recently spoken to a House of Lords review on the Licensing Act 2003;

(b)

the OPCC Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer was involved in the consultation around the police funding formula review;

(c)

a cyber café pilot was being trialled to raise awareness the steps members of the public can take to improve their online safety – these sessions had been held in a supermarket;

(d)

the Chief Constable was the national lead (on behalf of the Police Chief’s Council) for modern slavery;

(e)

£8.5 million of the Police Transformation Fund would be made available for Devon and Cornwall to lead nationally on a new National Modern Slavery Unit;

(f)

£150,000 additional funding had been secured for Sexual Assault Referral Centres (SARCs) in the force area;

(g)

the PCC was the Deputy Portfolio Holder for Victims and Witnesses of the Association of Police and Crime Commissioners;

(h)

the PCC welcomed the introduction of the new Stalking orders which would better protect victims at the earliest possible stage.

In response to questions, the Panel were advised that –

(i)

the Public Accountability Board would be replaced by an equivalent board in the near future so members of the public could see how the Chief Constable could be held to account.

(1)

delete ‘Impact of the Estates Programme’ from the work programme for 3 February 2017 and replace it with the ‘Police and Crime Plan’;

(2)

consider the following agenda items for allocation at a future meeting(s) –

·         deferred charging

·         missing people

·         ICT