Planning ahead for ASB: the multi-agency approach in Scotland

As you know working with partner agencies is the key to making changes.  Scottish organisations agencies are doing precisely this, with results are already emerging from their joined-up approach.

 Hawick is a prime example of what can be achieved by putting an ASB action plan in place. After an alarming number of ASB incidents in the Scottish Boarders town, council, police and housing staff  went door-to-door, to visit residents. The purpose of the visit was to reassure victims of ASB that help was at hand. Each household was given an information guide on how to report and deal with nuisance behaviour.  Anti-social behaviour traditionally rises over the Christmas period and Hawick’s organisations hope that more ASB will be reported and dealt with, as a result of the planning.

Throughout the town, agencies are urging communities to speak up about their problems. By reporting people or addresses, social landlords can address the issue with support from the police and council, where necessary.

Multi agency working is a key part of ReACT’s strategy for the New Year. Having launched a fantastic pilot in Northern Ireland, we are keen to support more partnership work between social landlords, councils and police. (If you are wondering how this is possible, please call Kate Hill or Paul Johns on 0121 384 2513 for more information).

Communication is vital to make partnership working effective and we can see from Hawick that combined action on  ASB really can help. Tenants also get to hear about the efforts being made on their behalf, from extra patrols to the enforcement of by-laws on drinking. (Lothian Police ASB campaign)  

 A final note to say, thank you all for supporting the ReACT blog throughout the year, it has been a great year, full of news and stories. From all the team, we wish you all a very merry Christmas and a happy New Year.

By Kate Hill

Related articles

• Can you fight ASB with a DVD or a tweet? (reactasb.wordpress.com)
• Partnership Working (reactasb.wordpress.com)

Independent Riots, Communities & Victims Panel suggests riots could happen again.

“The riots will happen again if urgent action is not taken.”

That is the stark warning from the independent Riots Communities and Victims Panel’s interim report published last week. Following its wide-ranging research the Panel conclude that riots of this nature will happen again, therefore immediate action is needed if this is to be prevented.

Key findings & recommendations

The Panel finds and recommends that:

1. People felt abandoned by the police in many areas.

Recommendation: The Police need to ensure they achieve the right balance in prioritising the protection of people and residential areas over commercial property in tackling riots.

2 Residents were forced into the streets after their homes were set alight. Some people were forced off buses into riot areas.

Recommendation: Local authorities and emergency services should review their processes for how to assist and/or evacuate residents and bystanders caught up in riot areas, including through designating particular sites ‘safe havens’.

3. Many people told the Panel that police stop and search was consistently carried out without courtesy.

Recommendation: Stop and Search needs immediate attention to ensure that community support and confidence is not undermined.

4. The police could not control the disorder in many areas.

Recommendation: Police authorities should immediately review their emergency plans to ensure they properly cover public disorder on the scale of the August riots.

5. Convicted rioters pose a risk of re-offending.

Recommendation: Clear plans from public services, including the probation service, youth offending teams and local government to deal with the return of rioters are needed to cut the potential for re-offending and to safeguard communities.

6. Victims should be able to confront rioters.

Recommendation: Central and local government and the police should make sure all victims who want to face people who committed crimes against them can have the opportunity do so.

7. The Riot Damages Act is not working. The Panel did not hear of anyone who had received a payment under the Act.

Recommendation: Unblock the Riots Damages Act system and make sure that victims of the riots receive compensation quickly.

8. Insurers are letting victims down.

Recommendation: Prompt the insurance industry to root out the cases where service has been poor and to make sure that customers who are facing severe trauma are dealt with effectively.

9. Footfall remains seriously down in some riot hit high streets.

Recommendation: The Government should start a fund to support struggling high streets, including using any potential under spend from the various support schemes to provide extra help.

10. Many emergency service staff risked their lives during the riots.

Recommendation: Honour the service personnel who protected communities at great risk to themselves

Next steps for the Panel

In the next phase of its work the Panel have committed to look more at the role of parenting, how to make young people more resilient and help them back into work, and to explore how brands can contribute to communities.

• All information has been extracted from the SLCNG Bulletin No 379
• Photo courtesy of  Tom Curtis at Digital Photos.net

By Paul Johns

Police seminar on ASB trials

The purpose of this seminar organised and hosted by West Mercia Police in Worcester on 9^th November was to have an update on the police trials involving eight police forces in England and Wales. Around 150 delegates attended, mainly ranking police officers but also representatives from housing associations and local authorities. Simon Edens Assistant Chief Constable of West Mercia Police is the ACPO national lead on ASB so I believe that the force is influential in the future direction of how the police will deal with complaints and incidents in future.

Chief Inspector Jim Baker of West Mercia Police said that “harm” is now the prime criteria for the police; the intention is to simply the reporting process, identify who is best to deal with ASB and importantly to share information. He said there are too many tools, powers and too much bureaucracy. The ideal aim is have “an end to end case management system from initial call to resolution of the case to the victim’s satisfaction”. Not sure if he means nationally or by police force – I assume the latter.

Jim Baker identified the need for better use of technology to share incident and personal profile information using a data platform, a common set of casework principles and an agreed risk assessment matrix with more use of IT systems. He welcomed the move to the three new definitions of ASB of personal, nuisance and environmental.

Peter Alleyne of the Home Office started by saying that a staggering 3.3 million (9,000 per day) ASB incidents had been recorded by police in 2010/11 and that this is considered to be a low figure. It is now recognised that much ASB is actually crime and can cause serious harm to victims and communities. Government’s priority, not withstanding the economic situation, is that police and their partners must deal with ASB. There will be no “directives” from government and no “targets” The expectation is that Police and Crime Commissioners will reflect elector’s priorities with ASB high on their agendas. The next steps are feedback from the police trials, to build on the experiences and share it with others but the underlying message is localism – what works for communities.

Geraldine Brown also from the Home Office presented an overview of the findings to date from the police trials. She identified partnership working as a key element (no surprise there then!) with co-location (police sharing office space with partners, especially housing associations) as being particularly effective. The allocation of responsibility with the police being the lead agency may not always be the best way to deal with incidents e.g. social housing landlords could be better placed in some instances. On risk and the identification of possible harm it should not be the sole responsibility of the police and the matrix must be a guide and talking to victims and making a professional judgement was essential. Data Protection is a barrier with incompatibility of IT systems being common, however workarounds are now being found.

Barriers to better working were given as an embedded culture, police preferring to deal with crime and tending to ignore ASB or give it a low priority, engaging with mental health, bureaucracy, IT (again and again), call centre performance, number of agencies (partners), police force boundaries and the financial climate and staff resources.

Jim Baker talked about the West Mercia trial based on Telford & Wrekin with ASB being dealt with alongside Wrekin Housing Trust. Of 2691 calls received between April and September 2011, 158 were referred to the police. The team achieved a 23% reduction in ASB reporting in one year. They identified, on average, one high risk case per month, 13 medium risk and 38 for the force area. Hate crime was revealed as most the vulnerable group and most reluctant victims to complain. Friction over sharing of information causes delays.

There were 4 plenary sessions with presentations from various police forces on:-

1. Risk Assessment.
2. Culture Change -Sussex Police spoke about the need to train front line officers in ASB and to take it much more seriously than they do now.
3. Data Sharing and IT – great interest in this with no recommendations or conclusions other than the urgent need to find a way that is cost effective and “works”and that current DP legislation is a major issue.
4. Partnership Working.

Conclusion:

It was a very worthwhile and informative day. A great deal of progress has been made and the police accept their lead role in tackling ASB but with some reluctance from rank and file police officers. Data protection and sharing of information remains a major problem with most sharing being at the local level, informal and by word of mouth. The chances of an early resolution to data sharing is, in my view very low and for me the catch phrase that sums it up is “Dare to Share”.

Mike Blomer

Related articles

• Tackling ASB: the new reality (reactasb.wordpress.com)

Partnership Working

Image via Wikipedia

An excellent example of close partnership working has been piloted and rolled out in Doncaster recently; the objective is to stop low level ASB cases escalating to bigger problems. The Council and the police community support officers have collaborated to patrol areas seven days a week to reduce those incidents becoming problems. A 30-strong team, comprising of council’s enforcement officers and PCSO’s have had an impact and are sure that ASB incidents have reduced.

The Mayor of Doncaster and members of public are 100% supporting the initiative and want to make sure that the people who “have got the idea that they can do what they like, can’t do that in Doncaster any more – we’re not tolerating it”.

This shows how important it is for agencies to work together in tackling ASB; with more and more similar initiatives being rolled out across the UK, we hope to hear results that reflect those in Doncaster.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-south-yorkshire-14715757

We would love to hear about your work and experiences. Please add a comment to the blog, below.

By Kate Hill

Information Sharing – Fact or Fiction

Image via Wikipedia

The sharing of meaningful information between partner organisations about vulnerable people and victims of ASB continues to be a hot topic.

Despite what would appear to be clear guidance from the Home Office about more cooperation, the police seem to be largely carrying on as before. In many areas local arrangements work well with beat managers liaising closely with RSL`s and they are very aware of the contribution made by front line housing staff. Even the eight police pilots have differing procedures for sharing vital information about cases and the results of these pilots will make for very interesting reading.

Having listened to a number of presentations it obvious to me that the problem lies with the interpretation of data protection rules. Many police information managers continue to block the release of information by officers and PCSO`s, to the obvious detriment of victims. Unless and until clear instructions are given from the highest level in the police service will we see any change. Perhaps we will need to wait for Police and Crime Commissioners to be in post or for ACPO to wake up to the problem before a common approach is introduced.

The role of Social Services in ASB is also frequently raised as an issue but is, in my opinion, nothing new. As with many of the problems they are supposed to deal with social workers so often work in a bubble and, like many in the police service, seem to totally unaware of the success that social landlords consistently achieve in dealing with ASB and the contribution that can be made to cases that very often cross many boundaries. It’s high time that the other professions recognise exactly what housing staff can do and how they can help in so many cases where their ability and knowledge is ignored.

By

Mike Blomer MBE

Home Office cuts ASB team in half

Image via Wikipedia

The Home Office is slashing the number of people who work in its anti-social behaviour team by half.

The 14-strong team has been reduced to seven members following staff restructuring at the department, coming at a busy time for the team, which is carrying out a review of ASB powers that began in July last year.

ASB overhaul: the proposals

• Criminal behaviour order available on conviction for any criminal offence
• Crime prevention injunction a civil order
• Police direction power a power to direct any individual away from a specified place
• Community protection order (level 1) a notice to stop persistent anti-social behaviour that is affecting quality of life in an area
• Community protection order (level 2) a local authority/ police power to restrict use of a property

Eamon Lynch, managing director of the Social Landlords’ Crime and Nuisance Group, said: ‘The Home Office anti-social behaviour unit has just been sliced in half. I don’t know why this has happened right in the middle of major reform – it just seems a very odd time. We have asked for the funding [for these posts] to be continued but this was politely declined.’

The review seeks to reduce the number of powers available to the police and landlords from 18 to just five. Social landlords have been asked to identify ASB ‘hotspots’ as part of the consultation.

According to ‘Inside Housing’ The Home Office refused to comment on personnel issues. A spokesperson said: ‘ASB is a priority for this government as set out in the coalition document and the Home Office business plan.’

By Paul Johns

Multi Agency work success in Newtownards – ASB reports driven down.

 

The council’s ASB team have set up a working partnership with local police to drive ASB complaints down; this initiative has been running for three years, with tenan reaping the benefits of this joint work. The team sits within the police station for two shifts a week and all weekend; the neighbourhood officers aren’t in uniform and respond to local residents calls of concerns, along with police action when needed. Even though the council’s ASB team and police work from different legislation and laws, everyone is still achieving their goal; to decrease ASB.

Let’s look at some stats– reports of ASB have fallen by nearly a third in Newtownards, County Durham since the initiative. In a local police partnership survey, 40% of people said ASB was their main concern. Over the past three years ASB reports have fallen by 28%, and 7% of that in last year.

Reportedly this has had a positive impact on the community and has been supported by local residents; both police and the neighbourhood officers have good rapport with groups of young people who hang about, this is a brilliant reflection of the partnership work and joint up thinking between agencies.

Once more, we’d love to hear how you are working together in your communities.

By Kate Hill

Breaking down the findings of the HMIC ASB review

Over the past three years there have been several high-profile cases (Garry Newlove: Warrington, Fiona Pilkington: Leicester, David Askew: Manchester) where the failure to tackle anti-social behaviour (ASB) has led to tragic consequences. This has led to Her Majesties Inspectorate of Constabularies to review the defining of ASB.

HMIC said that the extent of ASB should not be underestimated and remains one of the public’s top concerns when it comes to crime and disorder. It is estimated that the public only report just over a quarter of incidents of ASB to the police – about 28%. Even this low reporting rate led to around 3.5 million calls to police in 2009-10. By the way of comparison, around 4.3 million crimes were recorded in the same period.

 Whilst the level of reported ASB varies around the country, it is a problem that has an impact everywhere. Through extensive research, supported by MORI and Cardiff University, HMIC has identified systemic problems which affect the current strategy for dealing with ASB. These include:

• A lack of understanding of the intensity of harm to communities and vulnerable individuals caused by ASB.
• The lack of a comprehensive knowledge base of ‘what works’ for police and partners in stopping this problem.
•  Uncertainty about what priority to give ASB and what the police are seeking to achieve.

Defining ASB

Anti social behaviour means different things to different people and organisations.

For victims of ASB, the experience tends to be a cumulative, corrosive issue that undermines their ability to live in peace. Those who suffer ASB experience varied levels of harm. But in nearly all cases, repeat victims experience far higher levels of impact, which is exacerbated again if they have a disability or ill-health.

For some agencies the problem is ASB’s lack of precise definition. For others, it is the confusing overlap of matters that clearly qualify as ASB, but also as crime, such as litter and vandalism.

The reality is that ASB is a mixed bag of crime and disorder with their precursor, rowdy behaviour, being the overwhelming majority of reported events.

The public draw no meaningful distinction between crime and ASB. They exist on the same spectrum of bad or very bad behaviour. The public find it immaterial that the most insidious incidents of ‘pestering’, ‘taunting’ or ‘targeting’ individuals – including the most vulnerable – may not qualify technically as “crimes” with a prospect of prosecution. They dislike ASB, worry about reporting it, and are intimidated in significant numbers when they do.

However, for some people in policing (and some outside), dealing with issues that qualify as crime is ‘real police work’. After all, for almost 20 years the police record of accomplishment and failure has been expressed strongly, in terms of crime statistics. Meanwhile, the “non-qualifying” ASB issue, and its variants, that signal lack of control on our streets, have grown and evolved in intensity and harm.

Risk

There are four factors, any one of which indicates significant risk when ASB is involved. If they appear together, considerable problems may be present.

They are:

1. Repeat victims
2. Illness and disability
3. People who are at home for lengthy periods
4. Areas of particular deprivation

Partnerships

In looking at partnerships, there were some worrying indications that some partnerships were much less effective than accepted wisdom would have it. Checks were undertaken on the progress of a number of cases in a sample of Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs) across the country. They appear to indicate:

• Standards of service were significantly variable, with some delivering only marginal benefits.
• Some partnerships were focussed on working together, not working for the public.
• Some focus on strategy rather than delivery.
• Many interventions took significant amounts of time to be delivered.
• An escalation of interventions, coupled with a culture of meetings, meant that some problems were not gripped and as a result victimization continued.
• The focus in many was on the strategy and process rather than the victim’s experience.
• There was little in the way of testing the value for money in approaches undertaken.

What HMIC perceived as working

• Identifying repeat and vulnerable victims
• Attending and taking any timely action
• Briefing appropriate staff on the nature and impact of problems
• Understanding and analysing the problem

What HMIC perceived as not working

• Being treated as low priority when making a call

• Long-term “partnership” solutions to problems that are causing harm now

What HMIC thinks should be done

• Publish accessible and comparable data on ASB
• Review Graded Response – especially where systems do not readily identify repeat callers
• Urgently review outcomes being achieved by CSPs for victims and the timeliness in which they act
• Focus on what works and what doesn’t
• Take account of the impact of slow or no action
• Early Intervention – focus on repeats

What ReACT is doing

ReACT have embraced these changes by releasing ReACT 3.5 which includes the ability to record the HMIC Case Definitions and also to record risk assessments to identify vulnerability. For further details, please contact the ReACT Team on 0121 384 2513

Information taken from HMIC’s ‘Stop the Rot’

By Paul Johns

The new approach to handling complaints of ASB

The police want to share ASB information - but how? (Image by yabokz via Flickr)

Having now attended two SLCNG Regional Meetings (Wales and Midlands) where senior police officers gave presentations on their intentions for call handling from 1^st April, I am greatly heartened by what I heard.

Most readers will know that the Home Office has selected eight police forces to trial a new method of receiving and recording complaints of ASB with an emphasis on identifying vulnerable people. As part of these pilots, which will run for 3 months, the existing definitions will be reduced to just 3 – Personal threat (individual), Nuisance (community) and Environmental. The identification of vulnerable people, both victims and perpetrators, will be a priority and arranging support where appropriate, will be initiated. The police will also be expected to carry out proper investigations rather than just drive around and report “no contact”. It is to their credit that the police are actually saying that they have got it wrong in the past, mainly due to the target driven policing policy which existed not so long ago.

Police call handlers and response officers are to be trained in the new ways and there is a commitment to the sharing of information with partners, including social housing landlords. In my opinion, here lies a problem. Firstly there is no mechanism for the proper sharing of important information between the various agencies; most police are unaware of the role of social landlords in dealing with ASB and there is criticism of the way in which many CDRPs operate –  most with no meaningful input from social landlords. The police also acknowledge that there are major hurdles to overcome with data protection.

The police say they need to find a way to share information and look to IT suppliers for the answer with a national database of people vulnerable because of ASB. Let’s get real – the chances of this happening are NIL!

Budgets are so tight or non-existent and most local authorities and housing associations already have systems in place and will not take kindly to being forced into changing or entering the same information twice. What’s needed is integration between existing systems to identify the vulnerable and with current technology this must, surely, be worth investigating. This will, of course, mean that IT suppliers will need to work together to find a workable solution – I think we should play our part and grasp the nettle!

By Mike Blomer

Positive police action- sharing good practice

Image via Wikipedia

As we all know there has been hype about front line police officers taking more responsibility to tackle ASB alongside housing practitioners; the question is, when will this materialise and how will the collaboration work amongst agencies. Although there are a lot of whispers flying around about the set up, I would like to draw on a positive, innovative way a certain sergeant has been tackling ASB.

A sergeant from Cornwall is working on the idea that youths can help themselves stay out of trouble by taking responsibility for their actions and preventing incidents happening in the first place. Sergeant Dave Ainsley’s initiative is all about integration in to communities, bringing a sense of belonging through fun activities. Dave Ainsley says: “When a child says there is nothing to do in their community it is proof that they are not fully involved with their neighbourhood – if they were they wouldn’t say that”.

Dave believes giving children the opportunity to realise their own potential is a far more effective than preempting what they want to do. Initiatives like street dancing have been a huge success in Cornwall; Dave has seen massive changes in the 21 years he’s worked for the police.

Another positive action is the reintroduction of the Cadet’s; some say that people have lost all respect for police, but youths working so closely with the police realise how much they do – Police Cadet Tamsin Aimable says: “It makes you realise that the police aren’t just out there to tell you off. They’re there to help you and work with you.

Dave Ainsley will be speaking all about his work and initiatives at the European Council‘s expert conference in Strasbourg next month – it is important to shout about the excellent work that’s being done and to share thoughts. As we approach working on the ‘Local Deal’, I’m sure there are so many more initiatives like this happening throughout the UK already – it would be great to hear about the work you are doing and whether anyone has good practice to share about working together with the police in tackling ASB together.

For full details on Dave Ainsley work, please visit BBC Local.

By Kate Hill