Community safety
KEY LINES OF ENQUIRY AND DESCRIPTORS FOR A CROSS-CUTTING INSPECTION
june 2006 (Amended)
Introduction and inspection focus
Community safety is a collective term without definition in law[1]. Councils’ performance in achieving community safety as a collective outcome is measured through best value performance indicators under the provisions of the Local Government Act 1999 (the 1999 Act). Councils’ performance is assessed through inspection by the Audit Commission. The outcomes to be achieved by councils that fall within the scope of inspection include:· The reduction and prevention of crime and anti-social behaviour (*).
· The reduction and prevention of the fear of crime and anti-social behaviour (*).
· The reduction and prevention of substance misuse, (including the illegal manufacture, sale, acquisition, possession and consumption of drugs, alcohol and tobacco), by enforcement and treatment that supports communities, individuals and their families (*).
· The reduction and prevention of behaviour by the public that adversely affects the environment.
· The reduction and prevention of death and injury to the public by accidents on the highway.
Outcomes starred (*) are a statutory responsibility of councils under the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 Act (the 1998 Act). Councils’ performance against these aims and objectives will be assessed by the Audit Commission.
The primary inspection focus is councils’ own diligence in achieving these outcomes. A secondary inspection focus is how councils achieve these outcomes in partnership with other organisations as variously required by, the 1998 Act, differing local government structures, and the community leadership role required of councils under the Local Government Act 2000.
In the Key Lines of Enquiry and descriptors for cross-cutting inspections of community safety, the term ‘service’ means the entirety of pan-council provision including that enabled through other bodies, and the term ‘user’ means the public, i.e. residents and visitors to the area inside the council boundary.
The key lines of enquiry (KLOE) and descriptors reflect both the statutory and the wide range of discretionary provision made or secured by councils in responding to and supporting local community needs. The KLOE as expressed by the descriptors of level 2 and level 3 offer councils and inspectors the scope to explore how local priorities are met and their fit with the broader national agenda.
The descriptors are not intended as a prescriptive checklist, but as a guided to judgements and a starting point which will help scope individual inspections. The scope of the inspection will be determined by the configuration of services which are offered, secured and prioritised by the council; as well as the engagement with and support given by the council to its partners and other providers. Inspections of cross-cutting service delivery by a council will be possible, as will inspections scoped to particular areas. The actual scope of an inspection will be agreed between the Audit Commission and the council in question and will also be influenced by the time available to carry out the inspection itself.
The KLOE are written to the Audit Commission’s revised service inspection methodology, introduced in 2005, which focuses on outcomes, access, diversity, impact and value for money (VFM).
The council's self-assessment, which we anticipate the council will want to share with partners, will be critical in offering evidence that will help inspectors reach judgements when answering the KLOE headline questions.
The Commission will review the KLOE and descriptors on a regular basis to keep the material and references up to date and also to learn from the experiences of both councils and inspection teams.
JUDGEMENT 1 – HOW GOOD IS THE SERVICE?
Question 1 – What has the service aimed to achieve?
KEY LINE OF ENQUIRY / This question is for context only. It will not result in a judgement; it will inform all other judgements /What has the service aimed to achieve in terms of:
1.1 Community and user needs? / · Describe the council’s overall aims and contribution in achieving community safety. Summarise the contextual information used by the council to inform their approach. Examples include geography, demography, deprivation, transport and travel, employment, health, education and training.
1.2 Local, regional and national priorities? / · Describe how the community safety strategy links with strategies for:
o community cohesion;
o the drug action team/drug and alcohol action team;
o the children and young people’s partnership; and
o the youth offending team; and
o the local policing plan including the management of prolific and other priority offenders by the crime and disorder reduction partnership (CDRP).
· List the CDRP’s statement of agreed targets[2] 2005/06-2007/08 held by the government office for the region. Also note if the CDRP is defined by the Home Office as being a high crime CDRP.
· Describe any priorities specified in the national community safety plan 2006-09 that the council considers to be inappropriate locally.
· In non-unitary council areas only, describe how the council maintains appropriate roles for each tier of local government.
· Briefly describe the CDRP in terms of:
o membership participation as required by the 1998 Act as amended;
o leadership within the partnership and by the partnership as local community safety champion;
o definition of member roles;
o management of performance and projects;
o fit with the local strategic partnership;
o use of resources between partners; and
o impact evaluation.
· Describe the CDRP’s response to the review findings of the 1998 Act and in particular, the need for the CDRP to separate its strategic or commissioning function from operational activity.
1.3 Wider corporate ambitions, strategies and priorities for improvement? / · Describe where the council’s broader ambitions incorporate a community safety dimension. For example, achieving sustainable communities as defined by the local community strategy, local public service agreement and/or local area agreement.
· Describe where community safety aims and objectives are incorporated in the council’s cross-cutting strategies or specific service plans. For example, strategies for young or older people, individual neighbourhoods or community groups, local economic growth, local environmental quality, provision of social housing.
Question 2 – Is the service meeting the needs of the community and/or users?
Inspection focus
The council’s evidence shows comprehensively that:· Community safety outcomes are being achieved by the council. The achievements are sustainable and contribute to national, shared priorities for safer and stronger communities.
· The council works in partnership with local organisations to improve areas that the public and community groups say are important to them. The approach to equality and diversity is consistently thorough, and responses are consistently effective to changing demands and needs.
· The council’s actions have improved the public’s perception of community safety, and in particular that expressed by any specific community groups or neighbourhoods that the council has designated as a priority.
KEY LINE OF ENQUIRY / Descriptors at level 3 - a service that consistently delivers above minimum requirements for users, is cost-effective and makes contributions to wider outcomes for the community. / Descriptors at level 2 - a service that delivers only minimum requirements for users, and is not especially cost-effective nor contributes significantly to wider outcomes for the community. /
User focus, access and diversity
2.1 Are the needs of citizens and users at the heart of the design and delivery of the service now and in the future?
2.2 Is the service accessible, responsive and based on a robust understanding of local need?
2.3 Are service standards clear and comprehensive and have users been involved in setting them where appropriate?
2.4 Are there appropriate arrangements for consulting, engaging and communicating with users and non-users?
2.5 Does the delivery of the service embrace equality, diversity and human rights and ensure that all users, or potential users, have fair and equal access? / · The council has good understanding of the impact of crime, anti-social behaviour and the fear of crime upon neighbourhoods and community groups. The understanding is based on sound geodemographic analyses with solutions developed from the user’s perspective.
· The council has a good understanding of and tracks change affecting the most vulnerable communities and neighbourhoods.
· The prevalence and incidence of crime and anti-social behaviour is closely monitored by the council, particularly for neighbourhoods and community groups designated as a priority. Information is shared extensively between CDRP partners with services adapting to fit changing patterns of demands.
· The council uses a wide and contemporary range of information about the ethnicity, vulnerability and disability of local people to ensure that access to the service is non-discriminatory in planning and delivery.
· The council consults regularly with community groups about community safety, including black and minority ethnic and other disadvantaged groups. The findings from consultation inform the council’s resource allocation and prioritisation under the community safety strategy.
· The council ensures that its housing service and all housing associations operating within the council boundary have adopted policies and procedures to reduce and prevent anti-social behaviour. Such policies and procedures set universal, high standards, are published in a range of media, and are provided to anyone on request.
· The council sets, publishes and measures success by its performance in meeting challenging service standards for responding to reports of crime and anti-social behaviour. The standards are devised and performance is regularly assessed jointly by the council, user and community groups to ensure continuing timeliness and effectiveness.
· The council’s service standards are provided at each service point, are visible and easily understood by service users. To ensure fair access to services for everyone, the council routinely provides service standard translations, interpretations and different media formats.
· Frontline staff have a good understanding of the council’s community safety policies and procedures. For example, provision of timely and effective support to victims of crime and anti-social behaviour.
· The council has implemented a range of measures to prevent crime and anti-social behaviour. Regular evaluation of effectiveness is comprehensive, rigorous and integral to service planning. Under-performance by any CDRP member is challenged by the council and a remedy negotiated.
· For each perpetrator of crime and anti-social behaviour that it is aware of, the council’s response is effective. The council systematically coordinates its response with other agencies as appropriate and uses the full range of available sanctions.
· The council’s response is effective in resolving local community safety problems, for example, racially aggravated incidents or harassment of the public.
· Support to victims and witnesses of crime and anti-social behaviour is tailored by the council to meet individual needs and includes routine feedback about action taken against perpetrators.
· On behalf of the CDRP, the council provides effective public communication and engagement. A substantial proportion of the public regularly contribute to council policy development and review. The public’s engagement with the council is structured, regular and accessible to everyone.
· The council’s consultation arrangements are effective; the public can, and do, participate regardless of age, gender, language, physical access or sensory impairment. The council provides regular, public feedback about the results of consultation.
· Representative sampling of public opinion is regularly obtained by the council, including use of booster samples for under-represented groups. The consequent analysis informs allocation of resources and priority setting for neighbourhoods and community groups.
· The council initiates and manages a regular flow of community safety news through local media, including difficult issues. The council uses the most appropriate media to ensure that information is understood by priority community groups, neighbourhoods and the public.
· To increase access by all communities to community safety outcomes, the council effectively promotes equality of gender, disability and race irrespective of minority community size. All community groups are satisfied with the council’s non-discriminatory approach.
· The staff mix in the council reflects, or is moving toward reflecting, the community being served.
· All council members and officers are non-discriminatory in the application of policy and procedure, as well as personal behaviour.
· The service keeps abreast of current developments including case law covering human rights and equalities, using the knowledge to mitigate risk. / · The council understands fully the impact of its services on the achievement of community safety and its contribution is reducing crime and the fear of crime in neighbourhoods and for community groups designated as a priority.
· The council has an adequate understanding of the community safety concerns of local people.
· The council participates actively in the development of community safety priorities and understands the requirement to consider and incorporate crime reduction into all activity.
· Occasional representative surveys of public opinion are obtained by the council. Adequate use is made of the findings to inform decisions about the resource allocation to neighbourhoods and community groups designated as a priority.
· Periodic analysis is undertaken by the council to assess the prevalence and incidence of crime and anti-social behaviour, particularly for priority neighbourhoods and community groups. In conducting the assessments, the council uses data of adequate quality, drawn from appropriate sources.
· The public’s priorities for community safety are understood by most council members and staff, but these priorities are not yet fully integrated into all aspects of service planning and delivery.
· The council understands what contributes to local peoples’ fear of crime and anti-social behaviour and is coordinating activity across the council to reassure the public by keeping them appropriately informed.
· The public are involved in some aspects of community safety service planning, but their involvement is not systematic or evident across the service.
· To ensure that priorities are identified and addressed effectively, the council and CDRP partners have adequate arrangements for exchanging information about crime and anti-social behaviour.
· The council has a corporate policy and procedure for dealing with anti-social behaviour. The policy and procedures address the needs of community groups designated as a priority.
· Action to reduce and prevent anti-social behaviour is spread across the council. While the council responds to some local priorities, the response is insufficient to reduce anti-social behaviour more broadly or over the long term.