British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

HMIC Inspection Report

British Transport Police

November 2007
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

ISBN: 978-1-84786-019-2

CROWN COPYRIGHT

FIRST PUBLISHED 2007

 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

Contents
Introduction to HMIC Inspections

Programmed frameworks
Risk-based frameworks
The grading process
Developing practice

Inspection overview and context

Geographical description of force area

Demographic profile of force area
Strategic priorities
Force developments since 2006 inspection

Findings
Performance Management
Protecting Vulnerable People – Overview
Contact Management

Recommendations

Appendix: Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

Introduction to HMIC Inspections

For a century and a half, Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) has been
charged with examining and improving the efficiency of the police service in England and
Wales, with the first HM Inspectors (HMIs) being appointed under the provisions of the
County and Borough Police Act 1856. In 1962, the Royal Commission on the Police formally
acknowledged HMIC’s contribution to policing.

HMIs are appointed by the Crown on the recommendation of the Home Secretary and
report to HM Chief Inspector of Constabulary, who is the Home Secretary’s principal
professional policing adviser and is independent both of the Home Office and of the police
service. HMIC’s principal statutory duties are set out in the Police Act 1996. For more
information, please visit HMIC’s website at http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmic/.

In 2006, HMIC conducted a broad assessment of all 43 Home Office police forces in
England and Wales and, in addition, of the British Transport Police (BTP). This baseline
assessment had followed a similar process in 2005 and has thus created a rich evidence
base of strengths and weaknesses across the country. However, it is now necessary for
HMIC to focus its inspection effort on those areas of policing that are not data-rich and
where qualitative assessment is the only feasible way of judging both current performance
and the prospects for improvement. This, together with the critical factor that HMIC should
concentrate its scrutiny on high-risk areas of policing – in terms of risk both to the public and
to the service’s reputation – pointed inexorably to a focus on what are known collectively as
‘protective services’. In addition, there is a need to apply professional judgement to some
key aspects of leadership and governance, where some quantitative measures exist but a
more rounded assessment is appropriate.

Having reached this view internally, HMIC then consulted key stakeholders, including the
Home Office, the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) and the Association of Police
Authorities (APA). A consensus emerged that HMIC could add greater value by undertaking
fewer but more probing inspections. Stakeholders concurred with the emphasis on
protective services but requested that Neighbourhood Policing remain a priority for
inspection until there is evidence that it has been embedded in everyday police work. BTP’s
unique operating environment necessitated further work with HMIC to determine the exact
scope of inspection for each framework.

HMIC uses a rigorous and transparent methodology to conduct its inspections and reach
conclusions and judgements. All evidence was gathered, verified and then assessed
against an agreed set of national standards, in the form of specific grading criteria (SGC).
However, the main purpose of inspection is not to make judgements but to drive
improvements in policing. Both professional and lay readers are urged, therefore, to focus
not on the headline grades but on the opportunities for improvement identified within the text
of this report.

Programmed frameworks
This report contains assessments of two of the first three key areas of policing to be
inspected under HMIC’s new programme of work:

1. performance management; and

2. protecting vulnerable people.

This report also incorporates the 2007 reassessment of contact management in BTP which
had received a ‘poor’ grading from the 2006 baseline assessment.

Page 1
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

The third key area for national assessment was Neighbourhood Policing, not only because it
is a key government priority but also, more importantly, it is a style of policing that is rooted
in and responds to local concerns. The police service must, of course, offer protection from
high-level threats such as terrorism and organised criminality, but it also has a key role in
tackling the unacceptable behaviour of the minority of people who threaten the quality of life
of law-abiding citizens. Neighbourhood Policing was implemented in BTP at a later stage
than in the rest of England and Wales, the reasons for which are enshrined in funding
mechanisms and the need for clarity in the definition of ‘neighbourhood’, given BTP’s
operating environment and context. As such, in consultation with BTP, HMIC will delay its
assessment of Neighbourhood Policing until February 2008.

Performance management is an activity largely hidden from public view, although members
of the travelling public are directly affected by poor performance on the part of BTP as the
national force for the railways. This inspection has focused on the need for forces to
maximise the opportunities for performance improvement and has also posed questions as
to whether BTP has an accurate picture of how it is performing and the capability to respond
to changing priorities. This area was selected for inspection because it is a key factor in
delivering good performance across the board.

Protecting vulnerable people covers four related areas – child abuse, domestic violence,
public protection and missing persons – that address the critically important role of the
police in protecting the public from potentially serious harm. In the 2006 baseline
assessment this was the worst performing area nationally and raised the most serious
concerns for HMIC and others. As a result, this area was prioritised for scrutiny in 2007.

BTP has a key role within these frameworks to ensure that structures, systems and
processes are in place for sharing intelligence, responding to an initial incident and
preparing an investigation package for a Home Office force.

Risk-based frameworks
In addition to its programmed inspection work, HMIC continues to monitor performance
across a range of policing activity. In respect of HMIC activity within BTP, this will take into
account the issues highlighted by BTP’s own risk assessment framework in tandem with the
ongoing national assessment programme.

The grading process

Grades awarded by HMIC are a reflection of the performance delivery by the force over the
assessment period April 2006 to July 2007 One of four grades can be awarded, according
to performance assessed against the SGC (see full list of SGCs at
http://inspectorates.homeoffice.gov.uk/hmic/methodologies/baseline-introduction/ba-
methodology-06/?version=1).

Excellent

This grade describes the highest level of performance in service delivery and achieving full
compliance with codes of practice or national guidance. It is expected that few forces will
achieve this very high standard for a given activity. To achieve Excellent, forces are
expected to meet all of the criteria set out in the Fair SCG and the vast majority of those set
out in Good. In addition, two other factors will attract consideration of an Excellent grade:
¾ The force should be recognised, or be able to act, as a ‘beacon’ to others, and be
accepted within the service as a source of leading-edge practice. Evidence that
other forces have successfully imported practices would demonstrate this.

Page 2
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

¾ HMIC is committed to supporting innovation and we would expect Excellent forces to

have introduced and evaluated new ways of delivering or improving performance.
Good

Good is defined in the Collins English Dictionary as ‘of a high quality or level’ and denotes
performance above the minimum standard. To reach this level, forces have to meet in full
the criteria set out in Fair and most of the criteria set out in Good.

Fair

Fair is the delivery of an acceptable level of service. To achieve a Fair grading, forces must
achieve all of the significant criteria set out in the Fair SGC. HMIC would expect that, across
most activities, the largest number of grades would be awarded at this level.

Poor

Poor represents an unacceptable level of service. To attract this very critical grade, a force
must have fallen well short of a significant number of criteria set out in the SGC for Fair. In
some cases, failure to achieve a single critical criterion may alone warrant a Poor grade.
Such dominant criteria will always be flagged in the SGC.

Developing practice
In addition to assessing force performance, one of HMIC’s key roles is to identify and share
good practice within the police service. Much good practice is identified as HMIC conducts
its assessments; in addition, each force is given the opportunity to submit examples of its
good practice. HMIC has selected an example to publish in this report. The key criteria for
examples are that the work has been evaluated by the force and the good practice is easily
transferable to other forces. (Each force has provided a contact name and telephone
number, should further information be required.) HMIC has not conducted any independent
evaluation of the examples of good practice provided.

Page 3
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

Inspection Overview and Context

As a non-Home Office force, BTP differs significantly from Home Office forces in terms of
funding, accountability and specialisation, although the force strives to observe relevant
Home Office policing standards. HMIC regards BTP as a specialist police force for which
some nationally accepted performance measures are applicable but recognises that other
measures are relevant only to the force, such as timeliness of investigations for fatal railway
incidents. A customised approach to this assessment has therefore been agreed with BTP
and the British Transport Police Authority (BTPA) to take these differences into account.
With reference to Phase 1 of the 2007/08 inspection process, BTP will defer inspection of
implementation of its Neighbourhood Policing measures until February 2008 and has
identified which of the criteria from the protecting vulnerable people framework relate to BTP
activity and against which HMIC inspection activity has been undertaken. This report also
incorporates the HMIC reassessment of the contact management framework in 2007, which
had received a ‘poor’ grading in 2006.

Since the privatisation of the rail network, government policy has been that the user (the
railway industry) pays for the services of BTP and that BTPA enters into commercial
agreements with the rail industry for the provision of police services. BTP relies on funding
by Network Rail, the train and freight operating companies (TOCs and FOCs), Transport for
London and London Underground Ltd. This is a challenge for a modern police force that
relies on commercial profit margins and the marketplace for the funding required for medium
and long-term planning, and this has been a concern raised by HMIC for a number of years.

Geographical description of force area

BTP is the national police force for the railways and also provides the policing services for
the London Underground, Eurostar, the Channel Tunnel Rail Link, the Docklands Light
Railway, the Croydon Tramlink and the Midland Metro. BTP’s national structure takes into
account national borders, discrete legal systems, TOC and FOC boundaries and other
diverse elements of the railway network. It is not constrained by the geographical
boundaries of other police forces and covers the whole policing environment of the rail
network, including assistance for businesses and individuals who operate, live and work in
the surrounding areas. This structure is designed to provide a single point of contact and
consistency in policing standards across the railway network. There are seven territorial
basic command units, known as areas, and the HQ is in Camden, north London.

Demographic profile of force area

With over 10,000 miles of track and more than 2,500 stations, the population BTP serves is
mainly commercial, including 2.5 million passengers daily on the national rail system and
another 3 million daily on the London Underground and Docklands Light Railway networks.
Some 400,000 tonnes of freight travel through or visit premises within BTP’s jurisdiction
daily. The growth in public transport and the expansion of the 24-hour city culture means
that BTP polices economic and social hubs throughout mainland Britain, made up of small
communities of general retail outlets, offices, restaurants, bars and nightclubs. The force
does not police a residential population, but is charged on a daily basis with the safety of
some 5 million passengers and in excess of 100,000 railway staff. With 2,813 police officers
and 1,133 police staff, 254 police community support officers and 248 special constables,
BTP faces a significant challenge in policing a diverse and extensive rail network.

Strategic priorities
BTP focuses on five objectives set in the strategic plan for 2005–08. These are to:

Page 4
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

• work with partners and the railway community to prevent crime by tackling the
causes of crime, as well as dealing with crime incidents;

• investigate all aspects of a crime and to satisfy the needs of victims and witnesses.
BTP aims to undertake investigations that are efficient, effective and timely, in order
to increase the number of detections and the number of offenders brought to justice,
and to increase the overall detection rate to a level that is above the average for
Home Office police forces;

• increase the trust and confidence of the railway community and the travelling public
by working in partnership with others to make the railway a safe environment for all;

• respond to incidents in a way that meets the needs of the railway community and the
travelling public and takes into account local priorities; and

• make the most effective use of its people, supported by timely and accurate financial
information to aid operational decision making, sustained by the use of sound
information and communications technology (ICT).

Underpinning delivery of BTP’s strategic objectives is the creation of a more diverse

workforce. The force has long-term targets to increase the percentage of staff from black
and minority ethnic backgrounds and to improve gender representation, both in the wider
police officer population and in specialist posts, to levels that at least match the national
average for Home Office police forces.

Force developments since 2006 inspection

The outcome of the Department for Transport (DfT) review of BTP in 2006 has been a key
driver for action within the force and police authority since the 2006 inspection. The DfT
decision to retain BTP as the national specialist police force for the railways and to refocus
the force within its existing structural format ended a protracted period of uncertainty, during
which the force underwent four major reviews in as many years. However, the review did
identify a need for greater clarity about detailed aspects of BTP’s operation in relation to its
responsibilities to the rail industry, the rail industry’s own duties and the role of local police
forces. It also sought to ensure that the force’s resources are focused on areas where BTP
can provide maximum added value to the fight against crime on the railways. A more
structured partnership approach between the force and the rail industry was advocated, one
that focuses on agreed needs and priorities. The DfT also ratified existing work to develop
Neighbourhood Policing as a tailored means of meeting the more specialised needs of the
BTP community.

BTP consulted widely with partners and stakeholders to position its refocus within the
parameters of what had been prescribed by DfT and responded to the review outcome by
concentrating on the needs of its customers. The force continues to build on its commercial
awareness of the railway environment, working in partnership with the industry. It has
investigated ways of promoting partnership activity, including the setting up of joint
objectives with the railway industry to engender a commitment to improved communication
from both sides. A number of changes have also been implemented internally:
• the tasking and co-ordination process is now more formalised to facilitate regular
attendance by delegates from the rail industry;
• the mechanisms for constructing the annual policing plan incorporate a series of
meetings with the TOCs at an early stage to discuss high-level performance and
determine objectives;
Page 5
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

• the objectives are now organised in three tiers that retain corporacy but also
accommodate local flexibility and stakeholder consultation and input;
• police officers of inspecting rank are formally placed within major TOCs so that the
force can better understand rail industry business and its input to policing the
railways;
• TOC questions feature within BTP surveys, outcomes of which are used to drive
improvement; and
• there is TOC representation at local performance management process level and
through the BTPA at the force level.

The start of a new BTP strategic plan 2008–11 with rail industry participation is a significant
opportunity for the force to progress work in the refocusing arena.

Page 6
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

Findings

Performance Management GRADE GOOD

Contextual factors
The outcome of the DfT review provided significant opportunities to develop the area of
performance management with partners and stakeholders. This has yielded some
innovative work in planning and target setting that takes account of BTP’s national
perspective, stakeholder and partner input and the requirement for corporacy and
consistency alongside the flexibility to accommodate local needs.

BTP continues to develop a risk-based methodology for its audit and inspection processes
which is being rolled out to areas. Inspection activity is better informed by enhanced risk
management structures and a high-level performance analysis process that has replaced
the strategic business assessment. An area of significant development over the last year
has been in the use of BTP-commissioned survey data – which now incorporate TOC
questions – through the establishment of a survey unit to drive the consultation strategy and
identify operational issues.

There is an overall focus on developing the quality aspect of performance measures while
HQ departments are working to develop meaningful performance measures that best
quantify their contribution to BTP objectives.

Areas have developed their own performance management processes that meet local and
TOC needs, eg TOPS in the North Eastern Area and Compstat in the London Underground.
Using the corporate performance data set, there are opportunities to ensure that best
practice from each area is, where appropriate, implemented force-wide to ensure that
performance accountability is fully implemented at all levels.

Strengths
• There is clarity about the vision and strategy for BTP and about roles and
responsibilities for performance at all levels. There are mechanisms to demonstrate
a tangible performance ‘grip’ at ACPO level with chief officer ownership and
involvement, as appropriate, in BTP’s performance review processes. As part of the
ongoing implementation of refocusing measures, partners and stakeholders are
increasingly involved with the strategic and annual planning processes. The chief
officer leadership visits (COLV) process is underpinned by detailed pre-inspection
work that both informs the visit and becomes the basis of an accountable action plan
highlighting areas for improvement.

• BTP monitors comparative data at force, departmental and individual levels to

benchmark its own performance and, where appropriate, that of Home Office forces
in order to drive improvement. Performance information is now more available to
staff than it has ever been. Criminal justice performance information, in particular,
has improved significantly within the past year: from data in a variety of formats
provided by individual areas, to a system that is more corporate and accessible to all
staff. Counter-terrorism performance on bomb threats is now also automated with
the implementation of new information technology.

• BTP has developed a risk-based approach to audit and inspection themes based on
the HMIC FLINT methodology. Inspection themes are now determined through the
objective application of a suite of indicators such as HMIC assessments, external

Page 7
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

audits, national thematic publications and COLV performance analysis and

outcomes.

• BTP has implemented a new system for setting targets for 2008/09, comprised of
three distinct tiers: common targets for corporate objectives, eg fatalities; common
objectives with local targets to take account of a range of performance in different
BTP areas, eg staff assaults; and local objectives with local targets, eg different sets
of problems at railway stations.

• There is an effective corporate governance structure with clear authority levels for
decision making on matters of strategy and policy through such vehicles as the chief
officer group, the corporate assurance group, the programme management board
and the strategic projects review panel. These and other structures incorporate the
BTPA through its committee structure.

• There is full and constructive engagement between the force and the BTPA, with
appropriate support to facilitate the discharge of its statutory responsibilities. The
BTPA is fully involved with planning, target-setting and performance monitoring and
reports a significant improvement in its expertise in individual portfolio areas. It has
full access to a greatly improved suite of BTP data and is being assisted by the force
in the development of its own global performance management regime. BTPA
members are invited to patrol and conduct area visits and receive presentations to
operationalise BTP concepts.

• Policing plans and priorities are informed by feedback from service users through
early engagement and consultation with TOCs, passenger focus groups, police
sector commanders and Neighbourhood Policing priority-setting processes on an
annual basis and more regularly through partner and stakeholder participation in
tasking meetings. The outcomes of survey data analysis are also used to influence
plans and priorities.

• BTP has an established programme board structure to manage key projects and a
project management office capability that reviews projects before, during and after
implementation to ensure that lessons learnt are integrated into force policy and
practice.

• There is evidence to support the impact of public survey data on BTP policy. The
force has made significant advances in its use of survey data through the
establishment of a survey unit to drive the consultation strategy and identify
operational issues. The expertise within the survey unit drives sophisticated
analyses of data to predict trends, and of free text comments to understand the
factors that drive outcomes. The force is also working collaboratively with the
universities of Surrey and Glamorgan and other police forces, such as the City of
London police, on survey research work. BTP surveys are now included on TOC
websites and incorporate TOC questions.

• The Audit Commission’s review of the statutory requirement for the victims of crime
and anti-social behaviour surveys rated BTP’s arrangements as ‘excellent’.

• There has been significant progress in fully incorporating the corporate governance
and risk management structures into BTP business. Risk is now managed locally
through a risk register that informs priorities and plans and is routinely fed into the
central risk register.

Page 8
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

Work in progress
• A performance ethos is ingrained in all ranks and grades of BTP staff, but the formal
structures associated with accountability are less evident at the front-line service
delivery level. The force’s higher-level performance management and accountability
processes are well established and could be used in the development of a
performance management template for areas and departments that hold staff to
account at all levels.

• There is evidence of the development and implementation of pervasive performance

management and accountability frameworks in some parts of BTP, eg Compstat and
TOPS, which also highlight and spread good practice. The force has yet to fully
exploit opportunities to harness the learning from these processes and promulgate it
force-wide.

• BTP has developed a risk-based approach to assessment and inspection at the

force level through the use of the FLINT database – developed by HMIC – but
acknowledges that this approach is not as advanced in individual areas. BTP has
plans to address this issue during the forthcoming year through area-based contacts
who will be responsible for uploading area FLINT input into the central assessment
and inspection unit database on a monthly basis.

• The force is working to develop quality performance measures that complement the
existing suite of quantitative measures, especially in respect of survey outcomes,
which are now analysed for free text comments, and in areas such as witness care
and quality of service drivers.

• The force is in the early stage of developing meaningful performance indicators and
measures for HQ departments to match those that exist on areas – in order to
quantify their contribution towards force performance.

• There is integration of human resource (HR) and finance strategies with the
corporate strategy but since the baseline assessment little progress has been made
in representing these functions at policing plan and lower levels. BTP has made
some progress with integrating finance, ICT and HR with performance at the board
level, eg the HR training board, which has performance input from the deputy chief
constable and an operationally credible and experienced police officer lead.

• BTP has ceased production of the strategic business assessment as it was no

longer considered necessary to determine high-level priorities. It has been replaced
by a performance analysis process that determines priorities for inspection and audit
but necessarily involves high-level strategic analysis and use of the horizon-
scanning function. ACPO leads are responsible for determining strategic priorities
through dialogue with each of their portfolio areas and, through the weekly chief
officer group structure, the Chief Constable heads themed days to discuss key
issues highlighted by the National Intelligence Model (NIM) process. The force
needs to reassure itself that these various strands of work are sufficiently co-
ordinated and cohesive to create a strategic planning framework that also allows for
the resolution of any potential tensions arising from priorities.

• The programme of work determined by the outcome of the efficiency strategy review
and driven by the director of finance has continued into 2007. The use of B-Plan
software for activity analysis will facilitate the costing of activity to an individual level.

Page 9
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

• The performance development review (PDR) is still viewed by many staff as

meaningless and bureaucratic and the quality of objectives and reporting is best
described as ‘patchy’. Over the past year, the force has undertaken much work on
the effectiveness of the PDR process in order to address these issues and a new
policy and a more quality-oriented template have been launched. The cultural shift
necessary to make the PDR an effective management and development tool will,
however, take considerably more time.

• The force has been working on the development of a framework for departmental
commendations, in order to invoke corporacy in the way it recognises good work,
and has implemented policy on awards. Good news stories are also a standing
agenda item for the force management team. Some staff are not yet familiar with this
process.

Areas for improvement

• Although it is clear that a performance culture has evolved within BTP, there is no
overarching, cohesive, accountable, documented performance framework.

RECOMMENDATION 1
That the British Transport Police constructs a performance management
framework that sets out the key performance accountabilities, systems and
products across the force, while reflecting the principles within the joint ACPO,
HMIC, APA, Police Superintendents’ Association of England and Wales and
Home Office publication, Managing Police Performance.

• There is recognition within BTP of the scope and potential for organisational learning
and for promulgating good practice from the plethora of new structures and
processes that have been implemented or which have evolved over the last two
years. The determination of performance measures, the establishment of a
management information (MI) capability for support functions and the evaluation of
different styles of performance-monitoring processes on areas are just some
examples of how existing learning has the potential to drive improvement in the way
BTP does business.

RECOMMENDATION 2
That the British Transport Police devises a corporate mechanism to ensure that
organisational learning within its structures and processes is appropriately
harnessed, promulgated and utilised to drive improvement.

• An MI capability is being established across the force, particularly in respect of HQ

functions such as counter-terrorism, but there is little co-ordination between it and
the central MI repository. Such cohesion is necessary to ensure that MI, although not
necessarily corporate in content, is sufficiently corporate in style and approach to
facilitate benchmarking, to promulgate good practice and to drive decision making
and performance.

• The force has undertaken a series of efficiency reviews by department – these are
ongoing – and has reviewed the distribution of its resources using data from the
BTPA charging model and other indices. This work has set the baseline for
areas/departments and will be largely autonomous in respect of resource allocation,

Page 10
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

with the exception of a 2% top-slice from each baseline budget to fund new projects
and drive efficiencies. Nevertheless, there is no structured formula or methodology
for determining/reviewing the allocation of resources that can be applied on a regular
basis.

Page 11
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

Developing Practice
INSPECTION AREA: Performance management

TITLE: BTP London Underground Area: Compstat

PROBLEM:

The area identified a lack of strong police focus on reducing crime levels, linked to a lack of
active use of performance information to hold sector commanders and officers in charge to
account for their effectiveness. Moreover, a forum was needed for structured engagement
with industry and community stakeholders concerned with management information.

SOLUTION:

Compstat (computerised statistics) is a weekly performance review in two halves.

Part one – monitoring of performance and issues across sectors. Key members of staff from
all functions are briefed on new or emerging issues and trends and performance is reviewed
on a sector basis. Crimes and trends for the previous 28 days are reviewed with the focus
on the previous 7 days’ activity. Debate on performance and problem solving encourages
innovation and the spread of good practice.

Part two – detailed performance scrutiny of one of the eight London Underground areas. All
major stakeholders are invited, including group station managers, train operating managers,
line controllers and the Metropolitan Police Service transport operational command unit, and
receive a presentation of activity and operations in the preceding eight weeks. The group
stations’ objectives are reviewed and any problems discussed. Part two also includes a
Neighbourhood Policing health check, to ensure that area teams’ efforts are co-ordinated
and effectively linked to existing partnerships. Community groups are represented by an
independent advisory member who is present at every Compstat review to provide
community advice and facilitate a timely response to any community issues.

OUTCOME(S):

A greatly improved data set has been developed to support the process.
• Sector commanders, inspectors and group station managers have an improved and
more detailed awareness of the crime and quality of life problems existing in their
respective areas.
• Railway managers and the community are engaged in directing police activity and
contributing intelligence.
• Compstat meetings provide a forum for improved sector and police station
accountability and responsiveness to crime trends.
• Innovative and flexible tactics are being generated to address crime.

FORCE CONTACT: Superintendent Paul Shrubsole, Performance Directorate, BTP London

Underground Area – 020 7027 8397; paul.shrubsole@btp.pnn.police.uk

Page 12
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

Protecting Vulnerable People – Overview

GRADE NOT GRADED
Contextual factors

This framework has four components: child protection, domestic violence, missing persons
and public protection. The baseline assessment of BTP in 2006 highlighted the force’s
responsibilities in relation to vulnerable people – it should have the capacity to police the
‘golden hour’ of any incident that might lead to an investigation by a Home Office force.
Specifically, this entails having the processes needed to support an initial investigation,
such as intelligence, skills, capability and the relevant partnerships and communication.
Given the links between each of the vulnerability disciplines, intelligence is therefore a key
factor playing a significant part in any preventative and reactive work that BTP might
undertake to ensure that stakeholders in the railway environment feel safe.

There is no doubt that BTP staff are well-versed and experienced in dealing with critical
incidents and that golden hour issues are therefore relatively well ingrained into the
operational response. However, the additional risks presented by issues relating to
vulnerability call for heightened awareness and some basic structure. Inspection activity has
shown that these are not present in all parts of BTP.

One of the key challenges for BTP is to articulate its responsibilities in relation to vulnerable
people and to develop and formalise systems and processes to ensure that such
responsibilities are met. These systems and processes are not currently clear. The force
has selected those components of this framework that apply to its existing activities and will
therefore not be graded in this area. The basis for inspection activity has been evidence-
gathered during the fieldwork phase and supplied by the force. Assessment of these
arrangements in BTP has been based on performance as outlined in the 2006 baseline
assessment.

Generic protecting vulnerable people strengths

• Issues relating to vulnerability are a priority for BTP in that they feature in the
strategic assessment and control strategy. They relate mainly to reducing risks
related to the commission of sexual offences, identifying vulnerable groups of victims
and ViSOR (the Violent Offender and Sex Offender Register) subjects who travel by
rail, and improving intelligence flows from MAPPA (multi-agency public protection
arrangements) and MARAC (multi-agency risk assessment conferencing).

• The force has published policy and guidance for staff dealing with domestic violence,
missing persons and child protection based on the golden hour responses to these
issues. It takes account of ACPO guidance, such as the investigation of child abuse,
safeguarding children and the numbers of staff trained in achieving best evidence.

• There is accountability relating to some areas of vulnerability. Domestic violence, in

particular, is the subject of daily scrutiny at management team level on areas and
management information is used to inform improvement. Given the consistently low
levels of domestic violence dealt with by BTP on an annual basis (241 offences
across the 7 areas between April 2006 and March 2007), there is capacity and
resilience in this process.

• The force has a number of advanced interview-trained officers and officers trained in
sexual offences investigation and child offences investigation who can respond to
initial allegations of child abuse or offences involving children and other vulnerable

Page 13
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

victims. There are dedicated facilities to assist in this type of care and formal
published call-out systems to access the force expertise.

• BTP representatives sit as part of the MAPPA group and provide relevant
information to the force intelligence bureau. There is evidence of information sharing
with other forces – both formally and informally – that recognises and addresses
opportunities for criminality by sex offenders within the railway environment.

• There is some proactivity on vulnerability issues in BTP, such as links to the

Metropolitan Police Service’s Operation Maxim (people trafficking) for which a
Romanian-speaking officer has been deployed in the London Underground Area
intelligence bureau. The influx of eastern European children into London who are
being used to commit large-scale crime has necessitated this approach in order to
remove them from this area of vulnerability, including the identification of a need for
a pan-London response from social services.

Generic protecting vulnerable people work in progress

• The force has identified the need for and is progressing the implementation of
MAPPA-trained officers and a public protection structure on each area. They will
provide a point of contact for public protection issues and develop internal and
external links both for public protection and for other vulnerability disciplines. A field
intelligence officer is deployed centrally to deal with paedophile-related
investigations.

• BTP is working to organise an AWARE (the Metropolitan Police Service intranet

system) data warehouse in the management information and communications centre
(MICC) and a CRIMINT PLUS (the Metropolitan Police intelligence system) input in
order to share information with the Metropolitan Police. There are also points of
contact for the IMPACT database and BTP has access to the Eurostar booking
system.

Generic protecting vulnerable people areas for improvement

• There is little structure relating to issues of vulnerability in BTP. Most incidents are
reported as part of ongoing investigations by Home Office forces and BTP
responsibilities are thus limited to the monitoring of most and the investigation of a
very few offences in comparison. Nevertheless, the inspection found a significant
variation in awareness, knowledge and expertise across the force, eg use of the
domestic violence flag on command and control systems – apart from the use of this
flag there is nothing to distinguish domestic violence from other assaults.
RECOMMENDATION 3
That the British Transport Police articulates its approach to dealing with the
protection of vulnerable people and develops and implements an appropriate
structure that sets out the key accountabilities, systems and products to ensure
a standard and informed response to such issues.

• There is limited evidence of an awareness of links between the vulnerability

disciplines. The inspection revealed a tendency to think of such issues in silos. For
example, the conduct of S18 searches should necessarily involve a heightened
awareness of issues relating to child protection or domestic violence but the lack of
overall awareness among staff means that this generally does not happen.

Page 14
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

RECOMMENDATION 4
That the British Transport Police raises staff awareness of the links between the
various elements of vulnerability in order to ensure that staff and systems are
better informed about these issues and that any investigation package handed
to a Home Office force is of the highest possible quality.

• There are no formal or structured mechanisms to ensure national thematic work,

guidance or good practice on issues relating to vulnerability are promulgated to
areas as part of a corporate and consistent approach to addressing these issues.

• BTP policy and guidance on vulnerability consist primarily of advice relating to

golden hour issues because this is the area for which the force has the greatest
responsibility. There is thus an emphasis on the functions, systems, intelligence and
skills necessary to support an initial investigation. However, the policy also refers to
those very few cases in which BTP is expected to take the lead but offers no further
guidance on how this should be done, eg attendance at child protection
conferences, how to address the care of a victim/witness in a domestic violence or
child protection case or how to participate in a Part 8 review.

• The inspection found evidence that guidance on issues relating to vulnerability was
not applied consistently across the force. Most of the force’s expertise relating to
these issues appeared to be enshrined in the MICC and area control room duty
officer posts. If this is the approach the force is to take, it needs to ensure that there
is corporacy, consistency, sufficient resilience, training development and
succession-planning for this critical role.

• There is no evidence of audit or inspection being incorporated into the mechanisms

to deal with vulnerability in BTP. Although such incidents are few and generally of a
low level, the risks attached to them are significant. At the very least, the force
should be ensuring that the policy and guidance are up to date and applied
consistently, and that compliance is formally dip-sampled.

• Although the force has published policy and guidance on child protection, missing
persons and domestic violence, there is little advice – even for supervisors – on the
high-risk area of public protection apart from the use of the ViSOR system.
Guidance is available to all staff via the force intranet, but it proved extremely
difficult for staff to locate.

• There is no evidence of specialist training for appropriate staff in public protection

issues such as RM2000. There are also no job descriptions for staff involved in
public protection.

• There is no structured approach to the supervision of vulnerability issues. Where

there is supervision, it happens in pockets and is of varying quality.

Page 15
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

Contact Management
GRADE FAIR

Contextual factors
Contact management has historically been an area of concern for BTP. The baseline
assessment in 2005 graded the function as ‘poor/improved’ on the basis of the performance
of the preceding year, although the inspection team acknowledged that the force had
implemented a major project to address the key issues.

Contact management is a priority for BTP with good leadership and intervention by the
assistant chief constable (ACC) (operations) and the implementation of structures to ensure
articulation of the future strategic direction. A comprehensive management framework is
helping to drive performance and every area commander is signed up to a joint
understanding that the contact centre is pivotal to successful performance. This approach
ensures the timely resolution of cross-functional issues.

The contact management function is overseen by a contact management board, which

ensures that the function is mainstreamed into force activity. The strategic drive at ACC
level is underpinned by the appointment of a senior officer to champion the function across
the force on a tactical basis.

Strengths
• There is strong ACPO support for the contact management function, driven by the
Chief Constable. The focused, operationally sighted and driven approach of the ACC
(operations) as the strategic lead is having a positive impact on staff motivation and
performance. In addition, the commitment of area commanders to contact
management has prevented conflict between the operational and contact
management functions and there is a strong ethos of shared accountability. A
regular monthly meeting chaired by the ACC (crime) introduces corporacy into joint
processes through the attendance of representatives from the crime recording
centre, the force control room, the crime management unit, the administration of
justice department and the force intelligence bureau.

• There are robust arrangements for the contact management function, steered by the
relevant board. This structure sits above the baseline actions working group – which
utilises the assessment matrix and good practice guide from the HMIC thematic,
‘First Contact’ – to address areas for improvement and performance issues and
works with all departments involved in contact management.

• The call-handling strategy incorporates the contact centre’s strategic vision and
takes account of both optimising the use of resources within MICCs and
improvements in managing the contact centre and its functions, ownership and
compliance. The strategy is available to staff via the intranet and the force has
recognised the need to ensure that it is communicated to those expected to deliver it
by including the call-handling strategy in the training of all new staff.

• A dedicated team looks at customer service and online internal surveys in order to
address customer satisfaction/quality of service issues and inform user groups. A
quarterly external survey dedicated to the contact management function has also
been devised and despatched.

Page 16
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

• The force has effective processes in place to collate and deal with complaints and
letters of praise from its customers, with an appropriate feedback loop for both the
author and the subject. Results are used to address performance issues.

• The HR manager plays a significant role in contact centre functions and maintains
the link between HR and the contact management portfolio through regular
attendance at operational senior management team and performance management
meetings. Staff have access to training and mentoring as appropriate. The HR unit
has addressed previous succession planning issues in the contact management
centre. A succession planning pilot was undertaken at area level and is being
implemented within the contact management centre to replace the existing
spreadsheet-based system. The new process is considered more robust and offers a
specific career path for contact management.

• The MICC offers improved opportunities for career development and these will also
be offered in the new MICC (North). A Diploma in Police Service Communications
and Control (accredited by OCR) is being implemented in the MICC with supervisors
as assessors.

• There is a good staff feedback process in the MICC, which encourages positive
interaction between staff, supervisors, managers and partners. This has recently
been utilised in discussions between the Metropolitan Police Service and BTP in
relation to the identification of suicide bombers and has led to the introduction of a
standard operating procedure for such incidents.

• The force conducts an annual staff survey which promotes the sharing of staff ideas
and opinions on how to shape strategy and improve working conditions, thus
enhancing overall service delivery.

• BTP has implemented an action plan to deliver the recommendations of the HMIC
thematic ‘First Contact’, including regular monitoring and processes to deliver to the
good practice guide and the self-assessment matrix.

• BTP has introduced a quality monitoring system for the contact management unit
and operators are now monitored on a regular basis. Feedback on the results is
used to improve staff performance and development issues and is also included in
the PDR process.

• The accuracy and timeliness of performance information have improved significantly

and are used to identify and address poor areas of performance and to monitor key
areas, such as calls and quality of service, for which meaningful data was not
previously available. Improved performance indicators have been set and more
resources deployed to meet them. Supervisors are also able to address quality
control issues and provide feedback using the INSIGHT system.

• Control room staff have access to corporate information systems such as policy and
procedure, in order to inform contact management-related decisions.

Work in progress
• Plans are well advanced for the new MICC (North) which will enhance the force’s
capability for disaster recovery and business continuity. The site is expected to be
live by 2008.
Page 17
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

• A more streamlined approach to the operation of the new MICC (North) has
identified the core functions necessary to carry out the contact management function
and provide a quality service. This work also highlighted activities that are currently
undertaken within contact management that are not relevant to the function and
should be carried out elsewhere.

• Uncertainty over the siting of the new MICC (North), the potential threat of staff
redundancy and the lack of information was recognised as having a detrimental
impact on staff morale. This is being alleviated through the inclusion of staff
associations in the change management process. Concerns about the terms and
conditions of employment for contact centre staff have been recognised and are
being addressed.

• The technical issue with the BTP’s telephony platform that resulted in calls being
misrouted or abandoned, thus creating problems between the crime recording centre
and local crime management units, is being addressed. Early indications are that the
issue has been resolved but it continues to be the subject of close scrutiny.

• The large volume of internal traffic through the contact centre has prevented non-
emergency calls from being answered within targets. Work to identify the source of
this traffic is being undertaken by the project business analyst through workshops
with users and the application of a range of diversionary options including the
education of staff to use alternatives such as electronic telephone directories.

• Performance in answering emergency calls falls slightly below the National Call-
Handling Standard (NCHS), although there was an improvement of 10% on the
previous year. Non-emergency calls have reached the NCHS, with the
reassessment of this measure against a higher standard that legislated for the
presence of a switchboard function.

Areas for improvement

• The force does not have a specific contact management HR strategy although the
overall force HR strategy does incorporate the needs of the contact centre.

• There are outstanding accessibility issues, particularly via BTP’s DDI number and
the management of voicemail, although a new number range has been agreed with
the force’s network supplier. It is expected that some of these issues will be
addressed with the implementation of the MICC (North) in 2008.

• Current duty rotas restrict the opportunity to provide ongoing and refresher training,
although the new MICC may resolve some of these issues.

• Despite a robust sickness absence management policy, the contact centre

continually fails to meet the 6% target. Although there has been an improvement in
recent months, this is an area that will be closely monitored by the contact
management HR manager.

• BTP acknowledges that staff training in customer service techniques would enhance
the quality of the service provided by the call-handling function. Accordingly,
exercises in theory and NCHS will be incorporated into call handlers’ and
communication officers’ training.

Page 18
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

• Operationally deployed staff are not trained to use the Airwave digital radio system
to its full potential and are not therefore aware of its numerous operational and
supervisory benefits.

• Although the contact management function receives results and actions from local
tasking and co-ordination meetings, it is still not fully and formally included in the
NIM tasking and co-ordination process.

• Current reporting lines for area control room staff are to local senior managers. With
the elevated professional status of the contact management function within BTP, it
might be appropriate to incorporate a professional element, eg contact centre
manager within the line management structure pending the implementation of the
MICC (North).

• There is a lack of clarity in the distinction between emergency and non-emergency

traffic. The introduction of a switchboard facility to filter out many of the non-value
calls being taken within the contact centre might relieve some of the resulting
pressure. There are plans to address these issues with BTP’s emergency call-
handling provider.

• Although the arrest/summons performance is within target, there are backlogs in

other areas of the police national computer data input process.

Page 19
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

Recommendations

Performance Management

Recommendation 1
That the British Transport Police constructs a performance management framework that
sets out the key performance accountabilities, systems and products across the force, while
reflecting the principles within the joint ACPO, HMIC, APA, Police Superintendents’
Association of England and Wales and Home Office publication, Managing Police
Performance.

Recommendation 2
That the British Transport Police devises a corporate mechanism to ensure that
organisational learning within its structures and processes is appropriately harnessed,
promulgated and utilised to drive improvement.

Protecting Vulnerable People

Recommendation 3
That the British Transport Police articulates its approach to dealing with the protection of
vulnerable people and develops and implements an appropriate structure that sets out the
key accountabilities, systems and products to ensure a standard and informed response to
such issues.

Recommendation 4
That the British Transport Police raises staff awareness of the links between the various
elements of vulnerability in order to ensure that staff and systems are better informed about
these issues and that any investigation package handed to a Home Office force is of the
highest possible quality.

Page 20
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

Appendix: Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

ACC assistant chief constable

ACPO Association of Chief Police Officers

APA Association of Police Authorities

BTP British Transport Police

BTPA British Transport Police Authority

COLV chief officer leadership visits

DfT Department for Transport

DV Domestic Violence

FOC freight operating company

HMI Her Majesty’s Inspector

HMIC Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary

HR human resource

ICT information and communications technology

IMPACT intelligence management, prioritisation, analysis, co-ordination and tasking

Page 21
 British Transport Police – HMIC Inspection Report

November 2007

MAPPA multi-agency public protection arrangements

MARAC multi-agency risk assessment conferencing

MI management information

MICC management information and communication centre

NCHS National Call-Handling Standard

NIM National Intelligence Model

PDR performance development review

PI performance indicator

SGC specific grading criteria

TOC train operating company

ViSOR Violent Offender and Sex Offender Register

Page 22