Police Accountability Board Public Notes 14th June 2017

Office of Northamptonshire Police, Fire and Crime CommissionerNorthants Police Logo



Action Notes and Decision Record

14th June 2017


1. Welcome and Introductions


Stephen Mold (SM), Northamptonshire Police and Crime Commissioner (Chair)

Martin Scoble (MSc), Chief Executive

Paul Fell (PF), Director for Delivery, OPCC

Emily Evans (EE), Minute Taker, OPCC


Simon Edens (SE), Chief Constable

Rachel Swann (RS), Deputy Chief Constable

James Andronov (JA), Assistant Chief Constable

Mick Stamper (MS), Chief Superintendent

Ali Naylor (AN), Director of HR


– SM welcomed the meeting and gave introductions.


2. Outstanding Issues and Actions from Previous Meeting

– SM reviewed outstanding issues and action points from previous meeting and brief updates were provided.

– All actions were discharged.

– It was noted that the Police and Crime Panel members have showed interest in Specials and SE noted his support.


3. Burglary Performance


– MS summarised the report and gave update on progress made since burglary performance was last reviewed by the Accountability Board.

– New Home Office counting rules and the implications these may have had on current Force performance were explained.

– There was a brief summary of changes that have been implemented and the impacts that these have had.

– MS advised that support from EMOpSS and improvements in forensics have improved performance.


Ongoing Work

– MS noted longer term approach and next steps to reduce both burglary levels and support victims by reducing fear of burglary. It was advised that a high quality victim focused service is required.

– There is a specific on-going operation targeting the most high risk burglaries and support from EMSOU was noted. SM requested supplementary information regarding this operation.

– It was noted that a text message service has been implemented to enhance the victim service, through the use of a survey.

– MS advised of change of process regarding final updates which should increase satisfaction.

– It was summarised that the satisfaction rate is good, however there is additional work being undertaken, including an end to end review of the victim experience



– It was however noted that resourcing continues to be a challenge.

– Discussion took place regarding a previously planned operation which did not take place in the sense of addressing general burglary. The high risk burglary operation remains on-going, but reviews of all burglary processes has been undertaken and the changes as described by MS had been implemented.

– SM noted his disappointment relating to burglary trends and suggested that additional work is still required.

– SE advised that burglary is not an operational priority and that the priority must be to protect people from harm. SE stated that the Force would target highest risk issues across all crime types, including burglary when protecting people from harm.

– The importance of the implementation of the Service Delivery Model (SDM) in resolving concerns such as these was noted.

– MS raised issues regarding previous processes (TIC) and advised that this will have reduced the resolution rate.

– MSc requested clarification regarding HMIC and how they will assess force performance regarding burglary and SE provided reassurance.

– MS advised that more resources are being assigned to investigative roles which in turn should increase the resolution rate.

– There was discussion with SM asking SE when it could be expected to see the current upwards trend in all burglary offences starting to reduce. SM asked if this would be in 6 months or 12 months’ time. SE stated 6 months would see the implementation of SDM and 12 months ought to provide the opportunity for SDM to be better embedded that was designed to make these improvements.


Summary and Actions

– It was agreed that burglary will be revisited in approximately 12 months however a review will provided in around 6 months’ time.

ACTION: MS to provide SM with further information regarding recent operation targeting high risk burglaries.


4. Attendance Management and Monitoring


– AN began by summarising the report and explaining current performance, noting that these results are typical when compared to similar forces.

– Additional ways to support unwell members of staff were noted and it was suggested that the force could provide medical interventions to get staff back to work quicker.

– It was noted that this may be cost effective and could help to improve workforce motivation.

– AN noted that there are already steps in place however further work required around intervention.

– Clarification regarding the balance between supporting individual staff members and supporting the rest of the workforce is required to ensure supervisors understand what is expected of them when tackling absenteeism.

– It suggested that staff should return to work as soon as possible, even if only for a small amount of hours each week.

– SM requested clarification regarding discrepancy with the results from the Kettering based workforce, which has high rates of short term sickness.


Summary and Actions

– It was agreed that this will be revisited.

ACTION: AN to provide additional figures to SM regarding performance in Kettering.

ACTION: AN to send SM the national definitions for short, medium and long term sickness.

ACTION: AN and RS to prepare a business case for the application of appropriate medical intervention payments.

ACTION: AN and Carol Hever to review the data in this report in order to identify ways to support front line supervisors in challenging/supporting activity to reduce sickness and support staff.

ACTION: AN to provide the sickness data contained in this report six monthly to SM.


5. Digital Triage

– JA introduced the report and gave summary.

– It was explained that high risk crimes are prioritised which results in lower risk cases being pushed back.

– RS noted support for implementation of digital triage.

– SM advised of support for digital triage and advised of support regarding funding.

– RS noted that decision will be made at the change board tomorrow.

ACTION: RS to provide feedback from Change Board.


6. AOB

– SM requested clarification regarding merging two teams and RS advised that this planned for the next financial year.