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

ReACT and the ASB Review: see the video

We had a thought-provoking webinar on Monday, covering the implications of the ASB Review with Peter Jackson from Social Landlords Crime & Nusiance Group. In just under an hour, Peter set out the history and reasoning behind the review, together with the likely outcomes and impact on the housing sector. We also had the chance to hear about the future of the Respect Standard – something our audience voted overwhelmingly to keep! It was an excellent session, as one of our delegates, Clive Ledner, commented afterwards:

“I attend a lot of briefings and seminars on the subject of ASB and am highly conscious of the amount of time I’m away from the office (and the cost involved in travel). To be able to attend an informative briefing like this, without having to leave the comfort of my desk, is invaluable.

I had previously only scanned over the proposals after reading the bullet points. After hearing more detail from Peter Jackson on the implications of some of the new tools, e.g. losing the power of arrest and link to ‘interfering with the management function’ proposals for Crime Prevention Injunctions, it’s made me look at the proposals more closely with a view to feeding back on the Government consultation.” Clive Ledner, Accent Foundation

You can view our recording of “ReACT and the ASB Review”  or download the slides, free of charge.

ReACT’s risk assessment webinar

By now, you will know how ASB recording is changing – but what impact will it have on your systems and processes?

On Tuesday 22nd February, we will answer that question. Our expert consultant, Paul Johns, will be covering the new categorisations and the changes we have made to ReACT as a result.

See the recorded webinar

By Natalie Phillips

Respice Prospice (or, “learn from the past to look to the future”)

As this is the final blog post of 2010 I thought that it would be a good opportunity to look at the past twelve months and into the next twelve months.

Respice

Over the past year we have had a promising uptake in new ReACT users despite the difficult financial climate that we are all going through and also the uncertainty of the future of tackling anti-social behaviour caused by the change of Government.

In terms of support, it is fair to say support numbers have increased this year, with new customers joining us and with the release of ReACT v3.4. With the development of ReACT 4 well underway we will be eradicating the previous application issues that have arisen in the past, to provide an enhanced, more efficient and robust platform.

We also had a new member join our support team in September, Craig Bryan, who has helped us to manage the support cases more effectively, ultimately resulting in the issues being resolved in a shorter amount of time and allowing us to feedback case progression.

In October we held our annual User Group meetings in Birmingham and London which is an invaluable way for us to receive honest feedback from our current user base and also an ideal opportunity for users to bounce ideas and suggestions off each other in terms of how they use ReACT and also in terms of methods of dealing with and recording Anti Social Behaviour in general.

You can see the results of the user group meetings in the ReACT User Group Meetings 2010 – findings blog.

To ensure that we act upon the feedback received at the user groups, each member of the ReACT team have scheduled a winter task list. 

This includes but is not limited to the following items …

Re-launch of the User Forum

To enable ReACT and ReSOLVE users to raise questions and discuss suggestions with other users within an internet-based forum.

Re-write user manuals, and make them downloadable from the ReACT and ReSOLVE website

To help new users to learn the basics of ReACT and ReSOLVE as well as to refresh super user’s memory of some administration features in ReACT and ReSOLVE which are not used very regularly.

Create a library for all reports

Many users would like to see which bespoke reports have previously been developed and be able to add them to their own system; we are currently developing a list of these reports as well as instructions on how administrators can add them into their system.

 Prospice

Moving into the future and looking ahead into 2011 we have put together a schedule of events which the ReACT team will be attending, webinars to help to spread the knowledge amongst the ReACT user base, as well as our development road plan to ensure that the product continues to adapt and meet the continuing change in demand to fit in with ASB working practices and meet the needs of our customers.  This includes the introduction of a Risk Assessment Matrix and version 4 of ReACT which is a complete re-write of the application to give the product a fresh new look and more importantly to ensure that the system functions exactly as expected in time, every time.  The schedule for 2011 will be published and made available to all of our users and prospects soon.

That’s all for now and just leaves me time to wish all of our user base and blog readers a very Merry Christmas and a happy new year for 2011. 

At this point we should also remind our customers that the office is closed over the Christmas break from 25^th December 2010 until 3^rd January inclusive.

What does the future hold for tackling ASB?

Low level anti-social behaviour, such as graffiti, form the majority of complaints. How will they be dealt with in the future? (Image by ukslim via Flickr)

By Mike Blomer

Given the unprecedented number of Government announcements on future changes to the way social housing landlords are expected to deal with anti social behaviour, it is no wonder that practitioners are getting in a bit of a tizzy.

From what I have seen, the majority view the proposed abolition of ASBOs with favour, believing they have outlived their usefulness, and that there are more effective tools available to deal with serious cases.

 I am also encouraged by the greater emphasis on identifying the risk of harm – not only to victims of anti social behaviour – but also, potentially, to witnesses and even perpetrators. At a recent CIH conference (Landlords Tools and Powers to Tackle ASB – 5^th August 2010), Chief Inspector Jim Baker explained the new policy of West Mercia Police on how complaints are to be dealt with. In particular, they are identifying the risk, impact, harm and vulnerability of people who become involved in complaints, in whatever capacity. Can we take heart from the fact that Paul West, Chief Constable of West Mercia Police is the ACPO spokesman on ASB and that the initiatives introduced in his area will be replicated nationally?

Meanwhile the pilot projects on the sharing of information continue and the Police Reform and Responsibility Bill is now out for consultation. Note that the consultation period has been restricted to just 8 weeks and covers a substantial part of the main holiday period.

CIH Event – Landlords Tools and Powers to Tackle ASB

 Held at the new CIH meeting, training and conference facility in Grays Inn Road London the event was sold out with some 50 delegates hearing from SLCNG, TSA, Audit Commission, HouseMark and presentations from West Mercia Police, Buckles Solicitors, Poplar HARCA and New Charter Housing.

We are all waiting to learn what our new Government has in store in respect of ASB but in the meantime it’s business as usual. TSA is actively promoting the ASB Action Squad and Local Partnerships, whilst the Audit Commission covered the new inspection framework and hot topics such as the impact of recession, tenancy fraud, the respect standard, dangerous dogs and policing.

For me the highlight was the presentation from a senior officer of West Mercia Police, beginning with an admission that the police service nationally has failed to give the attention to ASB that it deserves and requires. It was heartening to hear that ACPO and HM Inspectorate of Constabulary are now majoring on the problem of definition, the context of ASB and vulnerability within modern policing and recognising the challenges.

West Mercia is taking a lead in protecting vulnerable people with a pilot scheme running in their North Worcestershire Division and working with local landlord Community Housing Group. This includes trialing the Risk Assessment Matrix currently being promoted by the Home Office.  In due course, this could become a recommended national standard with a requirement that information is shared between all partners.

Lets us hope that it happens and the initiative is not lost in Government cost saving measures.