Anti-Social Behaviour Call Handling and Case Management Field Trials

Transcription

1 Anti-Social Behaviour Call Handling and Case Management Field Trials October 2011 Report of Avon and Somerset Police Avon and Somerset Constabulary Working together to make the communities of Avon and Somerset feel safe and be safe

2 ASB Call Handling and Case Management Trials 1. Introduction and context Making Anti-Social Behaviour a Top Deliverable 1.1 Avon and Somerset Police (ASP) began its journey to significantly improve its response to Anti-Social Behaviour in This was achieved through a clear organisational commitment that this area of business would be one of four Top Deliverables (priorities) forming the bedrock of force plans to increase public confidence. 1.2 Implementation of the Top Deliverables was driven by the Deputy Chief Constable (DCC) through force Performance and Tasking structures and overseen by the joint Constabulary and Police Authority Citizen Focus Policing Programme Board, co-chaired by the DCC and a member of the Police Authority. 1.3 The ASB Deliverable was owned by an Assistant Chief Constable (ACC), developed through an ASB Gold Strategy, and driven through the organisation s Citizen Focus Delivery Group. This group is chaired by the ACC with membership including District Commanders and Department Heads. Through these means, ASP achieved the commitment of its leaders to providing a Gold Standard of Service to victims of ASB. Developing the ASB Gold Standard 1.4 In January 2010, ASP embarked on an extensive project to develop the Gold Standard (Appendix A). Its objectives were to: improve service to the public; increase public confidence and satisfaction; offer a victim-focused approach, and identify vulnerability irrespective of whether a victim had been targeted before. 1.5 The move towards a victim-focused approach was significant. It was designed to ensure that the victim s perspective of the harm suffered was assessed and understood, with cases progressed on this basis. Defining vulnerability 1.6 A significant part of the Gold Standard was to define vulnerability and embed this definition consistently across all districts and departments. This definition was: A victim should be treated as vulnerable if the manner or frequency of anti social behaviour causes significant adverse impact to their health, lifestyle, personal safety or quality of life. Following the implementation of this definition in ASP, it was adopted by the Home Office as the national definition and consequently used by a number of forces. Page 1 of 20

3 Marketing and informative material 1.7 ASP marketed the victim focused approach to managing ASB to embed the Gold Standard. An aide memoire was produced and issued by supervisors to their relevant staff and officers (Appendix B). This provides a memorable anagram of VICTIM. Each heading poses questions for the Officer to consider when dealing with a victim of ASB. Vulnerability Impact Contact Treatment Investigation Minimise Risk 1.8 ASP also produced posters and distributed these in key locations in their buildings to advertise the new victim focused approach to managing ASB. The aide memoire and poster campaign complemented other training and awarenessraising for staff and officers involved in tackling ASB. 1.9 ASP developed a leaflet that is handed, sent or ed to ASB victims and any interested parties (Appendix C). It aims to set expectations on how ASP manages ASB and give contact information both in an emergency and for non-emergency matters. The leaflets are personalised to each district to provide relevant local information where the victim lives, e.g. how to contact their local authority The Gold Standard drove ASP to review their processes to accurately identify all calls relating to ASB. This was critical to enable Neighbourhood Teams to make a follow-up call within 24 hours to assess vulnerability of the caller or victim. 2. Reason for change 2.1 By January 2011, ASP had made significant progress in implementing the Gold Standard with corporate process changes, internal marketing and awareness raising. Significant work was still required at district level to embed these processes to attain a consistent approach across the Force. There was also a range of different processes in place for partnership working with other agencies across the six policing districts. 2.2 ASP saw an opportunity to use the Home Office Field Trials to continue developing and embedding the Gold approach. Their focus would be at an operational level and to improve their partnership arrangements by introducing a genuinely partnered response within each district. The ultimate aim was to achieve a level of collaborative working which would support the effective and efficient management of incidents of ASB from the initial point of contact with ASP, through to case management with other agencies, to eventual resolution, and achieving customer satisfaction for all agencies. 2.3 The Field Trials essentially provided a catalyst for ASP to make these changes and promote the need for improved partnership working across the force area. Page 2 of 20

4 3. Background the Avon and Somerset area 3.1 The ASP force area covers 1,855 square miles with an approximate population of 1.6 million. The Police Officer establishment is just over 3,200. ASP has six policing districts covering both urban and rural communities. These are Bath and North East Somerset; Bristol; North Somerset; Somerset East; Somerset West; and South Gloucestershire. 3.2 The map below shows the ASP force area and location of their six districts. 3.3 Bristol is the smallest district geographically (110km 2 ) but is the most densely populated area within the force with approximately 406,000 residents. It has a large transient population travelling to and from the city to work, shop or socialise and this figure can increase substantially on a daily basis. It requires the largest concentration of Police resources - currently 966 Police Officers, 113 Police Community Support Officers (PCSO s) and 170 police staff. 3.4 In contrast, Somerset West is the largest police district, spanning an area of approximately 1753 km 2. It covers a diverse range of economic, community and geographic areas, including the two large market towns of Taunton and Bridgwater, sparsely populated moorland on the Quantock Hills and Exmoor National Park, agricultural valleys, scenic locations such as Cheddar Gorge and the Somerset Levels and 45 miles of holiday coastline. A diverse approach to policing is therefore required. In comparison to Bristol s high concentration of staff, Somerset West currently has 316 Police Officers, 70 PCSOs and 62 Police staff. 3.5 These two districts provide the starkest example of the differences in partnership working arrangements across the force area. Bristol District has a single partnership arrangement with Bristol City Council as the Unitary Authority. Somerset West sits within a two-tier Local Authority area and therefore works with Page 3 of 20

5 Somerset County Council (which also covers the policing district of Somerset East) and three District Councils. More complex partnership arrangements are required. 3.6 The vast differences in area, needs and resources across the force area mean that ASP has been unable to implement a single, prescriptive process for managing ASB across policing districts. To deliver the Gold Standard, ASP recognised it would need to give flexibility to manage incidents in a way that could be shaped to fit the needs of local communities. 3.7 ASP are supported by a Headquarters-based Citizen Focus Team who have overarching responsibility for the Gold Standard. Districts are also supported by specialist ASB Coordinators who lead on managing delivery of service to ASB victims on their districts. ASB reporting levels 3.8 The data below shows reporting levels of ASB in Avon and Somerset in the year prior to the Field Trials (with equivalent months provided for comparison purposes). January July 2010 District ASB Incidents Of which is rowdy / nuisance Bristol % South Gloucestershire % Bath & North East Somerset % Somerset East % Somerset West % North Somerset % Total ASB incidents % This represents an average of almost 80,000 calls during Bristol clearly receives the greatest number of reports of ASB. This reflects the demand level across the district due to the large population in comparison to the area covered. ASB Satisfaction 3.9 ASP are one of few forces nationally who measure ASB victim satisfaction. The ASB user satisfaction survey annually captures the views of over 2000 ASB victims. They are randomly selected from the STORM (System for Tasking and Operational Resource Management) command and control system each month. (This system is used by ASP for call handling and to dispatch the relevant Police resource.) The group selected for survey are then screened to deselect persons with mental health issues, those under 16 and domestic-related incidents. The survey applies the same methodology as the Home Office mandated User Page 4 of 20

6 Satisfaction Survey for crime victims. The survey is telephone based and takes about 10 minutes to complete ASP user satisfaction surveys results for the same period (January to June 2010) were: ASB Satisfaction Survey results; Target (from April 2010 to March 2011) January July 2010 Ease of Contact % Action Taken % Follow Up 59% 59.90% Treatment % Whole Experience 75% 75.30% This indicated to ASP that there were weaknesses around Action Taken and Follow Up. Targets for Follow Up and Whole Experience were introduced in April 2010 during the reporting period illustrated. 4. The 5 Principles of the ASB Trials 4.1 ASP recognised that the five key principles of the field trials related to elements of its work that could be further developed and used the opportunity to take action to make these improvements. The principles of the Call Handling and Case Management trials were as follows: 1: Create an effective call handling system where each individual has a log of complaints created from the very first call. 2: Introduce risk assessment tools to quickly identify the most vulnerable victims. 3: Install off-the-shelf IT systems to share information on cases between agencies, removing the need for meetings. 4: Agree a protocol across all local agencies setting out how they will manage cases. 5: Engage with the community to clearly set out the issues which are causing the most harm to individuals and neighbourhoods and set how the police and other local agencies and the public can work together to address them. 4.2 ASP considered at the start of the Trials that they would not work to implement Principle 3 in its entirety. ASP is currently using existing IT systems for case management and considering its collaborative approach with partner organisations. 4.3 ASP did not feel that removing the need for meetings was an appropriate step for it to take at this time as they are considered a valuable tool to drive performance. Teams are encouraged to operate virtually and not to let matters arising to wait for a meeting. However, a meeting provides opportunity to consider case options more widely, check and test that matters are being progressed in a timely manner, as well as holding action holders to account. Page 5 of 20

7 5. The problem and the action taken 5.1 ASP sought to integrate the Home Office Trials work within its broader continuous service improvement around ASB. At the start of the trials, ASP already had an established understanding of this process and the trials were viewed as a continuation of this work to embed and improve it at a district and partnership level. 5.2 The five principles clearly align themselves with ASP process still broadly in place as at the beginning of the trials: 5.3 This process diagram is included as Appendix D to this report. Principle 1 Principle 2 Principle 3 Principle 4 Page 6 of 20

8 Workshops 5.4 In order to assess each districts position and identify where improvements were required, workshops were held bringing police and key partners together. This was coordinated by the Citizen Focus Team. The workshop activities focused on: Reaching a common understanding to a harm centred approach Categorising risk Developing joint tactics and methods Developing multi-agency case management principles (Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC) principals) Identifying next steps, collaboratively 5.5 The workshops also considered areas for improvement in processes that agencies could consider in order to strengthen their approach to managing cases of ASB. 5.6 District ASB Co-ordinators were supported by the Citizen Focus team in taking the principles forward. 6. Principle One: Create an effective call handling system 6.1 The main route for victims reporting ASB is through ASP s Force Service Centre (call handling centre). It is at this point that the call is identified as ASB. The initial process followed for every call is identical to ensure that all victims of ASB are identified using the same procedures ensuring consistency in management of cases of ASB. This is vital so that the necessary follow up is undertaken by the relevant team. 6.2 All calls are entered into ASP s STORM command and control system. As call handling staff are not police officers, ASP produced a detailed flow chart to assist the call taker to correctly grade the call as ASB and to identify on initial contact what response the demand requires (Appendix E). 6.3 In May 2011, ASP began using a system called ProQA as a key development in the call handling process. They are the only force using the system in England and Wales. ProQA is a controlled questioning process to ensure that the most appropriate outcome for the caller is reached through effective identification of the nature of the incident being reported. The response to each question is coded and directs the dispatch outcome based on the specific elements of the situation. This means that as soon as the victim is identified as being vulnerable, ProQA prioritises the call as an immediate or priority for response. 6.4 The questions used to determine risk at the initial point of contact with the call handler have been integrated into ProQA. The complete question set can be found at Appendix F. Questions are the risk assessment that takes place within the call taking process. They are: 13: Have you or your family been subject to repeat incidents of anti-social behaviour? 14: If yes, how often? 15: If yes, has it been directly targeted at you or your family? Page 7 of 20

9 16: If yes, why do you think you are being targeted? 17. Has it affected your health or lifestyle? 18. If yes, does it place you, your family or your property at risk of harm? 6.5 The caller will be automatically categorised as a vulnerable victim on STORM if the response to question 13 is positive, then questions will follow. 6.6 Given the recent implementation of ProQA and the learning from the trials, ASP are reviewing opportunities to use ProQA for ASB calls to determine more fully the degree of risk earlier in the victim journey. This may involve amending the question set to ensure that vulnerable victims who are not a repeat victim, are not missed from early categorisation. See next steps at the end of this report for further detail. 6.7 The primary purpose of ASP call handling is to consider what initial action is required. It is for this reason that the ASP Gold Standard set a target that 100% of victims of ASB must be called back within 24 hours to be further risk assessed using the Risk Assessment Matrix or Scorecard. 6.8 Neighbourhood Policing Teams are the responsible leads for deploying the risk assessment. Their PCSO Support (administrative) officers were primarily undertaking the function. There were some local variances in place with the use of Volunteers, restricted staff and in Bristol, the Victim and Witness Liaison Unit linked to the Witness Care Unit for some Neighbourhood areas. The role of the PCSO Support has been withdrawn as part of ASP s response to the fiscal position. Their loss was experienced in the run up to June 2011 and has been challenging ASP s ability to fulfil this key part of their Gold Standard commitment. 6.9 Whilst call backs are resource-intensive and primarily intended to identify risk, they have had an extremely positive impact on levels of customer satisfaction. This is demonstrated through satisfaction surveys for the force for January to July 2011: ASB Satisfaction Survey results; Jan - July 2010 Jan - July 2011 % pt Change Ease of Contact 81.20% 93.70% 12.50% Action Taken 68.50% 77.70% 9.20% Follow Up 59.90% 61.50% 1.60% Treatment 90.40% 92.50% 2.10% Whole Experience 75.30% 81.30% 6.00% 6.10 The satisfaction increase for follow-up service has been lower than other elements of the survey. Based on their professional judgement, ASB Co-ordinators consider that providing a call back service to victims who do not require further risk assessment (to meet the 100% target) could be affecting views about satisfaction when surveyed. Page 8 of 20

10 6.11 To give a wider context to Follow Up, the following chart shows the increases over a three year period. ASB - Satisfaction with Follow Up - Force Level Percentage satisfied 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Apr-08 May-08 Jun-08 Jul-08 Aug-08 Sep-08 Oct-08 Nov-08 Dec-08 Jan-09 Feb-09 Mar-09 Apr-09 May-09 Jun-09 Jul-09 Aug months ending (rolling 12 months) Sep-09 Oct-09 Nov-09 Dec-09 Jan-10 Feb-10 Mar-10 Apr-10 May-10 Jun-10 Jul-10 Aug-10 Sep-10 Oct-10 Nov-10 Dec-10 Jan-11 Feb-11 Mar-11 Apr-11 May-11 Jun-11 Jul-11 Aug Given that ASP has recently withdrawn their PCSO Support roles who primarily undertook the call backs, over the period of the trials, the force has had to plan to ensure the commitment was achieved even as the posts were lost. Although ASP have sought to achieve this 100% call back target the resource capacity has led them to reconsider the efficiency and benefits of the current processes. Calling back 100% of victims of ASB is not only a substantial commitment for Neighbourhood Teams but includes a significant proportion of organisational or one-off passing victims who do not want to receive this service ASP received over 7000 ASB calls per month on average between January and July They have recognised that they need to consider a more targeted approach of neighbourhood teams calling back 100% of vulnerable and repeat victims identified at the initial point of contact. Broader opportunities to continue with some form of additional customer care callback to victims of crime or ASB are under consideration. Work currently in progress to move to this way of working is detailed in the Next Steps section of this report Bristol are currently using a system where the call handler tags the STORM record indicating that no call back is required. This is a simple way of immediately reducing the number of call backs and is soon to be rolled out force wide as an interim measure of support. 7. Principle Two: Risk assessment to quickly identify vulnerable victims 7.1 As part of the ASP Gold Standard, an ASB Risk Assessment Scorecard Matrix was produced and deployed for the follow up call that the Neighbourhood Teams are responsible for (Appendix G). As mentioned, ASP s current service standard is to call back all victims of ASB within 24 hours of their initial call to conduct a risk assessment. Page 9 of 20

11 7.2 The Risk Assessment takes into account a number of factors that are known to increase vulnerability and have a significant impact on the victim's quality of life. This includes frequency of incidents of ASB, whether the victim feels they are personally targeted and what effect this may be having on their health. 7.3 The caller is invited to respond to seven questions, four of which score the impact on the victim on a scale of 1 to 5. A total score is then calculated and an outcome as Red, Amber or Green risk is determined (High, Medium or Low). It also directs the officer to also consider the risk using their professional judgement. This risk assessment guides the investigating officer by providing tactical options to support them in managing the risk and enhance their service to the victim. Often this is to be expected with support from relevant partners. 7.4 The Risk Assessment Matrix has been successfully introduced to a number of ASP s partners at district level. The Risk Assessment has been either wholly adopted or used to inform development of partner processes that so that partners are working to a common method of identifying vulnerability. Given that ASP and their partners are working on the same definition of a vulnerable victim, this has been a significant step forward in collaborative working. It has been achieved primarily by the use of the partnership workshops held during the Trials. 7.5 This has worked particularly well in the North Somerset, where a Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC) process has been implemented. As a result, the district council, housing and health partners are using the Risk Assessment Matrix and reporting on vulnerable victims according to common definitions. 7.6 A list of all partners that have been successfully engaged in multi-agency meetings to manage ASB is included at Appendix H. The MARAC meeting structure and processes are detailed further under Principle Four below. Case Study Anne, 54, Bristol Anne lives alone and felt extremely intimidated by her neighbour who lives opposite. They share a communal hallway and landing. She was identified as high-risk in March 2011 using the Risk Assessment Matrix. The ASB related to lots of visitors and young people attending the perpetrator's address resulting in noise nuisance, suspected drug activity, items being thrown from his 5th floor window and abusive language being used. He also got drunk regularly at home and failed to keep his dogs leashed in the communal areas where they were allowed to foul. Anne felt particularly vulnerable as she believed she would easily be identified as the complainant. A Noise Abatement Notice was served. This was breached twice. The perpetrator refused to sign an Anti-Social Behaviour Contract. Bristol City Council secured a Civil Injunction against him in June 2011 and this not been breached to date. Anne is now very happy as the perpetrator has changed his behaviour and she has had no further problems. *names have been changed for the purpose of this report. Page 10 of 20

12 7.7 Whilst initial risk is identified using the Risk Assessment Matrix, the matrix is also formally deployed again at the conclusion of the investigation or action plan. This ensures that the case can be confidently de-escalated. 7.8 ASP believes that the matrix is an effective tool to identify those who are most vulnerable. They have trialled an extended Risk Assessment Matrix in one Neighbourhood area over a six week period. The additional two questions ask for more information about the victim s health and wellbeing, and whether they have reported the incident to any other agencies. During that period, 68 ASB victims were called back. None were identified as high risk, three were identified as medium risk and the remaining 62 were deemed low risk. Call handlers provided positive feedback on the enhanced Risk Assessment Matrix and the ASB Coordinator for the district recommended that the enhanced Matrix is rolled out forcewide. The implementation of this Risk Assessment Matrix will be discussed further in the next steps section. 7.9 As a consequence of ASP s focus on Principles One and Two, they identified gaps that need to be addressed in order to consistently deploy the risk assessment to reports of ASB. Appendix D shown on page 7, details the variety of other ways in which reports of ASB are received by the force - wider than calls to the Force Service Centre. ASP will now take steps to implement processes to ensure that vulnerable victims are identified regardless of the medium through which they choose to report an incident of ASB. Development of these processes is detailed in the next steps section. 8. Principle Three: Installing IT systems to share information on cases between agencies, removing the need for meetings 8.1 Further to ASP s approach to meetings detailed on page 6, each district has multiagency meetings that are attended by representatives from local councils, housing providers, environmental protection, probation service, safeguarding boards, social care and mental health. 8.2 An example of the approach being developed by the force through the period of the Trials - North Somerset district previously held an ASB Panel meeting that was attended by partner agencies that was offender and location focused. With the Gold Standard ethos being victim-focused, they moved to a MARAC process (see paragraph 7.5 above). This meeting focused on agencies working together to support the victim and manage the case to a resolution. The district has worked to ensure that there is representation from all key partner agencies at the MARAC meetings. These are held monthly to discuss all high risk vulnerable victims of ASB located on the district. Open cases and action taken to manage cases by any agency are reviewed at the MARAC to ensure all agencies are actively involved in discussions for each victim. An example agenda is attached at Appendix I. Integrated working 8.3 South Gloucestershire district has an integrated ASB team comprising of Local Authority staff and four district Police Officers. The local authority element of this Page 11 of 20

13 team had previously used an off-the-shelf case management system to manage cases reported to the Local Authority. ASP s Incident and Intelligence management system is called Guardian. ASB incidents that are not classified as a crime are managed through the intelligence section of this system. This could not be accessed by the Local Authority team members of the integrated ASB team. They have now been given read-only access to the Guardian system to allow access to the same case records to ensure cases can be managed efficiently and without duplication of actions. Although access to amend information in Guardian has not been provided, the accessibility has allowed for a more effective case management by the integrated team. They share information on cases and work closely together to manage cases to resolution for both ASP and the Local Authority. The district hold an ASB Panel meeting every six weeks and high risk victims are discussed with the other partners through this forum. Case management opportunity 8.4 ASB incidents that are not specific crime categorised incidents are currently recorded in the Intelligence section of the Guardian system as it supports grouping all matters about the victim in one place. ASP are reviewing this practice to understand whether ASB would be better managed through the Incident system as this would instigate a tighter control around supervisory hierarchal reviews, allow wider linking of suspects to the incident and provide the victim an opportunity to sign up to ASP s Track my Crime system that went live fully in March This is where victims can keep themselves up to date on the progress of their investigation electronically. 8.5 ASP rely on STORM and customer satisfaction surveys to provide management information on performance around ASB. They believe that the breadth of information could be expanded by moving ASB case management to Guardian Incident as a wider range of data can be stored and extracted from this part of the system. This will allow ASP to analyse performance in further detail. 8.6 Currently ASP s STORM and Guardian systems do not have an interface enabling information to be shared between them. ASP is taking steps to implement such an interface to improve information sharing within systems. This is expected to be in place within 18 months. It may present an opportunity once ProQA has identified a potential vulnerable victim, to send a task direct into the Guardian system, automatically triggering a call-back request to a neighbourhood officer. This would remove the need to trawl through the STORM system to find the ASB-tagged victims and save duplication in data-inputting. Information exchange 8.7 ASP has been successful in establishing effective partnership working arrangements in all six policing districts ensuring communication and joint working between agencies to manage ASB. Exchange of information is conducted both formally through multi-agency meetings and informally between partnership agencies outside of these. ASP maintain that the face to face meeting structure is ensuring they are engaging partners and delivering the most effective service to Page 12 of 20

14 victims of ASB. This is continuing through the development of the Integrated ASB Team in Bath and North East Somerset. 9. Principle Four: Agreeing a protocol across all local agencies setting out how they will manage cases 9.1 ASP has decided to continue using the MARAC and multi-agency meeting process as described above. During the Trials, all districts considered their processes with their partners and have worked to improve these wherever possible to ensure victims of ASB are given the support they require from all agencies. Some districts have maintained their processes after assessment, whilst others have worked to change and improve the processes they follow. 9.2 Bristol has had its ASB team in place since 2004, working alongside the council ASB team. Multi-agency meetings and case conferences have been ongoing since this arrangement began and have had a number of protocols in place for the same period of time. A complete review of all protocols was undertaken and two new protocols drafted. One protocol has been drafted to cover the process in place for local multi-agency meetings and identifies the geographical areas for these along with a template agenda for every meeting (Appendix J). A second protocol has been drafted for the multi-agency ASB case conference in the form of terms of reference for the meeting (Appendix K). These are overarching protocols that are applied to the management of any case with scope for actions specific to the case to be identified and implemented as required. Problem solving 9.3 During the Trials, ASP has considered that it is often problematic to obtain dynamic ASB problem profiling. Although ASP currently updates their ASB data quarterly on their Neighbourhood Profiles, it is aware that some forces are now capable of understanding this daily. It is now exploring how to move to a position where this can be delivered by ASP and more effectively support Neighbourhood Teams as the problem solving leads. 9.4 Each district follows a process for problem solving for individual cases of ASB to identify issues and actions to tackle them. The problem solving approach endorsed by ASP is the commonly-used SARA model. Bristol together with Bath and North East Somerset district use an enhanced process called IDPARTNERS as their problem solving model. An overview of this model is detailed in Appendix L. Bristol has been using this process with their partners since 2008 and has a tight tracking system in place through their Neighbourhood Delivery Teams. This is where wider agency tasking and direction is supported by the problem solving process, driven by their Community Safety Partnership, Safer Bristol. 9.5 Bristol s effective use of IDPARTNERS with a number of agencies has been demonstrated in managing a significant issue in Newquay Road. Historically there have been ongoing problems with persistent ASB, drug use and street drinking. Satisfaction surveys revealed that the local community had little confidence in ASP and local agencies as a result of the persistent issues. Page 13 of 20

15 9.6 The local council and housing provider undertook a project to improve the situation and tackle the problems in Newquay Road for local residents. They used the IDPARTNERS model to identify the problem, conduct research in the local area, set objectives to be achieved by the project, respond effectively to the problem and ultimately measure the success of their actions. ASP and their partners instigated environmental improvements, secured funding for replacement fences for all council owned properties and improvement works to properties. They undertook extensive community engagement work to ensure the local community were aware of what was being done to tackle the ASB issues. ASP issued banning letters to seven main offenders and referred two key offenders to Bristol s offender management programme called IMPACT that is run by partner agencies. They used Acceptable Behaviour Contracts extensively. The success of this project is demonstrated in the reduction in incidents of ASB at its conclusion as below: The project to reduce ASB in Newquay Road is attached as Appendix M. 9.7 The Neighbourhood Team deployed a community safety survey asking residents if their area had got better or worse. In 2008, 15% reported better, 50% reported worse. This compared to 71% reporting better and 0% reporting worse in 2011 when followed up. Similarly, when asked about whether crime and safety had got better or worse, 22% reported better and 56% reported worse in 2008 compared to 63% reporting better and 4% reporting worse in Principle 5: Engaging with the community to clearly set out the issues which are causing the most harm to individuals and neighbourhoods, and setting how the police, and other local agencies and the public can work together to address them 10.1 Community engagement is an established tactic used by to tackle ASB-related issues across the force area. ASP has had in place an active Partners and Communities Together (PACT) process since 2007 which is supported by organisational manuals and How To Guides. In 2009 the Citizen Focus team further defined a number of tactical options for districts to consider supporting their engagement with communities. These included distraction techniques in the form of Pizza and Cola evenings and the Dream Scheme where young people can earn points for community work in exchange for rewards. It ranges to other opportunities through local meetings, beat surgeries and street briefings, consultation cards and face to face surveys. Page 14 of 20

16 10.2 South Gloucestershire has undertaken extensive work to engage communities aimed at reducing levels of ASB and to increase local confidence in ASP. Engagement activities have taken a number of forms including action and delivery planning, community surveys and ongoing targeted local meetings. An action plan is being developed currently for the Patchway area involving the local church, colleges, youth service, housing providers and council (Appendix N). It aims to improve quality of life, focusing on local environment improvement, community health, wellbeing and local employment opportunities. The plan has had input from a number of key local stakeholders ensuring that the actions are achievable. Progress is already being made against identified actions. A three year Priority Neighbourhoods Delivery Plan has also been developed in collaboration with partners through a steering group aims to support communities through the Safer Stronger Neighbourhoods Partnership South Gloucestershire has also produced a learning pack called Damage Done which is available for neighbourhood teams and anyone working with young people or involved in reducing ASB (Appendix O). It is aimed at 11 to 16 year olds and provides a one hour lesson on ASB with case studies and situational examples in the seven minute DVD film. This form of engagement targets young people at a time when they may be most likely to begin engaging in ASB. It aims to raise awareness so they can identify different types of ASB, think about who may be affected by ASB in a community and how and recognise the seriousness of ASB and consequences of behaviour. Response to this film has been very positive with schools and groups across the force using it In Bristol, a project that used community engagement to respond to the problems of street drinking and ASB was undertaken in the Stokes Croft area. Enforcement alone had not tackled the problems so an extensive programme of engagement activities were undertaken to reduce street drinking and ASB. These detailed in Appendix P. The outcomes were extremely positive. Street drinking is no longer a priority at local priority setting forums, violent crime down by 47%, ASB by 31% and 70% of local traders believe street drinking has reduced. The local Councillor has sent letter of thanks for the work done by ASP (Appendix Q). 11. Overall outcomes 11.1 ASP are one of few forces nationally who measure ASB victim satisfaction. ASP has measured the outcomes of taking part in the Trials through customer satisfaction surveys completed by victims of ASB and through levels of ASB both locally in district areas and across the entire force. Page 15 of 20

17 11.2 The following data shows the changes in levels of ASB reported to ASP: ASB Satisfaction Survey results; Jan - July 2010 Jan - July 2011 % pt Change Ease of Contact 81.20% 93.70% 12.50% Action Taken 68.50% 77.70% 9.20% Follow Up 59.90% 61.50% 1.60% Treatment 90.40% 92.50% 2.10% Whole Experience 75.30% 81.30% 6.00% The information below demonstrates the reduction in incidents of ASB in detail and rowdy/nuisance behaviour within districts and as a force wide total: Jan 10 - Jul 10 BCU ASB Incidents Rowdy/Nuisance Behaviour Bristol South Gloucestershire Bath & North East Somerset Somerset East Somerset West North Somerset Force Jan 11 - Jul 11 BCU ASB Incidents Rowdy/Nuisance Behaviour Bristol South Gloucestershire Bath & North East Somerset Somerset East Somerset West North Somerset Force % Difference BCU ASB Incidents Rowdy/Nuisance Behaviour Bristol -1.74% -1.32% South Gloucestershire % % Bath & North East Somerset % % Somerset East % % Somerset West 2.19% 0.58% North Somerset % % Force -6.54% -7.29% A BCU is a Basic Command Unit that is described as a district elsewhere in this report This information is based on all calls handled as ASB incidents during the given periods and has been collated from the STORM system. Page 16 of 20

18 11.3 The data shows a reduction in the number of calls relating to incidents of ASB on all districts with the most significant reduction seen in calls relating to rowdy or nuisance behaviour in four Districts being notable The improvement in overall satisfaction of management of ASB cases can be clearly seen in the next chart: ASB Satisfaction by District 88% 86% 84% 82% 80% 78% 76% 74% 72% 70% 68% 66% B (BRISTOL) D (SOUTH GLOUCESTER) E (BATH & NE) F (SOMERSET EAST) G (SOMERSET WEST) Jan - July 2010 Jan - July 2011 J (SOMERSET NORTH) FORCE 11.5 The bar chart below also demonstrates the improvements in customer satisfaction across the entire force area for ease of contact, treatment and followup service provided to victims of ASB: Forcewide ASB Satisfaction Rates % 90.00% 80.00% 70.00% 60.00% 50.00% 40.00% 30.00% 20.00% 10.00% 0.00% Ease of Contact Action Taken Follow Up Treatment Whole Experience Jan - July 2010 Jan - June 2011* Page 17 of 20

19 11.6 Ensuring satisfaction with the action taken to respond to the victim s report of an incident of ASB is the most difficult element of the process in which to achieve an improvement. ASP must respond appropriately and within its powers but with the strict parameters of dealing with an incident which cannot be managed as criminal activity. An increase in the overall experience of victims is evident as is improvement in ease of contact and in treatment of the victim, although treatment was an area in which ASP had historically achieved high levels of satisfaction Assessment of this data shows a reduction in the number of ASB incidents reported and an increase in customer satisfaction, ultimately demonstrating that the work done by ASP to embed the principles of call-handling in their processes has been successful in improving victim experience and in reducing ASB across the Force area and locally within districts In addition to customer satisfaction surveys ASP have received numerous letters of thanks from ASB victims for work they have done to reduce levels of ASB and help improve the quality of life for vulnerable victims. A group of vulnerable victims in South Gloucestershire sent the following to the ASB Co-ordinator thanking her for ASP s involvement and work done in stopping the persistent ASB that had affected their quality of life for some time: This is just to say a huge thank you for all you and the police have done for us.without all your hard work we would still be in the horrible position we were in Each and every one of us are so grateful. A similar of thanks was received from two vulnerable victims whose lives were significantly restricted by the fear caused by continued ASB near their homes: [We] just wanted to say a big thank you to you for everything you have done for us. You have been really supportive and nothing was too much trouble. At last something has been done! We are so happy that we have our lives back Feedback from ASB victims are key to indicating whether processes in place to manage ASB are effective and are achieving their objective of supporting the victim and improving their quality of life by reducing ASB levels. 12. Next steps for ASP 12.1 ASP are exploring ProQA s potential to assist in identifying repeat or vulnerable victim callers at the first point of contact. This would support an earlier full assessment of risk and a more targeted approach to the potential group of vulnerable victims. See page ASP are exploring opportunities to ensure that other points of contacts for reporting ASB also employ risk assessment at first point of contact using the initial tools that will be afforded by ProQA. Where potentially vulnerable or a repeat victim, they too can be subject to further risk assessment using the Matrix. See page 11. Page 18 of 20

20 12.3 ASP are considering an amended Gold Standard target for call backs. It is seeking to effectively respond to 100% of vulnerable and repeat victims rather than calling back 100% of ASB victims. ASP are also exploring opportunities to maintain effective broader customer care through additional use of volunteers. See page ASP recognise that a short term reduction in call backs can be achieved by rolling out Bristol s system where the call handler can tag the STORM record indicating that no call back is required. See page The enhanced Risk Assessment Matrix explores the victim s health and wellbeing more deeply. ASP will now consider the viability of using this across the force area and with partner agencies. See page In order to improve partnership working arrangements, Bath and North East Somerset propose to form an integrated ASB team with the council and the largest housing provider in the district (Appendix R). It is proposed that this team will share staff and manage cases from initial contact with any of the partners through the MARAC process and to a resolution whilst achieving value for money through shared resources and information. See similar arrangements in South Gloucestershire on page ASP are exploring whether their ASB incidents that are case managed through their Guardian Intelligence system would be better placed on their Guardian Incident system. See page ASP are keen to enhance their Problem profiling opportunities at a strategic and local level to support problem identification and resolution. ASP has recognised that more timely information would support problem solving and enhance their effectiveness. See page In September 2011 South Gloucestershire will be undertaking a multi-agency workshop during their ASB Panel meeting with a view to deciding whether the implementation of a combined ASB, Domestic Violence and Hate Crime MARAC meeting would be beneficial to the district. Often victims and perpetrators are discussed at all three individual meetings for similar incidents and the district will be considering whether combining these meetings could further streamline their case management process in the future Somerset West are developing a new customer satisfaction survey that is intended to be used to drive process improvement, support targeted problem solving and patrols. It will be trailed for 3 months from October to December 2011 where the data will be available as early as November ASP s Gold Standard has been in place for 18 months. ASP used the trials as a timely opportunity to review their processes to drive the Gold Standard forward. The core of their Gold Standard remains and its refresh is viewed as a way of exploring how new developments can keep its gold status live and relevant and drive continuous improvement across the force. Page 19 of 20

21 12.13 The next steps for the force have become apparent through the development of the Gold Standard and ASP has learned a number of significant lessons as a result of participating in the Trials. Delivering a gold service to victims of ASB remains a key deliverable for Avon and Somerset Police and a wealth of project planning is underway to assist ASP moving their next steps forward through deployment of task and finish groups. It is intended to see the refresh of their Gold Standard by January Appendices A ASB Gold Standard B ASB Aide Memoire C ASB Leaflet D Case management process diagram E Initial call handlers flow chart F Current ProQA question set G Current Risk Assessment Matrix H Partners Engaged in Multi-Agency Meetings I Example North Somerset MARAC agenda J Bristol multi-agency meeting protocol K Bristol case conference protocol L IDPARTNERS guide M Newquay Road review and appendices N Patchway plan August 2011 O Damage Done DVD Booklet P Stokes Croft community engagement report Q Stokes Croft letter of thanks R BANES integrated ASB team project proposal Further information from ASP can be obtained from the Citizen Focus Team Inspector Julie Knight julie.knight@avonandsomerset.police.uk Sergeant Andrew Owen andrew.owen@avonandsomerset.police.uk Citizen Focus, Avon and Somerset Constabulary, Police Headquarters, PO Box 37, Valley Road, Portishead, Bristol. BS20 8QJ This report was produced by Hannah Dennis on behalf of RSM Tenon Limited in conjunction with Avon and Somerset Constabulary. Page 20 of 20