Day One Pilot Assessment Centre - College of Policing · assessment centre by the end of January 2019. All candidates underwent the same assessment centre exercises. The pilot assessment

Day One Pilot Assessment Centre Interim evaluation report with recommendations

Version 1.2

OFFICIAL

Day One Pilot Assessment Centre

Page 2 of 28 OFFICIAL Version 1.2

© – College of Policing Limited (2019)

This publication is licensed under the terms of the Non-Commercial College Licence v1.1

except where otherwise stated. To view this licence visit

http://www.college.police.uk/Legal/Documents/Non_Commercial_College_Licence.pdf

Where we have identified any third-party copyright information, you will need to obtain

permission from the copyright holders concerned. This publication may contain public sector

information licensed under the Open Government Licence v3.0 at

www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/

Any enquiries regarding this publication please email us at [email protected]

This document has been created with the intention of making the content accessible to the

widest range of people regardless of disability or impairment. To enquire about having this

document provided in an alternative format please email us at [email protected]

http://www.college.police.uk/Legal/Documents/Non_Commercial_College_Licence.pdf

http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3/

mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

OFFICIAL

Interim evaluation report with recommendations

Version 1.2 OFFICIAL Page 3 of 28

Contents

Key findings ........................................................................................................................ 4

1. Introduction ................................................................................................................... 6

Why is Day One important? ............................................................................................. 6

How was Day One designed? ......................................................................................... 6

What is Day One? ........................................................................................................... 7

2. Evaluation ...................................................................................................................... 8

3. Findings ......................................................................................................................... 9

3.1 Technology performance ......................................................................................... 9

3.2 Cost analysis ......................................................................................................... 12

3.3 Candidate performance and diversity ..................................................................... 14

3.4 Candidate perceptions ........................................................................................... 16

3.5 Assessor diversity .................................................................................................. 17

3.6 Assessor perceptions ............................................................................................. 18

3.7 Assessor performance ........................................................................................... 19

3.8 Senior stakeholder engagement ............................................................................ 20

3.9 Fit for purpose ........................................................................................................ 21

4. Recommendations ...................................................................................................... 24

5. Next steps .................................................................................................................... 26

OFFICIAL



Key findings

A number of assessment centre (AC) design principles known to be effective at reducing

disproportionality between BAME and white candidates were implemented during the

design of Day One (eg, participation of those under-represented in policing during design

stages and avoidance of the use of assessments known to generate disproportionally

lower passing rates for under-represented groups).

There is strong evidence which indicates candidates found the assessment centre a

positive experience, with 76.3 per cent of candidates attending Day One (59 per cent for

Police SEARCH®) having felt that the assessment centre provided an opportunity to

demonstrate their full range of skills. Likewise, 86.7 per cent of candidates either Agreed

or Strongly Agreed they would be likely to recommend Day One (78.9 per cent for Police

SEARCH®) to a friend or member of their family.

Key challenges in onboarding additional forces to deliver Day One were rooted in the

technology model (developed by a third party), requiring a third party to install software

at a physical location; there were concerns around specific devices needing to be

procured through existing force procurement frameworks; and concerns around not

being able to locally support specified devices. The College has responded by

recommending a more accessible delivery format to be made available to pilot forces.

Altogether, 2,995 (63.4 per cent) candidates successfully passed the Day One pilot

assessment centre by the end of January 2019. All candidates underwent the same

assessment centre exercises. The pilot assessment centre has been delivered at one

location (the Metropolitan Police Service).

There is a reduction in the difference in mean exercise scores between BAME and white

candidates when compared to Police SEARCH®. A total of 50.7 per cent of BAME

candidates were successful, compared with 71.6 per cent of white candidates. This

represents an Adverse Impact Ratio (AIR) of 0.71. AIR is a common and accepted metric

for understanding differences in pass rates between minority and majority group

candidates. The four fifths rule prescribes that a selection rate for any minority group that

is less than four-fifths (or an AIR of 0.8) of that for the majority group may provide

evidence of adverse impact.

Candidates’ applications were not subject to any selection or ‘sift’ process before being

invited to the Day One assessment centre, other than an eligibility check. An effective

sifting process is highly likely to increase cost effectiveness of the assessment centre.

OFFICIAL



Furthermore, data modelling using the Day One video based exercises as a sifting

process provides some evidence that a sifting process leads to decreased

disproportionality between BAME and white candidates in terms of assessment

outcomes.

There was a positive uplift in the proportion of assessors who indicated they were from a

BAME background. Overall, 51.3 per cent of Met Day One assessors have indicated

they have a BAME background, compared with 35.6 per cent of BAME assessors who

assessed at the Met Police SEARCH® assessment centre.

Assessor training is translating well into assessor skills for three exercises. However,

there is less consistency of assessing for the written exercise (and to a lesser extent, the

interview). Survey evidence also indicates that some assessors feel they need further

support in order to perform their role to the best of their ability. A recommendation is

offered to address this.

When analysing biodata, it was clear the greatest difference in assessment outcomes

was between candidates whose first language is English and for those whose first

language is not English. Further exploration is required in this area over the coming

months.

Recommendations are set out in section 4 of this report. A final evaluation report will be

published by the end of October 2019.

OFFICIAL



1. Introduction

One of the recommendations from the College of Policing 2016 review of police initial

recruitment was that the College works with the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) to

develop the specification for a new recruit assessment centre. The assessment centre was

to be based on the findings of the best available evidence on improving selection decisions

and minimising adverse impact on minority groups.

Why is Day One important?

The majority of policing expenditure is spent on people, therefore the service’s most

expensive asset. Making the right selection choices is essential to the police service’s

success and wellbeing of its staff.

Day One will enable the police service to select people who meet the demands of policing as

a profession, while minimising the likelihood of selecting individuals who are unable to cope

with the demanding role of a police officer and the consequent negative outcomes for

individuals and forces.

The Day One project has been identified as a workforce transformation priority which will

help shape the future policing landscape by ensuring the best, most suitable and diverse

talent is recruited into the service via a standardised recruit assessment process. This will

align the service with many aspects outlined in Policing Vision 2025.

How was Day One designed?

A third-party consultancy was engaged by the MPS to design the Day One assessment

centre. The College provided SME input throughout the design process. The design process

included:

A job analysis, including 100+ police constables, sergeants, inspectors and policing

leaders.

Piloting of assessment exercises during their development.

Validation and subsequent development of final assessment exercise and scoring

procedures.

Trialling and development of an assessor and facilitator training course.

OFFICIAL



The design of Day One utilised a number of factors, which are referenced within multiple

research studies, to reduce disproportionality between black, Asian and minority ethnic

(BAME) and white candidate groups, including:

Inclusion of under-represented individuals within the assessment design process, which

included 30 per cent BAME participation during the pilot and 30 per cent BAME

participation during the validation process.

Training assessors and facilitators to provide candidates with a warm, supportive and

welcoming assessment environment.

Choosing selection methodologies known to reduce disproportionality and avoiding using

selection methods known to create disproportionality (eg, cognitive ability tests).

Use of values within the assessment that are expected to further reduce

disproportionality.

Training and development of a bank of diverse assessors, as BAME candidates are

likely to feel more comfortable when they can see an organisation is proactive in its

application of diversity and inclusion. Consequently, this is expected to maximise

engagement of BAME candidates.

What is Day One?

Day One is a multi-method, multi-assessor assessment centre for the recruitment of police

constables to the police service. The purpose of Day One is to select the best new police

recruits from all backgrounds and communities, who can meet the demands of the role and

possess the right values for modern policing.

The assessment centre is called ‘Day One’ because it represents the start of the candidates’

policing journey. Each Day One candidate will undertake the following seven assessments

over the course of five hours:

two role play exercises

video based observational exercise

video based scenario exercise

written exercise

virtual reality partnership exercise

structured interview.

OFFICIAL



Assessment activities are assessed against the Police Competency and Values Framework

(CVF). Each candidate is required to meet an agreed minimum standard for values (55 per

cent of the available marks) and for competency areas (55 per cent of the available marks)

and no evidence of inappropriate language or behaviour. Standards have been agreed by

the Day One project board.

The Day One recruit assessment centre was launched as a pilot in the MPS in April 2018.

South Wales, Surrey and Sussex, Thames Valley Police, and West Midlands plan to join the

pilot over the coming months. The pilot is due to be completed by the end of October 2019.

2. Evaluation

The purpose of the evaluation is to determine whether the Day One assessment centre is fit

for purpose to be used nationally for the selection of police officers. This includes whether

the assessments are effective, the technology is robust enough and whether the solution

addresses the concerns with the current Police SEARCH® model while maintaining

acceptable levels of validity, reliability and fairness. The evaluation sets out to answer the

following questions:

How do assessment outcomes at Day One compare to assessment outcomes at Police

SEARCH®?

Are assessors able to assess candidate performance consistently and accurately?

How satisfied are candidates with their Day One assessment experience?

How satisfied are assessors with their Day One experience?

How satisfied are facilitators and administrators with their Day One experience?

How satisfied are senior stakeholders with the Day One assessment centre outcomes?

Is the Day One assessment centre designed and delivered in line with assessment

industry standards?

How much does Day One cost to deliver and how does this compare with Police

SEARCH®? (see 3.2)

Has the Day One software been developed using an appropriate software development

methodology and to a set of best practice standards? (see 3.1.1)

Have the Day One applications been designed with sufficient consideration of the impact

on end users? (see 3.1.2)

OFFICIAL



Does the Day One technology solution meet national accreditation and data protection

standards? (see 3.1.3)

Is the assessment centre standard set at an appropriate level for the role? (see 3.3)

Does the Day One model generate minority group pass rates that are equal to those of

the majority group? (see 3.3)

Do people who perform well at the assessment centre go on to perform effectively on the

job?

Is Day One fit for purpose as an assessment centre for the recruitment of police

constables?

The findings section will set out an overview of the evidence collated to date. Furthermore,

this report will provide recommendations of how to best utilise the remainder of the

evaluation and provide a summary of next steps.

3. Findings

The findings for the Day One evaluation are broken down into nine key sections as follows:

3.1 Technology performance

3.2 Cost analysis

3.3 Candidate performance and diversity

3.4 Candidate perceptions

3.5 Assessor diversity

3.6 Assessor perceptions

3.7 Assessor performance

3.8 Senior stakeholder engagement

3.9 Fit for purpose

3.1 Technology performance

The findings around Day One technology are grouped into the following four areas:

3.1.1 Software development

3.1.2 User testing

3.1.3 IT Health Check

3.1.4 Pilot forces feedback

OFFICIAL



3.1.1 Software development

Overall, the Day One applications have been developed and engineered to a good standard.

In the majority of cases, best practice has been followed in terms of architecture and code

layout, and the selection of tools and languages are considered to be suitable for the task.

All testing of the applications appears to have been carried out manually rather than using

automated tools, but a good amount of evidence has been provided. However, relying on

manual testing only limits the load that can be exerted onto the applications at any one time,

while also not following robust test-driven development practices.

Security has mainly been implemented through the use of in-built security features within the

chosen frameworks. This provides adequate security, especially considering that all

applications are going to be operated within a closed network.

However, what was lacking across all applications was good technical design

documentation, both in terms of supporting documentation and code commenting. One of

the key fundamentals of good engineering processes is to document design decisions and

workflow, and to annotate code in order for it to be easily read and understood by another

developer who has no previous knowledge of the application. The issue of documentation

and code commenting has been passed on to Shared Services Connected Limited (SSCL)1

to address appropriately.

The software has been designed in such a way that it only works for specific devices (eg,

Samsung Tab 2). It is recommended that consideration should be given to removing the

dependency between software and hardware, and ensure that the future delivery solution is

device agnostic (ie, does not require the use/procurement of specified devices).

3.1.2 User testing

An internal testing event was held at Ryton on 19 December 2018, involving nine individuals.

Overall, individuals were positive regarding technology used to support the video based

exercises, and there was some degree of support for the use of virtual reality within the

collaboration exercise. However, individuals were less convinced of the need to have

candidate tablets used for the role play exercises, the interview and in the written exercise.

Individuals felt improvements could be made to the candidate and assessor applications.

They felt too many steps were needed (eg, lots of clicking on ‘next’ buttons) and in the video

1 SSCL deliver assessment services in partnership with the Metropolitan Police Service.

OFFICIAL



based exercises, candidates were required to wait for the time allocated to each part of the

exercise to finish before being able to submit their answers.

Overall, individuals were positive about the assessment exercises, but felt the level of

technology supporting the assessment centre should be based on enhancing the

assessment process and not necessarily used for every element of the assessment process.

It is recommended that greater consideration be given to the impact of Day One technology

on the end user.

3.1.3 IT Health Check

An IT Health Check was conducted on 30 October 2018. This revealed that the on-site

security level represented a high risk. Twelve high risk vulnerabilities, eleven medium risk

vulnerabilities and eight low risk vulnerabilities were identified during the IT Health Check.

Although there are a number of separate security issues, most of them relate to the following

key areas:

password related issues – weak credentials being utilised in order to access various

functionality of the hardware, services and application

third-party software issues – various third-party software installed using versions that are

no longer supported by the vendor or are known to contain multiple vulnerabilities

servers missing Windows patches – some of the systems are missing a number of

security updates

users can ‘break out’ of locked down application environment – users can access

functionality/utilities that they should ideally be restricted from accessing.

The technology solution provided by the third-party supplier does not meet national police

accreditation standards and data protection standards. Information regarding the outcome of

the IT Health Check and suggested mitigation action have been shared with the MPS and

SSCL.

3.1.4 Obstacles to pilot forces launching Day One

A number of factors relating to the technology model were identified as obstacles to pilot

forces launching Day One. These are:

Under current commissioning arrangements, it is taking an excess of eight months for

technology commissions to be agreed and actioned.

The technology model requires a third party to install software at a physical location

which entails devices being couriered to a central location for updates.

OFFICIAL



There are concerns around the requirement for a specific device model to be procured

(eg, Samsung Tab 2), which creates issues with forces being able to procure through

existing procurement frameworks.

The need for a specific legacy device means the technology model is soon out of date.

There are concerns around not being able to locally support technology specified by the

third party supplier.

Due to limitations in the coding, user experience, security and ease of onboarding of the Day

One technology, it is recommended that the College identifies a lower technology model to

provide greater accessibility to additional forces’ inclusion in the pilot. Furthermore, it is

recommended that the College identifies an appropriate longer term technology solution

which addresses the issues set out above.

3.2 Cost analysis

A cost analysis has been conducted. While a delivery model for Day One has not yet been

agreed, the below provides an indication of expenditure for key elements of Day One.

Assessment centre delivery

technology

The technology model of Day One requires the purchase

of specified devices which cost approx. £36,000 (including

charging trolleys).

In the technology model being piloted, there would be a

need for an annual replacement of the majority of the

devices if these were used on weekly basis. This is likely

to lead to an annual expenditure of approx. £27,000.

However, this will be dependent on usage.

There is a likelihood of IT customer service to support the

technology.

Assessment centre

accommodation

There will be some uplift to the amount of space required

to deliver Day One, as some of the rooms for the

interactive exercises require more space (for a two role

player interactive exercise and for the collaboration

exercise between two candidates). However, it will

depend on the layout of current assessment venues as to

what the impact will be. The College can supply forces

OFFICIAL



with an accommodation specification.

Assessors and role players per

assessment centre

There is uplift to the number of assessors and role players

required for Day One. Overall, Day One requires 18

assessors and role players. Police SEARCH® requires 14

assessors and role players to deliver one morning or

afternoon session of 24 candidates.

Management support staff per

assessment centre

Although the role requirements for Day One management

support staff are slightly different to Police SEARCH®, the

level of resource required is comparable to Police

SEARCH®.

Broadly, Day One is more expensive than Police SEARCH® due to an uplift in expenditure

related to technology, increased delivery resource and a potential uplift in accommodation

required to deliver the assessment centre. However, it should be noted the price charged by

the College for Police SEARCH® has remained constant over the past 15 years.

There is evidence candidates felt the technology enhanced their Day One experience (see

section 3.4). While there are benefits to be gained through the use of technology, the Day

One technology solution being piloted is not easily scalable as a national solution (as set out

in section 3.1). An optimised technology model is set to be developed and costed – see the

recommendations section of this report. It is likely that an optimised delivery model will lower

the delivery expenditure for Day One.

A refined cost analysis will be made available for the final evaluation report.

OFFICIAL



3.3 Candidate performance and diversity

OFFICIAL



3.3.1 The data above and below represents candidate performance between 4 April 2018

– 31 January 2019. Appendix A provides details on performance of the exercises.

OFFICIAL



3.3.2 The Day One assessment centre standards have been set using the best available

evidence. Further research will be conducted over the coming months to determine

the predictive ability of Day One to determine success during initial training and early

career.

3.3.3 The College intends to conduct research to explore the cause of lower pass rates for

BAME candidates, including the impact of language and socio-economic status.

3.4 Candidate perceptions

Candidates attending Day One and Police Recruit SEARCH® assessment centres were

provided with a candidate feedback survey. Candidates answered questions using the

following five point scale: Strongly Agree, Agree, Neither Agree or Disagree, Disagree and

Strongly Disagree. The below data summary is based on responses from 2,707 Police

SEARCH® candidates and 2,476 Day One candidates.

OFFICIAL



3.5 Assessor diversity

The uplift in diversity of Met Day One assessors is a notable factor, as can be seen in the

figure below. A total of 58 (51.3 per cent) of Met Day One assessors have indicated they

have a BAME background, compared with 41 (35.6 per cent) BAME assessors who

assessed at the Met’s Police SEARCH® assessment centre.

OFFICIAL



3.6 Assessor perceptions

OFFICIAL



3.7 Assessor performance

OFFICIAL



3.8 Senior stakeholder engagement

3.8.1 Seven semi-structured telephone interviews with senior stakeholders involved in the

Day One pilot were conducted in January 2019 to establish initial levels of

satisfaction.

3.8.2 Overall satisfaction with Day One: Interviewees were generally satisfied and positive

about Day One, although most suggested that they would be better placed to

comment once Day One was established in their force, or when initial difficulties have

been resolved. Interviewees, particularly those where the pilot had progressed

further, were generally satisfied that:

The assessment centre exercises provided candidates with a more positive,

realistic view of policing and the role that they were applying for. A few added that

the new policing focus would be better at assessing ability and would identify

better candidates. However, one stakeholder commented that those with no prior

knowledge or experience of policing may be less confident at the assessment

centre now the exercises were more policing focused.

Having a welcoming environment for candidates improved the overall candidate

experience. One stakeholder described how Day One improved the overall

assessment centre feel, in part due to the location, where a waiting room was

present and candidates were able to access refreshments.

“Basically, everyone that comes to see it loves it, but there’s still nervousness

around adopting it, because it is a massive change.” – Stakeholder interview two.

3.8.3 Day One delivery considerations and lessons: The following key issues were raised

by interviewees and influenced the ability to deliver Day One:

Technology – A few forces faced difficulties with technology, such as obtaining

the correct devices and lengthy security and procurement processes. Concerns

around reliability (including repercussions of failed technology) and the impact on

those with specific learning needs were also mentioned. Where the equipment

necessary for Day One had been successfully obtained, an efficient procurement

and IT ordering process was well established within the force. Considering the

required technology earlier on in the design phase and a more flexible approach

to the requirements were also mentioned.

“Perhaps a little bit more flexibility on the main types of equipment that we can

use to run the assessment centres would be much more helpful.” – Stakeholder

interview three.

OFFICIAL



Location – Forces who are, or will be, running Day One assessment centres in

their own buildings commented that doing so provided greater control to the force

and was easier for local candidates to attend. The size of the building was also

an important factor due to the number of candidates, assessors and rooms

required, as well as the need to place and use technology appropriately. Difficulty

in identifying a suitable location has led to delayed delivery and reconsideration

of candidate numbers in one force. This has had a knock-on effect for those

forces relying on others to host the assessment centres. An extension on the

current building would help address these issues.

Cost and timescales – Most interviewees commented that the costs associated

with the pilot were higher than expected and that pilot timescales were an issue,

with a number of forces being behind schedule. Most interviewees were also

concerned that only one force had delivered Day One, which meant that the pilot

was not yet representative of all forces involved.

“…to just test it on some of the real big-hitters who run their own assessment

centres, I think, would be unrepresentative of a lot of the other forces, particularly

the smaller ones.” – Stakeholder interview six.

3.8.4 Overall, there were positive views towards the College’s role in the pilot, with a few

interviewees mentioning that they were supported and listened to by the College

when coming up against obstacles. One interviewee also described that having a

clear understanding of objectives amongst all stakeholders meant that decisions

were well aligned with the objectives, and another emphasised the usefulness of the

working group meetings. This suggests that clear communication has been key for

understanding the aims and objectives and resolving issues throughout the pilot.

3.9 Fit for purpose

There are concerns raised regarding the technology supplied to support the delivery of the

Day One assessment centre. The solution does not lend itself to be scaled up to support a

national rollout of Day One, as evidenced in section 3.1. Pilot forces have struggled to

launch Day One due to issues surrounding the need to use specific devices. The supporting

technology proposed by a third party commercial supplier is not fit for purpose for national

delivery. It is recommended the College provides pilot forces with a lower technology

solution in the shorter term (to gain more evaluation evidence through further forces joining

the pilot), and in the longer term develops a suitable technology solution to support national

rollout where forces are able to use existing devices and procurement frameworks.

OFFICIAL



This report highlights that generally, the Day One exercises are performing well as a suite of

police constable selection assessments. Candidates themselves reported that they found the

assessment centre a positive experience. A total of 76.3 per cent of candidates attending

Day One (59 per cent for Police SEARCH®) felt that the assessment centre provided an

opportunity to demonstrate their full range of skills. Additionally, 86.7 per cent of candidates

either Agreed or Strongly Agreed that they would be likely to recommend Day One (78.9 per

cent for Police SEARCH®) to a friend or member of their family.

However, there are a number of issues which need to be addressed as soon as practicable.

In particular, inter-rater reliability evidence indicates a lack of consistency of assessors’

evaluation of the written exercise. A recommendation has been offered to determine whether

the issue is with the exercise or the implementation.

Evaluation visits to the Day One assessment centre have identified that the written exercise

does not have an allocated time slot in the AC timetable. All assessors evaluate the written

exercise during their downtime at the AC. This takes place in a busy assessor room where

there are distractions. In addition, limited QA has been witnessed during QA visits. It is

recommended that a formal QA process is put in place and dedicated time in the

assessment centre delivery timetable is allocated for the written exercise.

For the collaboration exercise, more data is required to establish whether there is an impact

on candidate performance depending on the specific role (tablet or virtual reality) and who

candidates are partnered with.

Through evidence collated from assessors, it has been identified that the interview has too

many areas to assess within the time allocated. Assessors have indicated that they feel this

exercise, in its current state, is the least likely to lead to fair assessment decisions.

Enhancements will be introduced to reduce the amount of areas to assess in the interview

(from 7 areas to 4). Evidence from these changes will be monitored to ensure changes

translate to the interview working effectively from both a candidate and assessor

perspective.

Pass rates for BAME candidates are lower than for white candidates. However, there is a

smaller difference in mean scores between white and BAME candidates compared to Police

SEARCH®. This is an encouraging finding as it indicates that for Day One, the gap in

performance between these two groups has been reduced.

This positive development in the technical quality of Day One exercises could be translated

into decreased disproportionality between BAME and white candidates with the introduction

of an effective sifting process. An effective sifting process would reduce the number of

OFFICIAL



applicants who are not appropriate for police constable selection, which would increase the

cost-effectiveness of the Day One assessment centre.

Further research into the cause of differences between BAME and white candidates would

be helpful. A recommendation is put forward to further explore the reason for this difference.

While the majority of assessments are fit for purpose, a number of areas require attention

(eg, increasing consistency of assessing for written exercise and interview) in order to add

further robustness to the assessment process. Further research (eg, around causality of

differences between BAME and white candidates) will ensure that Day One is well placed to

meet its aim of effectively selecting candidates from diverse backgrounds and align it to the

aspirations of Policing Vision 2025.

OFFICIAL



4. Recommendations

The below recommendations are for the remainder of the evaluation and beyond:

Recommendation one – as data modelling has indicated that effective sifting processes

are likely to lead to decreased disproportionality between BAME and white candidate

success rates and increased cost effectiveness, it is recommended that pilot forces put

in place effective sifting mechanisms in order to fully maximise returns from the Day One

assessment centre processes.

Recommendation two – it is recommended the College provide a toolkit which sets out

guidance to forces around best practice in sifting applicants for attendance at the Day

One recruit assessment centre.

Recommendation three – inter-rater reliability study evidence indicates there is less

consistency between assessors for the written exercise (and to a lesser extent, the

interview). It is recommended further evidence is sought from alternative assessment

centres (eg, Thames Valley, West Midlands or Ryton) to establish whether the

inconsistency in assessing is inherent in the exercise or related to delivery format at a

specific location.

Recommendation four – all assessors should be quality assured on a frequent basis to

maintain assessor consistency and ensure assessments are being assessed fairly. It is

recommended a formal quality assurance (QA) process, applying the College of

Policing’s QA model designed for Day One, is put in place as soon as possible to ensure

Day One is being assessed in line with best practice and industry standards for

assessment centre delivery.

Recommendation five – to respond to evidence of assessors indicating they require

more support, it is proposed that additional practice video clips during the assessor

training course are prioritised to help support the development of assessor skills.

Furthermore, it is recommended that dedicated time and appropriate assessment rooms

are built into the assessment centre delivery timetable for the assessment of the written

exercise. This will ensure assessors have sufficient time to assess the written exercise.

Recommendation six – differences between BAME and white candidates’ assessment

outcomes have been identified. As the exact causes of these differences are unclear, it

is recommended the College of Policing conducts further research to explore the cause

of lower pass rates for BAME candidates. All available candidate characteristics will be

considered in this research.

OFFICIAL



Recommendation seven – only one force is currently piloting the Day One assessment

centre. A key barrier to launching Day One has been associated with technology

required to deliver the pilot model. In order to increase force participation with Day One,

it is recommended the College of Policing provides a lower technology version of Day

One for the remainder of the pilot/evaluation period. Consideration will be given to how

requests for reasonable adjustments requiring computer assistance (eg, a candidate

requesting a computer to complete the written exercise) will be managed.

Recommendation eight – it is recommended the College of Policing work on developing

a longer term technology solution which addresses some of the concerns of the pilot

model by being device agnostic (only working on a specific device), integrating with the

Computerised Administration System for Assessments (CASA) replacement candidate

management software, and being generally easy for forces to implement locally.

In addition, the College is currently consulting with forces on suitable delivery options for the

national rollout of Day One, which will be included in the final evaluation report.

OFFICIAL



5. Next steps

The following sets out key milestones for the Day One project:

A lower technology model will be made available to pilot forces by 10 June 2019.

The Day One final evaluation report with recommendations will be made available to

appropriate College boards and the NPCC in Q4 of 2019.

A proposed implementation plan will be included within the final evaluation report.

A decision regarding the future adoption of the Day One model by the police service will

be made by the Professional Committee and Chiefs Council in Q4 of 2019.

If the Day One recruit assessment centre model is supported by senior policing leaders,

it is anticipated the model would be rolled out to the service in the second half of 2020.

The rollout will take place in parallel with a CASA replacement assessment information

management system being available to support the national delivery of Day One

assessment centres.

A longer term Day One technology solution will be made available to forces in the first

half of 2021.

OFFICIAL



Appendix A – Performance of Day One exercises

The table below sets out the difference in mean percentage scores for each of the Day One

exercises by ethnicity.

Exercise

Without sift mean percentage scores

Modelled sift mean percentage scores

white BAME diff white BAME diff

Dispute

settlement 59.1 53.8 5.3 61.6 57.9 3.7

Early

intervention 55.3 50.8 4.5 57.9 55.1 2.8

Collaboration 61.0 53.8 7.2 63.6 57.8 5.8

Burglary 73.9 65.2 8.6 79.3 75.0 4.4

Youth

engagement 66.0 62.4 3.5 70.8 69.6 1.2

Stop and

search 52.3 46.3 6.1 55.3 50.2 5.1

Interview 64.6 61.8 2.8 66.7 65.1 1.6

The difference between BAME and white candidates is significant at the p<0.01 level for all

exercises when a sift had not been applied and when a modelled sift was applied to the

interim evaluation data set. However, the overall difference in pass rates was decreased

(AIR=0.85 with modelled sift vs AIR=0.71 with no sift) between BAME and white candidates

when a modelled sift was applied to the Day One interim evaluation data set.

OFFICIAL



THIS PAGE HAS BEEN LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK