May 2012 - Performance Report

TAYSIDE POLICE

Contents

Welcome

This performance report covers a range of force performance and is available on the force web site every month. It provides an overview of local performance results and pub-lic feedback. Areas covered are:

- Dundee Local Policing Area

- Angus Local Policing Area

- Perth & Kinross Local Policing Area

The report incorporates information from local Inspectors about what they are doing to tackle crime and antisocial behaviour in your community. Results are presented at Section (local community ) level.

Background

Guidance

Policing Tayside

Policing Dundee

Policing Angus

Policing Perth & Kinross

4

5

9

13

20

27

Summary of Results 6

Introduction 3

VISION AND

VALUES

STAN-

DARDS OF

COMMU-

NITY PRI-

ENGAGE

AND LISTEN

REVIEW

RESULTS

MANAGE

RE-

MAY 2012

2

3

DELIVERING LOCAL POLICING

B uilding public confidence and trust is how Tayside Police aims to improve satisfaction with the quality of service provided to its communities. This is achieved through the effec-tive delivery of policing services which meet the needs of local communities. It is about ease of access to services, giving the public a voice in order to influence how the force responds to is-sues that matter to them, delivering appropriate and robust interventions, working with partners, providing feedback to the public and keeping them informed of progress and improvement.

C orporate support forms an important role in ensuring that appropriate resources are in place to deliver an efficient and effective service to the public. The force uses performance indicators to gather information about performance, quality of ser-vice and public perception. These are listed below. They are derived from priorities identified through the annual strategic assessment and also include issues, such as housebreaking and vandalism, identified through public feedback. The challenging economic climate means that robust monitoring and reporting processes are instrumental in ensuring that the force is on track to deliver its objectives within the resources available.

Key Performance Indicators

1. Standards of Service

• First Contact : overall satisfaction rating

• First Contact: caller provided with the name of the call handler

• Proportion of people who received an update on the progress of their enquiry

• Overall customer experience of the service provided by the police

2. Crime and Detection Rates

• Violent Crime

• Robbery

• Vandalism

• Domestic Housebreaking

3. Road Casualties

4. Proportion of working time lost to sickness absence

In addition, a programme of regular surveys tests local public opinion on how neighbourhoods

are policed in order that where action is required, it can be initiated in a timely manner.

Introduction

4

P erformance Indicators are derived from detailed policing plans and busi-ness plans outlining what Local Policing Ar-eas and supporting departments intend to deliver in support of the priorities set out in the three-year Tayside Policing Plan 2011-2014. These form the basis for this per-formance publication. Two community priorities: ‘Public Safety’ and ‘Public Reassurance’, underpin the policing plan . Analysis of data and context

1 with respect

to performance indicators, combined with the outputs from public consultation, pro-vide an indication of the extent to which the force is succeeding in contributing to im-proved community outcomes.

What this will tell us about performance

Tayside Police Key Performance Indicators

help the force define and measure progress

toward the achievement of standards of

service and force objectives.

Monitoring results over the longer term al-

lows the force to see where sustained im-

provement occurs, or identifies challenges

which require to be addressed.

Consulting, engaging and listening Public consultation and feedback runs as a thread throughout performance manage-ment and provides information that lets us know whether we are doing things right. ‘Customers’ include our staff. FOOTNOTE: 1.Context Indicators are not measures of performance per se; rather they provide additional background infor-mation in relation to the demands placed upon the force and the environment in which it operates.

Background

5

INTERPRETATION OF RESULTS

B aselines for improvement adopt the methodology used in previous years, incorporating the most recent three years average performance as a starting point for improvement. For some KPIs a slight adjustment is ap-plied to the three-year average target which may take account of developing trends or patterns over the last 36 months. The target may be adjusted up or down ac-cordingly to ensure that it is both challeng-ing and realistic in terms of achievement . Improvement Targets are agreed annually through a process of consultation with terri-torial commanders and heads of depart-ments. These are ratified by the Force ex-ecutive and Tayside Joint Police Board.

R esults are colour-coded against the following criteria: Results are presented as a ‘Dashboard’ for ease of viewing. Further context is pro-vided at the beginning of the document as a summary. Behind the scenes, results over time are monitored using charts, to which upper and lower control limits are applied.

P erformance reporting. Where performance is adhering to the ‘norm’, i.e. remaining within upper and lower control limits, minimal reporting takes place. Areas of concern or exceptional

performance, lying outwith the upper or lower control limits, is commented upon in the summary. In addition, areas of police business not contained within the key performance indi-cators (such as fleet, health and safety, staff development) are reported on in dashboard style, subject to data being available, with a view to producing a bal-anced view of organisational activity. This promotes the diverse range of services that support operational policing.

P ublication of Performance Results. This document is published monthly on the force web-site in accordance with the statutory requirement under Section 13 of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 2003 which covers public performance reporting in relation to the publication of performance information and evidence of continuous im-provement.

Guidance

On or above target Below target

6

1. STANDARDS OF SERVICE All customer satisfaction targets were achieved for the period April to May 2012 with particular attention drawn to the ‘updating the public’ indicator where results exceeded the 2012/13 target set at 65.0% by 9.2 percentage points finalising at 74.2%. Overall satisfaction at first contact evidenced a sig-nificant 5.7 percentage point improvement com-pared to the same period the previous year, rising from 90.4% to 96.1% exceeding the target by 2.1 percentage points. The proportion of respondents who were provided with the name of the person dealing with their en-quiry rose 3.3 percentage points from 81.7% to 85.0%, and achieved the increased target set of 85% set for 2012/13. Huge improvements were evident in relation to ser-vice users receiving an update on the progress of their enquiry increasing a significant 17.4 percent-age points to 74.2% compared to 56.8% in 2011/12. Further analysis undertaken on this indicator high-lighted that 84.5% of customers who had reported a crime were updated on progress with their enquiry with a lesser proportion, 51.0%, of those who had made contact for reasons other than to report a crime, confirming that they had received an update. Satisfaction with the overall service provided by Tayside Police returned an improvement of 7.3 per-centage points compared with the commensurate figure the previous year, rising from 79.3% to 86.6% and again achieved the target of 85.0%.

2. CRIME Performance in relation to overall crime groups : • Violent crime (Group 1) - a decrease of 10.1% (9 crimes)

• Crimes of indecency (Group 2) - an increase of 8.8% (6 crimes)

• Crimes of dishonesty (Group 3) - an increase of 0.4% (6 crimes)

• Malicious mischief, vandalism etc (Group 4) - a reduction of 27.6% (251 crimes)

(Data was sourced directly from the crime reporting system on 1 June and may differ slightly to other published results due to

some reclassification of crimes and any additional ‘no crime’ status being applied in the intervening period.)

The force achieved 5 out of 9 crime-related targets including recorded levels of violent crime and van-dalism and detection rates for vandalism and rob-bery.

The detection rate for groups 1 to 4 crimes (45.0%) failed to achieve target by 1.5 percentage points. A further 35 detections would have been required in order to achieve target. Similarly, with domestic housebreaking, the detection rate of 25.2% failed to achieve the target of 31.0% and a further 9 detec-tions would have been required to achieve target. Two areas of recorded crime did not achieve target; 26 robberies occurred in April and May 2012, 7 more than in the same period last year. 155 domes-tic housebreakings were recorded this year, 70 more than the 85 recorded at the same time last year.

3. COMMUNITY POLICING The community policing questions are designed to capture the views of the public about local police service delivery, in particular knowledge of commu-nity officers - who they are and how to contact them and views of officers’ awareness of the issues and concerns affecting local communities. • 51.7% of service users thought that the current level of police patrols in their neighbourhood was ‘about right’ for their community needs. Con-versely, 47.7% felt it was ‘too little’ and a minimal 0.7% that it was ‘too much’.

• The majority of respondents, 79.8%, felt reas-sured when they witnessed an officer on patrol in their neighbourhood whilst 5.6% stated that it caused them concern.

• Almost a third of respondents, 30.3%, confirmed that they were able to recognise their community officer either by name, sight or both. A further 13.8%, although unable to identify their local offi-cer by sight or name, knew how to contact them should the need arise. 35.9% of residents stated that they would like to know the identity of the community officers who looked after their neighbourhood whilst interestingly a fifth, 20%, did not feel there was a need for them to know their community officers.

• ‘Local newspapers’ were the preferred medium

Summary of results: Apr 2012 - May 2012

7

for respondents to be kept informed about ac-tions being taken by officers in their communities.

• 69.5% of service users agreed that officers un-derstood the issues that mattered in their neighbourhoods and 62.8% felt that officers were dealing with such matters. Overall, 70.8% of re-spondents had confidence in the police in their neighbourhood.

• Taking everything into account, 71.6% of service users thought that community officers were doing a ‘good’ or ‘very good’ job in their area.

4. TELEPHONE RESPONSE 4528 emergency calls were received in May and 92% of these were answered within 10 seconds, exceeding the national target of 90%. A total of 21530 non-emergency calls were received and 76% were answered within 40 seconds

5. SICKNESS ABSENCE The absence rate for police officers was 3.2% at the end of May and met the target of 4.0%. The police staff result at 4.6% was a deterioration on the 3.4 recorded at the same time last year and failed to meet the target of 4.0%.

6. ROAD CASUALTIES Between April and the end of May, there were 2 adult fatalities, exactly the same as at the end of May 2011. A further 27 people were seriously in-jured (44 last year), one of which was a child. The total number of people killed or seriously injured (29) was 17 fewer than at the same time last year. From April 2011, the force adopted the govern-ment’s Road Safety Framework Targets to the year 2020.

7. PUBLIC PERCEPTION OF CRIME The vast majority of respondents in Tayside (89.4%) perceived their neighbourhood to be a safe place to live. This indicates a slight reduction of 1.3 percent-

age points when compared with the previous year where 90.7% of respondents were of the same opin-ion. Opinions remained fairly static between 2012/13 and 2011/12 in relation to those who felt that crime levels had remained the same in their neighbour-hood - 59.3%. A 2.6 percentage point improvement was recorded for those who felt that crime had decreased, rising from 13.9% to 16.5% and similarly, a minimal 0.7 percentage point reduction in those who felt that crime had increased, falling from 24.8% to 24.1%. The main issues of concern to residents when asked unprompted were ‘dangerous/careless driv-ing’, 28.5% (2011/12 result 13.4%), followed by ‘drug dealing or drug abuse’, 21.9% (14.9%) and ‘antisocial behaviour’, 14.6% (30.6%). In terms of prevalence of crime in local neighbour-hoods, almost four in ten respondents, 38.0% (49.1%) said that ‘antisocial behaviour’ was a com-mon problem, followed by ‘vandalism/graffiti’, 34.8% (39.4%) and ‘dangerous/careless driving’, 31.6% (30.9%). 38.6% (35.2%) of respondents confirmed that they were concerned at becoming a victim of crime in their area and when asked to comment on the is-sues which caused them concern, ‘housebreaking’, 43.1% (46.1%), followed by ‘antisocial behaviour’, 37.2% (47.5%), were the major issues of concern. Feelings of safety walking alone in local neighbour-hoods both during the day and after dark evidenced a decline in confidence in 2012/13 compared to 2011/12 whereby 90.4% (97.2%) of the public felt safe during the day and 54.1% (62.1%) felt safe af-ter dark.

A minority of residents, 2.2%, stated that fear of crime prevented them from taking part in their every-day activities. Service Delivery When asked to provide views on the force’s service delivery first in terms of the importance of certain activities and then how well those activities were performed, the greatest disparity in opinion between importance and effectiveness related to police visi-bility (39.8%). This suggests that ‘providing a visible presence’ is

8

the main area of policing which the public perceive Tayside Police should improve going forward. It is worth noting, however, that the public’s opinion with regard to the force’s performance in providing a visible presence improved 13.4 percentage points compared to the same period the previous year ris-ing from 41.4% to 54.8%.

9

POLICING TAYSIDE

Tayside Land Area: 7,528 square kilometres Population: 405,720 Police Officers: 1258 Police Staff: 543 Special Constables: 172 Mid year population estimates - most recent - published by The General Register Office for Scotland on 30 June 2011 Staff profile as at 31 March 2012 and is based upon headcount - which includes full and part-time working.

KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS

Dundee Local Policing Area

Population 145,570 Land area 60 sq km

Angus Local Policing Area

Population 110,630 Land area 2,182 sq km Perth & Kinross

Local Policing Area Population 149,520

Land area 5,286 sq km

CUSTOMER SATISFACTION:

2012-13 Target

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

% / p

p Change

2012-13 Target

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Target

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Target

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

First Contact: Overall satisfaction rating for service provided at first contact

94.0% 96.1% 90.4% 5.7 94.0% 95.5% 84.0% 11.5 94.0% 98.0% 85.7% 12.3 94.0% 95.2% 100.0% -4.8

First Contact:% of respondents provided with the name of the person dealing with their enquiry

85.0% 85.0% 81.7% 3.3 85.0% 84.6% 76.7% 7.9 85.0% 82.9% 78.3% 4.6 85.0% 87.0% 89.3% -2.3

Updating the Public: Overall % of customers who received an update on the progress of their enquiry

65.0% 74.2% 56.8% 17.4 65.0% 65.5% 54.5% 11.0 65.0% 81.0% 66.7% 14.3 65.0% 77.4% 51.2% 26.2

% customers who received an update following their

contact to report a crime~ 84.5% 63.9% 20.6 ~ 74.4% 68.4% 6.0 ~ 93.3% 66.7% 26.6 ~ 87.8% 58.3% 29.5

% customers who received an update following their

contact for reasons other than to report a crime~ 51.0% 49.1% 1.9 ~ 43.8% 44.0% -0.2 ~ 50.0% 66.7% -16.7 ~ 57.1% 41.2% 15.9

Customer Experience: Overall satisfaction rating of the service provided by Tayside Police

85.0% 86.6% 79.3% 7.3 85.0% 82.4% 74.1% 8.3 85.0% 92.6% 76.3% 16.3 85.0% 86.1% 86.8% -0.7

(Response Rate)

CRIME

Groups 1-4 recordedNo

target2299 2547 -9.7%

No

target1171 1395 -16.1%

No

target494 508 -2.8%

No

target634 644 -1.6%

- Detection rate 46.5% 45.0% 48.4% -3.4 45.5% 46.6% 45.3% 1.3 47.5% 46.0% 45.1% 0.9 48.0% 41.2% 57.8% -16.6

Violent Crime recorded 520 80 89 -10.1% 273 42 55 -23.6% 104 18 6 200.0% 143 20 28 -28.6%

- Detection rate 85.0% 93.8% 89.9% 3.9 80.0% 90.5% 85.5% 5.0 91.0% 100.0% 83.3% 16.7 93.0% 95.0% 100.0% -5.0

Robbery recorded 133 26 19 36.8% 89 16 13 23.1% 8 1 0 *** 36 9 6 50.0%

- Detection rate 70.0% 92.3% 68.4% 23.9 62.0% 87.5% 53.8% 33.7 85.0% 100.0% 0.0% *** 85.0% 100.0% 100.0% 0.0

Vandalism recorded 4650 597 848 -29.6% 2300 265 458 -42.1% 1250 183 205 -10.7% 1100 149 185 -19.5%

- Detection rate 31.0% 33.7% 31.4% 2.3 28.0% 32.5% 29.5% 3.0 32.0% 31.1% 32.7% -1.5 34.0% 38.9% 34.6% 4.3

Domestic Housebreaking recorded 700 155 85 82.4% 445 115 54 113.0% 95 10 18 -44.4% 160 30 13 130.8%

- Detection rate 31.0% 25.2% 36.5% -11.3 28.0% 30.4% 37.0% -6.6 33.0% 30.0% 33.3% -3.3 33.0% 3.3% 38.5% -35.1

198/600 (33.0%) 70/216 (32.4%) 54/168 (32.1%) 74/216 (34.2%)

KEY PERFORMANCE RESULTS SCORECARD APRIL - MAY 2012

POLICING DUNDEEPOLICING TAYSIDE POLICING ANGUS POLICING PERTH & KINROSSKEY

On or above 3 year averageBelow 3 year average

2012-13 Target

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

% / p

p Change

2012-13 Target

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Target

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Target

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

ROAD CASUALTIES

People killed 26 2 2 0.0% N/A 0 0 *** N/A 1 0 *** N/A 1 2 -50.0%

People seriously injured 222 26 37 -29.7% N/A 3 9 -66.7% N/A 4 9 -55.6% N/A 19 19 0.0%

Children killed 1 0 0 *** N/A 0 0 *** N/A 0 0 *** N/A 0 0 ***

Children seriously injured 25 1 7 -85.7% N/A 0 2 -100.0% N/A 0 4 -100.0% N/A 1 1 0.0%

RESOURCES

Sickness Absence - police officers 4.0% 3.2% 3.9% -0.7 4.0% 3.8% 2.6% 1.2 4.0% 3.8% 5.8% -2.0 4.0% 2.8% 5.5% -2.7

Sickness Absence - police staff 4.0% 4.6% 3.4% 1.2 4.0% 3.4% 5.0% -1.6 4.0% 5.6% 5.5% 0.1 4.0% 4.9% 3.6% 1.3

KEY PERFORMANCE RESULTS SCORECARD APRIL - MAY 2012 .. continued

VISION AND

VALUES

STANDARDS OF

SERVICECOMMUNITY

PRIORITIES

ENGAGE

AND LISTEN

REVIEW

RESULTSMANAGE

RESOURCES

KEY

On or above 3 year averageBelow 3 year average

POLICING DUNDEEPOLICING TAYSIDE POLICING ANGUS POLICING PERTH & KINROSS

12

TAYSIDE CRIME IN MORE DETAIL PERIOD APRIL to MAY 2011/2012 2012/2013 May Alone

CRIME CLASSIFICATIONMade

known

DETECTIONS

number %

Made

known

DETECTIONS

number %

INC./DEC.

number %

Made

known

DETECTIONS

number %

GROUP 1Murder 2 2 100.0% 2 3 150.0% 0 0.0% 1 2 200.0%

Attempted Murder 13 12 92.3% 7 7 100.0% -6 -46.2% 6 6 100.0%

Culpable Homicide 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0 0 -

Serious Assault 31 28 90.3% 31 26 83.9% 0 0.0% 17 14 82.4%

Robbery (Incl attempts) 19 13 68.4% 26 24 92.3% 7 36.8% 12 12 100.0%

Child Cruelty/Neglect 17 18 105.9% 11 13 118.2% -6 -35.3% 5 3 60.0%

Pos of Firearm with intent to endanger life 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0 0 -

Abduction 3 3 100.0% 1 1 100.0% -2 -66.7% 0 0 -

Threats 4 4 100.0% 1 0 0.0% -3 -75.0% 0 0 -

Others 0 0 - 1 1 100.0% 1 - 0 0 -

GROUP 1 - TOTAL 89 80 89.9% 80 75 93.8% -9 -10.1% 41 37 90.2%

GROUP 2Rape 11 6 54.5% 13 7 53.8% 2 18.2% 7 5 71.4%

Assault with intent to rape 0 0 - 1 0 0.0% 1 - 1 0 0.0%

Indecent assault 35 20 57.1% 23 20 87.0% -12 -34.3% 10 7 70.0%

Lewd & Libidinous practices 5 3 60.0% 2 5 250.0% -3 -60.0% 0 2 -

Public Indecency 10 5 50.0% 9 4 44.4% -1 -10.0% 9 4 44.4%

Others 7 3 42.9% 26 23 88.5% 19 271.4% 15 11 73.3%

GROUP 2 - TOTAL 68 37 54.4% 74 59 79.7% 6 8.8% 42 29 69.0%

GROUP 3Housebreaking ~ domestic dwelling 85 31 36.5% 155 39 25.2% 70 82.4% 84 14 16.7%

Housebreaking ~ domestic non-dwelling 56 6 10.7% 32 3 9.4% -24 -42.9% 17 2 11.8%

Housebreaking ~ commercial 54 28 51.9% 54 23 42.6% 0 0.0% 29 13 44.8%

Theft, attempt theft from locked premises/property 23 8 34.8% 36 7 19.4% 13 56.5% 17 3 17.6%

Theft, attempt theft from locked motor vehicle 86 16 18.6% 46 25 54.3% -40 -46.5% 18 8 44.4%

Theft, attempted theft of a motor vehicle 52 29 55.8% 43 17 39.5% -9 -17.3% 24 10 41.7%

Convicted thief in poss.of tools etc. w.i. to steal 1 1 100.0% 5 5 100.0% 4 400.0% 1 1 100.0%

In building with intent to steal 20 20 100.0% 26 23 88.5% 6 30.0% 17 17 100.0%

Theft 963 564 58.6% 878 433 49.3% -85 -8.8% 494 224 45.3%

Theft from motor vehicle 51 24 47.1% 51 3 5.9% 0 0.0% 24 1 4.2%

Reset 11 11 100.0% 13 13 100.0% 2 18.2% 3 3 100.0%

Embezzlement 2 4 200.0% 1 1 100.0% -1 -50.0% 0 0 -

Fraud 68 67 98.5% 111 52 46.8% 43 63.2% 54 37 68.5%

Others 9 2 22.2% 36 13 36.1% 27 300.0% 14 2 14.3%

GROUP 3 - TOTAL 1481 811 54.8% 1487 657 44.2% 6 0.4% 796 335 42.1%

GROUP 4Fireraising 26 11 42.3% 31 20 64.5% 5 19.2% 9 5 55.6%

Malicious Damage/Vandalism 848 266 31.4% 597 201 33.7% -251 -29.6% 320 111 34.7%

Others 35 28 80.0% 30 22 73.3% -5 -14.3% 14 10 71.4%

GROUP 4 - TOTAL 909 305 33.6% 658 243 36.9% -251 -27.6% 343 126 36.7%

SUB-TOTAL OF GROUPS 1 TO 4 2547 1233 48.4% 2299 1034 45.0% -248 -9.7% 1222 527 43.1%

GROUP 5Public mischief & wasting police time 20 19 95.0% 11 11 100.0% -9 -45.0% 5 5 100.0%

Escape or rescue from police custody or prison 1 1 100.0% 5 5 100.0% 4 400.0% 2 2 100.0%

Resisting arrest or obstructing police officer 49 50 102.0% 34 34 100.0% -15 -30.6% 16 16 100.0%

General attempts to pervert the course of justice 16 14 87.5% 15 16 106.7% -1 -6.3% 9 8 88.9%

Sex Offenders' register offences 0 0 - 1 1 100.0% 1 - 0 0 -

Bail - Fail to keep conditions 108 104 96.3% 111 109 98.2% 3 2.8% 59 57 96.6%

Possession of offensive weapons 70 66 94.3% 35 34 97.1% -35 -50.0% 17 15 88.2%

Drugs - supply, with intent to supply etc 49 46 93.9% 40 41 102.5% -9 -18.4% 16 17 106.3%

Drugs - personal possession 250 248 99.2% 296 294 99.3% 46 18.4% 142 142 100.0%

Drugs - manufacture etc 11 14 127.3% 11 10 90.9% 0 0.0% 5 4 80.0%

Others 34 30 88.2% 13 9 69.2% -21 -61.8% 7 7 100.0%

GROUP 5 - TOTAL 608 592 97.4% 572 564 98.6% -36 -5.9% 278 273 98.2%

TOTAL OF GROUPS 1 TO 5 3155 1825 57.8% 2871 1598 55.7% -284 -9.0% 1500 800 53.3%

Please Note: This document is an end of month 'snap-shot' in time and the data may vary from later publications where updates have been taken into consideration.

13

POLICING DUNDEE

CRIME

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

% / p

p Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

Groups 1-4 1171 1395 -16.1% 343 371 -7.5% 304 336 -9.5% 270 353 -23.5% 254 335 -24.2%

- Detection rate 46.6% 45.3% 1.3 53.9% 61.2% -7.3 49.7% 38.4% 11.3 42.6% 39.9% 2.6 37.4% 40.3% -2.9

Violent Crime (G1) 42 55 -23.6% 10 19 -47.4% 12 10 20.0% 11 10 10.0% 9 16 -43.8%

- Detection rate 90.5% 85.5% 5 90.0% 73.7% 16.3 66.7% 90.0% -23.3 118.2% 100.0% 18.2 88.9% 87.5% 1.4

Indecency (G2) 41 33 24.2% 24 14 71.4% 10 8 25.0% 4 6 -33.3% 3 5 -40.0%

- Detection rate 90.2% 39.4% 50.8 100.0% 42.9% 57.1 60.0% 25.0% 35 100.0% 50.0% 50 100.0% 40.0% 60

Dishonesty (G3) 789 814 -3.1% 263 240 9.6% 186 210 -11.4% 167 203 -17.7% 173 161 7.5%

- Detection rate 45.4% 51.2% -5.9 51.7% 70.8% -19.1 50.5% 46.7% 3.9 37.7% 41.4% -3.7 37.6% 40.4% -2.8

Mal Mischief, vandalism (G4) 299 493 -39.4% 46 98 -53.1% 96 108 -11.1% 88 134 -34.3% 69 153 -54.9%

- Detection rate 37.8% 31.4% 6.4 34.8% 37.8% -3.0 44.8% 18.5% 26.3 39.8% 32.8% 6.9 27.5% 35.3% -7.8

Robbery 16 13 23.1% 4 4 0.0% 6 5 20.0% 3 2 50.0% 3 2 50.0%

- Detection rate 87.5% 53.8% 33.7 100.0% 25.0% 75 66.7% 20.0% 46.7 133.3% 50.0% 83.3 66.7% 0.0% 66.7

Vandalism 265 458 -42.1% 39 91 -57.1% 83 100 -17.0% 81 122 -33.6% 62 145 -57.2%

- Detection rate 32.5% 29.5% 3.0 28.2% 36.3% -8.1 39.8% 17.0% 22.8 34.6% 28.7% 5.9 22.6% 34.5% -11.9

Domestic Housebreaking 115 54 113.0% 24 8 200.0% 16 9 77.8% 35 12 191.7% 40 25 60.0%

- Detection rate 30.4% 37.0% -6.6 12.5% 50.0% -37.5 50.0% 33.3% 16.7 34.3% 41.7% -7.4 30.0% 32.0% -2

KEY PERFORMANCE RESULTS: LOCAL POLICING AREA SCORECARD APRIL - MAY 2012

Caution! Variation in results may appear extreme due to very small numbers of crimes involved. Cells with symbol *** mean that a valid percentage change could not be calculated.

POLICING

DUNDEE

SECTION 1

City Centre and

Maryfield

SECTION 2

Lochee

and Ryehill

SECTION 3

Downfield

and Hilltown

SECTION 4

Longhaugh and

Broughty Ferry

14

POLICING DUNDEE

Customer Satisfaction

2012-13 Target

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

% / p

p Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change


94.0% 95.5% 84.0% 11.5 91.7% 87.5% 4.2 96.0% 80.0% 16.0 100.0% 81.2% 18.8 92.4% 90.9% 1.5

First Contact: % of respondents provided with the name of the person dealing with their

enquiry

85.0% 84.6% 76.7% 7.9 83.3% 83.3% 0.0 78.6% 75.0% 3.6 100.0% 71.4% 28.6 75.0% 80.0% -5.0

Updating the Public: Overall % of customers who received an update on the

progress of their enquiry

65.0% 65.5% 54.5% 11.0 45.4% 77.8% -32.4 75.0% 50.0% 25.0 60.0% 53.8% 6.2 77.8% 40.0% 37.8

% of customers who received an update

following their contact to report a crime74.4% 68.4% 6.0 50.0% 100.0% -50.0 91.7% 40.0% 51.7 77.8% 100.0% -22.2 75.0% 50.0% 25.0


following their contact for reasons

other than to report a crime

43.8% 44.0% -0.2 0.0% 50.0% -50.0 50.0% 57.1% -7.1 33.3% 40.0% -6.7 100.0% 25.0% 75.0


85.0% 82.4% 74.1% 8.3 77.0% 80.0% -3.0 91.7% 64.7% 27.0 84.2% 68.7% 15.5 66.7% 90.9% -24.2

Response Rate 13/52 (25.0%)70/216 (32.4%) 13/50 (26.0%) 25/60 (41.7%) 19/54 (35.2%)

KEY PERFORMANCE RESULTS: DUNDEE LPA SCORECARD - STANDARDS OF SERVICE - APRIL to MAY 2012

POLICING

DUNDEE

SECTION 1

City Centre and

Maryfield

SECTION 2

Lochee

and Ryehill

SECTION 3

Downfield

and Hilltown

SECTION 4

Longhaugh and

Broughty Ferry

Caution should be exercised when interpreting the results at sectional level due to the very small sub-sample sizes.

First Contact

- Improvement in satisfaction with service at first contact from 84.0% to 95.5%. This result exceeds the force target set at 94.0%.

- Improvement in identifying the person dealing with the enquiry from 76.7% to 84.6%.

Updating the Public

- Eleven percentage point improvement in updating the public from 54.5% to 65.5%. This result achieves the force target set at 65.0%.

When analysed by reason for contact - 74.4% of those who reported a crime were updated compared to 68.4% the previous year. A slight reduction, however, was evident in

relation to those whose contact was for reasons other than to report a crime whereby 43.8% received an update compared to 44.0% in 2011.

Customer Experience

- Improvement in overall customer experience from 74.1% to 82.4%.

15

POLICING DUNDEE

Public Perception

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

% / p

p Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

Crime in neighbourhood

% of residents who thought that

the crime rate in their

neighbourhood had remained

the same or improved over the

past year

68.7% 80.5% -11.8 50.0% 71.4% -21.4 81.3% 83.4% -2.1 60.0% 86.7% -26.7 71.4% 75.0% -3.6

Feelings of safety after dark

% of residents who felt safe

walking alone in their

neighbourhood after dark

45.4% 43.8% 1.6 28.6% 41.7% -13.1 35.2% 16.7% 18.5 60.0% 47.1% 12.9 50.0% 53.9% -3.9

Concerns at becoming a

victim of crime

% of residents concerned at

becoming a victim of crime in

their neighbourhood

61.0% 46.6% 14.4 75.0% 66.7% 8.3 60.0% 66.7% -6.7 50.0% 33.3% 16.7 66.7% 58.4% 8.3

Issues that cause most

concern in neighbourhoods

*Other includes:

Litter, Dog Fouling, Fly tipping

etc

Response Rate 15/52 (28.8%)59/216 (27.3%) 8/50 (16.0%) 20/60 (33.3%) 16/54 (29.6%)

Drug dealing/drug abuse (27.5%)

Dangerous/careless driving

(21.6%)

Antisocial behaviour (13.7%)

Housebreaking (13.7%)

Other* (9.8%)

Vandalism/graffiti (5.9%)

Motor vehicle crime (3.9%)

Alcohol related crime (2.0%)

Assault (2.0%)

Cause no concern:

Robbery



Other* (25.0%)


(12.5%)


Cause no concern:

Alcohol related crime

Assault

Motor vehicle crime

Robbery

Vandalism/graffiti






Assault (5.6%)

Dangerous/careless driving (5.6%)


Other* (5.6%)

Cause no concern:

Robbery


(33.3%)


Other* (16.7%)




Cause no concern:


Assault

Robbery

Vandalism/graffiti


(38.5%)




Cause no concern:


Assault

Motor vehicle crime

Other*

Robbery

Vandalism/graffiti

DUNDEE LPA SCORECARD - PUBLIC PERCEPTION ~ APRIL - MAY 2012

POLICING

DUNDEE

SECTION 1

City Centre and

Maryfield

SECTION 2

Lochee

and Ryehill

SECTION 3

Downfield

and Hilltown

SECTION 4

Longhaugh and

Broughty Ferry

16

Policing Dundee: Community Summaries ~ April to May 2012

SECTION 1: CITY CENTRE AND MARYFIELD Main areas of local community concern: anti-social behaviour and housebreaking

CRIME Highlights • Reduction of 47.4% in violent crime (9 crimes). • Reduction in vandalism of 57.1% (52 crimes)

Performance issues • Increase in crimes of indecency from 14 to 24 (most of which are related to prostitution)

• Increase in crimes of domestic housebreaking of 200%, from 8 to 24

DETECTION RATE Highlights • Best detection rate across the Local Policing Area (LPA) for groups 1-4 at 53.9%, however, this was a 7.3 percentage point decrease (last year 61.2%)

• Improvement in detection rate for violent crime from 73.7% last year to 90.0%

• Improvement of 75 percentage points in detec-tion rate for robbery from 25.0% to 100% against 4 crimes recorded in both years

Performance issues • Fall of 37.5 percentage points in detection rate for domestic housebreaking, from 50% to 12.5%

STANDARDS OF SERVICE Performance issues • A reduction of 32.4 percentage points in the per-centage of customers who received an update on the progress of their enquiry.

PUBLIC PERCEPTION • A deterioration from 71.4% to 50.0% for people who thought that crime in their neighbourhood had remained the same or improved over the past year

• An increase of 8.3 percentage points from 66.7% to 75.0% in the percentage of residents who ex-pressed concern at becoming a victim of crime in their neighbourhood.

TARGETED COMMUNITY ACTIVITY Inspector Steve Main said: "The month of May was particularly challenging for the Section due to two major incidents which had a significant effect on overall resources. In view of this, I was pleased that the officers in Section 1 managed to reduce both violent crimes and vandal-ism during the month and managed to improve de-tection rates particularly with regard to crimes of robbery. I believe the aforementioned major crimes had a negative effect on public perception regarding over-all crime in their community and concerns at becom-ing a victim of crime. I would like to reassure mem-bers of the public residing, working and visiting the City Centre and Maryfield that these areas remain safe and are currently experiencing year on year reductions in overall crime resulting in far fewer vic-tims of crime.

Two areas of concern are domestic housebreaking and a fall in the percentage of people who received an update on the progress of their enquiries. In rela-tion to domestic housebreakings. Two individuals of interest were arrested and this will undoubtedly have a positive impact. In relation to people being updated, this will be rectified with immediate effect and supervisors will ensure that their individual offi-cers carry out this important function of service de-livery."

SECTION 2: LOCHEE AND RYEHILL Main areas of local community concern: drug dealing/drug abuse, vandalism/graffiti and anti-social behaviour

CRIME Highlights • Reduction of 11.4% in crimes of dishonesty (24 crimes)

• Reduction of 17.0% in vandalism (17 crimes) Performance issues • Rise in domestic housebreaking from 9 to 16 (77.8%)

DETECTION RATE Highlights • Best improvement in detection rate for Groups 1-4 of 11.3 percentage points from 38.4% to 49.7%

(* Results should be viewed in conjunction with sample size. Changes in results may appear inflated due to the small number of respondents involved.)

17


• Robbery detection rate improved from 20% to 66.7%

• Best detection rate in LPA (and biggest improve-ment) for vandalism from 17.0% to 39.8%

• Improvement in detection rate for domestic housebreaking from 33.0% to 50.0%

STANDARDS OF SERVICE Highlights • An improvement of 25 percentage points in the percentage of customers who received an update on the progress of their enquiry from 50% to 75%

• 91.7% of customers expressed overall satisfaction with the service provided, compared to 64.7% at the same time last year.

PUBLIC PERCEPTION • An improvement from 16.7% to 35.2% for resi-dents who felt safe walking alone in their neighbourhoods after dark

• 60% of residents said they were concerned at be-coming a victim of crime in their neighbourhood, an improvement of 6.7 percentage points on the result at the same time last year (66.7%).

TARGETED COMMUNITY ACTIVITY Sergeant Dave Small said: “I was delighted to see that the Section had contin-ued to reduce crimes such as dishonesty and van-dalism as I am well aware of the effect this type of crime has on the community. Whilst I am concerned at the number of domestic housebreakings in the area, I was pleased to see that our detection rate has increased and we will continue to work with our part-ners to ensure that we are doing all we can to pro-vide public reassurance. Our overall feedback with regard to standards of ser-vice was very positive, and I would like to see this continue over the coming months. Whilst I am very satisfied at the results achieved throughout the month, I am not one to rest on my laurels and will continue to make every effort to try and improve upon our already high standards”

SECTION 3: DOWNFIELD AND HILLTOWN Main areas of local community concern: danger-ous/careless driving and drug dealing/drug abuse

CRIME Highlights • Best reduction in LPA for crimes of dishonesty—17.7% (36 crimes)

• Reduction of 33.6% in vandalism (41 crimes) Performance issues • Increase in crimes of domestic housebreaking of 191.7%, from 12 to 35

DETECTION RATE Highlights • 5.9 percentage point improvement in vandalism from 28.7% to 34.6%

STANDARDS OF SERVICE Highlights • 100% result for service provided at first contact and for respondents who were provided with the name of the person dealing with their enquiry

• 84.2% of customers expressed overall satisfac-tion with the service provided, compared to 68.7% at the same time last year.

Performance issues • 77.8% of customers received an update following their contact to report a crime compared with 100% last year.

PUBLIC PERCEPTION • An improvement from 47.1% to 60.0% for resi-dents who felt safe walking alone in their neighbourhoods after dark

• 50% of residents said they were concerned at becoming a victim of crime in their neighbour-hood, a deterioration of 16.7 percentage points on the result at the same time last year (33.3%).

TARGETED COMMUNITY ACTIVITY Inspector Paul McCord said: “Last month, as a result of serious incidents in the communities of Coldside and Strathmartine I stated that we intended to tackle the issues sur-rounding the upsurge in violent crime in previous


18

weeks. We did carry out high visibility patrols to pro-vide reassurance and crime prevention measures to our community, as well as carry out more stop and search tactics. We intended to make our communi-ties safer and this is an ongoing process and one on which we will continue to focus over the summer period. We will also provide focused patrols in order to deter individuals who are intent on breaking into homes. In addition, we will target known criminals who com-mit such acts and ensure they are provided with lim-ited opportunities to implement misery on house-holders. In order to do this we will work closely with our colleagues throughout the Criminal Justice sys-tem to ensure all agencies are contributing to en-sure justice for the community. I would ask the community, one and all, that when you come across officers out on foot, cycle and mo-bile patrol that you engage with them and provide us with any information that you believe may help us in our quest to make our communities safer.”

SECTION 4: LONGHAUGH AND BROUGHTY FERRY Main areas of local community concern: danger-ous/careless driving, drug dealing/drug abuse and anti-social behaviour CRIME Highlights • Reduction of 24.2% in groups 1 to 4 (81 crimes) ~ largest decrease in LPA

• 43.8% decrease in violent crime from 16 to 9 • Best reduction in LPA for vandalism— 57.2% (83 crimes)

Performance issues • Increase in crimes of domestic housebreaking of 60%, from 25 to 40. (However, this was an im-provement on last month when there had been an increase of 138.5%)

DETECTION RATE Performance issues • 11.9 percentage point drop in detection rate for vandalism ~ from 34.5% to 22.6%

STANDARDS OF SERVICE Highlights • 75.0% of customers received an update following their contact to report a crime compared to only 50.0% last year.

Performance issues • Only 66.7%% of customers expressed overall satisfaction with the service provided, compared to 90.9% at the same time last year.

PUBLIC PERCEPTION • 66.7% of residents said they were concerned at becoming a victim of crime in their neighbour-hood, a deterioration of 8.3 percentage points on the result at the same time last year (58.4%)

TARGETED COMMUNITY ACTIVITY Inspector Kevin Williams said: "I was pleased to see a significant reduction in crime levels this month. Our focus will remain on further reductions in crime, especially domestic house-breaking. Also, every effort is being made to detect these crimes and bring the offenders to justice. In addition, we will continue to work on increasing our overall standard of service delivery to the public to help increase levels of satisfaction and confi-dence."



19

POLICING DUNDEE: Crime in more detail PERIOD APRIL to MAY 2011/2012 2012/2013 May Alone


known

DETECTIONS

number %

Made

known

DETECTIONS

number %

INC./DEC.

number %

Made

known

DETECTIONS

number %

GROUP 1

Murder 1 1 100.0% 2 2 100.0% 1 100.0% 1 2 200.0%

Attempted Murder 8 7 87.5% 4 4 100.0% -4 -50.0% 4 4 100.0%


Serious Assault 22 19 86.4% 16 13 81.3% -6 -27.3% 8 7 87.5%




Abduction 2 2 100.0% 0 0 - -2 -100.0% 0 0 -

Threats 1 1 100.0% 1 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0 -

Others 0 0 - 0 1 - 0 - 0 0 -

GROUP 1 - TOTAL 55 47 85.5% 42 38 90.5% -13 -23.6% 20 18 90.0%

GROUP 2Rape 9 2 22.2% 5 6 120.0% -4 -44.4% 2 4 200.0%

Assault with intent to rape 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0 0 -


Lewd & Libidinous practices 3 1 33.3% 1 2 200.0% -2 -66.7% 0 0 -

Public Indecency 2 2 100.0% 6 2 33.3% 4 200.0% 6 2 33.3%

Others 6 3 50.0% 20 19 95.0% 14 233.3% 11 10 90.9%

GROUP 2 - TOTAL 33 13 39.4% 41 37 90.2% 8 24.2% 21 18 85.7%



Housebreaking ~ commercial 23 2 8.7% 19 9 47.4% -4 -17.4% 12 4 33.3%



Theft, attempted theft of a motor vehicle 24 12 50.0% 25 7 28.0% 1 4.2% 15 4 26.7%

Convicted thief in poss.of tools etc. w.i. to steal 1 1 100.0% 4 4 100.0% 3 300.0% 1 1 100.0%


Theft 528 312 59.1% 439 228 51.9% -89 -16.9% 238 101 42.4%


Reset 6 6 100.0% 10 10 100.0% 4 66.7% 3 3 100.0%

Embezzlement 1 3 300.0% 0 1 - -1 -100.0% 0 0 -

Fraud 27 20 74.1% 43 20 46.5% 16 59.3% 24 14 58.3%

Others 6 0 0.0% 25 4 16.0% 19 316.7% 12 1 8.3%

GROUP 3 - TOTAL 814 417 51.2% 789 358 45.4% -25 -3.1% 409 156 38.1%



Others 20 16 80.0% 19 16 84.2% -1 -5.0% 8 7 87.5%

GROUP 4 - TOTAL 493 155 31.4% 299 113 37.8% -194 -39.4% 166 61 36.7%



Escape or rescue from police custody or prison 1 1 100.0% 3 3 100.0% 2 200.0% 2 2 100.0%


General attempts to pervert the course of justice 6 6 100.0% 8 9 112.5% 2 33.3% 4 4 100.0%

Sex Offenders' register offences 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0 0 -

Bail - Fail to keep conditions 63 60 95.2% 51 51 100.0% -12 -19.0% 29 28 96.6%




Drugs - manufacture etc 8 11 137.5% 6 5 83.3% -2 -25.0% 3 2 66.7%

Others 23 21 91.3% 6 4 66.7% -17 -73.9% 3 3 100.0%

GROUP 5 - TOTAL 357 344 96.4% 332 325 97.9% -25 -7.0% 152 149 98.0%



20

POLICING ANGUS

CRIME

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

% / p

p Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

Groups 1-4 494 508 -2.8% 177 152 16.4% 122 131 -6.9% 146 156 -6.4% 49 69 -29.0%

- Detection rate 46.0% 45.1% 0.9 46.9% 40.8% 6.1 47.5% 45.0% 2.5 50.7% 48.7% 2.0 24.5% 46.4% -21.9

Violent Crime (G1) 18 6 200.0% 7 2 250.0% 2 1 100.0% 6 3 100.0% 3 0 ***

- Detection rate 100.0% 83.3% 16.7 114.3% 50.0% 64.3 100.0% 100.0% *** 100.0% 100.0% 0 66.7% 0.0% ***

Indecency (G2) 12 14 -14.3% 3 0 *** 6 2 200.0% 3 8 -62.5% 0 4 -100.0%

- Detection rate 91.7% 78.6% 13.1 133.3% 0.0% *** 66.7% 250.0% -183.3 66.7% 25.0% 41.7 0.0% 50.0% ***

Dishonesty (G3) 271 275 -1.5% 111 86 29.1% 49 75 -34.7% 91 84 8.3% 20 30 -33.3%

- Detection rate 50.6% 50.2% 0.4 47.7% 51.2% -3.4 61.2% 46.7% 14.6 56.0% 56.0% 0.1 15.0% 40.0% -25

Mal Mischief, vandalism (G4) 193 213 -9.4% 56 64 -12.5% 65 53 22.6% 46 61 -24.6% 26 35 -25.7%

- Detection rate 31.6% 35.2% -3.6 32.1% 23.4% 8.7 33.8% 34.0% -0.1 32.6% 39.3% -6.7 23.1% 51.4% -28.4

Robbery 1 0 *** 0 0 *** 0 0 *** 1 0 *** 0 0 ***

- Detection rate 100.0% 0.0% *** 0.0% 0.0% *** 0.0% 0.0% *** 100.0% 0.0% *** 0.0% 0.0% ***

Vandalism 183 205 -10.7% 53 63 -15.9% 64 48 33.3% 43 59 -27.1% 23 35 -34.3%

- Detection rate 31.1% 32.7% -1.5 34.0% 23.8% 10.2 34.4% 27.1% 7.3 27.9% 35.6% -7.7 21.7% 51.4% -29.7

Domestic Housebreaking 10 18 -44.4% 4 5 -20.0% 1 6 -83.3% 5 5 0.0% 0 2 -100.0%

- Detection rate 30.0% 33.3% -3.3 25.0% 0.0% 25 0.0% 50.0% -50.0 40.0% 40.0% 0 0.0% 50.0% ***



POLICING ANGUSSECTION 1

Forfar

and Kirriemuir

SECTION 2

Montrose

and Brechin

SECTION 3

Arbroath

SECTION 4

Carnoustie

21

POLICING ANGUS


2012-13 Target

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

% / p

p Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change


94.0% 98.0% 85.7% 12.3 100.0% 80.0% 20.0 100.0% 100.0% 0.0 100.0% 80.0% 20.0 93.8% 85.7% 8.1


enquiry

85.0% 82.9% 78.3% 4.6 71.4% 71.4% 0.0 88.9% 100.0% -11.1 90.9% 66.7% 24.2 75.0% 83.3% -8.3



65.0% 81.0% 66.7% 14.3 57.1% 50.0% 7.1 90.0% 66.7% 23.3 72.7% 63.6% 9.1 92.8% 87.5% 5.3


following their contact to report a crime93.3% 66.7% 26.6 33.3% 66.7% -33.4 100.0% 60.0% 40.0 100.0% 50.0% 50.0 100.0% 100.0% 0.0




50.0% 66.7% -16.7 75.0% 40.0% 35.0 0.0% 100.0% -100.0 25.0% 80.0% -55.0 66.7% 75.0% -8.3


85.0% 92.6% 76.3% 16.3 91.0% 55.5% 35.5 83.3% 87.5% -4.2 93.4% 76.9% 16.5 100.0% 87.5% 12.5

Response Rate

KEY PERFORMANCE RESULTS: ANGUS LPA SCORECARD - STANDARDS OF SERVICE - APRIL to MAY 2012

16/34 (47.1%)54/168 (32.1%) 11/43 (25.6%) 12/39 (30.8%) 15/52 (28.8%)


First Contact

- Improvement in satisfaction with service at first contact from 85.7% to 98.0% (an almost perfect result across the LPA). This result well exceeds the force target set at

94.0%.

- Improvement in identifying the person dealing with the enquiry from 78.3% to 82.9%.

Updating the Public

- 14.3 percentage point improvement in updating the public from 66.7% to 81.0%, the highest result across the force. This result again well exceeds the force target set

at 65.0%.

When analysed by reason for contact - 93.3% of those who reported a crime were updated compared to 66.7% the previous year. A reduction, however, was evident in


Customer Experience

- Improvement in overall customer experience from 76.3% to 92.6%, the highest result across the force.

POLICING

ANGUS

SECTION 1

Forfar

and Kirriemuir

SECTION 2

Montrose

and Brechin

SECTION 3

Arbroath

SECTION 4

Carnoustie

22

POLICING ANGUS

Public Perception

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

% / p

p Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change






past year

92.7% 71.4% 21.3 90.0% 100.0% -10.0 90.9% 77.8% 13.1 90.0% 42.9% 47.1 100.0% 76.5% 23.5





56.8% 72.0% -15.2 60.0% 100.0% -40.0 50.0% 90.9% -40.9 50.0% 72.7% -22.7 75.0% 57.9% 17.1


victim of crime



their neighbourhood

18.0% 33.4% -15.4 27.3% 12.5% 14.8 18.8% 30.0% -11.2 16.7% 45.5% -28.8 9.1% 36.9% -27.8



*Other includes:


etc

Response Rate 52/168 (31.0%) 11/38 (28.9%) 17/40 (42.5%) 12/46 (26.1%) 12/44 (27.3%)



(25.0%)

Assault (12.5%)




Cause no concern:


Motor vehicle crime

Other*

Robbery





Assault (5.7%)


Other* (5.7%)


Cause no concern:

Motor vehicle crime

Robbery




(16.7%)

Other* (16.7%)


Cause no concern:


Assault

Housebreaking

Motor vehicle crime

Robbery



(33.3%)



Cause no concern:


Assault

Housebreaking

Motor vehicle crime

Other*

Robbery




Assault (11.1%)


(11.1%)


Other* (11.1%)

Cause no concern:

Motor vehicle crime

Robbery

Vandalism/graffiti

ANGUS LPA SCORECARD - PUBLIC PERCEPTION ~ APRIL - MAY 2012

POLICING

ANGUS

SECTION 1

Forfar

and Kirriemuir

SECTION 2

Montrose

and Brechin

SECTION 3

Arbroath

SECTION 4

Carnoustie

23

Policing Angus: Community Summaries ~ April to May 2012

SECTION 1: FORFAR AND KIRRIEMUIR Main areas of local community concern: drug dealing/drug abuse, anti-social behaviour and dangerous/careless driving

CRIME Highlights • 15.9% reduction in crimes of vandalism (10 crimes)

Performance issues • Biggest increase in Local Policing Area (LPA) for groups 1 to 4 of 16.4% - 25 crimes. How-ever, this figure was 34 at the end of last month.

• Crimes of violence increased by 250% (5 crimes).

• Increase in crimes of dishonesty of 29.1% (25 crimes).

DETECTION RATE Highlights • Best improvement in detection rate across the LPA for vandalism (10.2 percentage points) from 23.8% to 34.0%.

• Improvement in detection rate for domestic housebreaking from 0% to 25% over similar number of crimes

STANDARDS OF SERVICE Highlights • 91.0% of customers expressed overall satisfac-tion with the service provided, compared to 55.5% at the same time last year ~ a 35.5 per-centage point improvement.

Performance issues • A deterioration of 33.4 percentage points in the number of customers who received an update following their contact to report a crime from 66.7% to 33.3%

PUBLIC PERCEPTION • Only 60% of residents said they felt safe walking alone in their neighbourhoods after dark com-pared to 100% last year at the same time.

• 27.3% of residents said they were concerned at becoming a victim of crime in their neighbour-hood, a deterioration of 14.8 percentage points on the result at the same time last year (12.5%).

TARGETED COMMUNITY ACTIVITY Inspector Ally Robertson said: “The section Sergeants and Officers continued to work extremely hard during this traditionally busy period. Reductions in some areas of crime were re-alised together with improved detection rates. The main issue for me is the public perception of crime and the public’s feeling of safety. The fact remains that Angus LPA, year on year, is reducing the amount of crime in the communities and therefore the likelihood of members of the public being victims of crimes is also reducing. Our Policing style of be-ing more visible is the only way, in my opinion, of reducing the fear of crime and I hope that my offi-cers will, by being more active in their communities, bring down this perception of crime and the associ-ated fears.”

SECTION 2: MONTROSE AND BRECHIN Main areas of local community concern: anti-social behaviour, dangerous/careless driving and drug dealing/drug abuse

CRIME Highlights • Best reduction across LPA for crimes of dishon-esty, 34.7% (26 crimes)

Performance issues • 33.3% increase in vandalism from 48 to 64

DETECTION RATE Highlights • 14.6 percentage point improvement in crimes of dishonesty from 46.7% to 61.2%

• Best detection rate across Local Policing Area for vandalism at 34.4%

STANDARDS OF SERVICE Highlights • An improvement of 23.3 percentage points in the percentage of customers who received an up-date on the progress of their enquiry from 66.7% to 90.0%

PUBLIC PERCEPTION • Only 50.0% of residents said they felt safe walk-


24


ing alone in their neighbourhoods after dark com-pared to 90.9% last year at the same time.

• 18.8% of residents said they were concerned at becoming a victim of crime in their neighbour-hood, an improvement of 11.2 percentage points on the result at the same time last year (30.0%).

TARGETED COMMUNITY ACTIVITY Inspector Mark McInally said: “With respect to detecting crime, it is vitally important that every crime that is committed receives the ap-propriate enquiry with the aim of tracing the people responsible. The Section officers constantly work hard attempting to achieve this and their endeavours were reflected in the very good results for this period. Standards of Service ~ the improvement reflects the fact that officers have taken on board the need for complainers and victims to be appropriately updated on the progress of the officers’ enquiries. There is still some improvement needed and officers will con-tinue to be reminded to take some time from their enquiries and pass on their updates. Public Perception ~ I would suggest that the percent-age figure published for this period for residents that do not feel safe in their own areas is not a true reflec-tion of the community as a whole. I am confident that the figure is far higher and that the majority of residents do not feel this way. Having said that, any resident who does feel unsafe in their area is a con-cern and we must make efforts to reach all sections of the community to share the message that they should not be afraid. Whilst fear of becoming a victim of crime was a rela-tively low figure there is still a perception from a small section of the community that they may be tar-geted. Our challenge is to work hard to reach that group and provide them with the re-assurance they require.”

SECTION 3: ARBROATH Main areas of local community concern: drug dealing/drug abuse, alcohol related crime, anti-social behaviour

CRIME Highlights • Reduction of 27.1% in vandalism from 59 to 43

DETECTION RATE Highlights • Best detection rate across the LPA for groups 1-4 at 50.7%.

STANDARDS OF SERVICE Highlights • 90.9% of respondents stated that they were pro-vided with the name of the person dealing with their enquiry, a 24.2 percentage point improve-ment on the 66.7% recorded last year and also best result across the LPA

• 16.5 percentage point improvement on the overall satisfaction rating from 76.9% to 93.4%

PUBLIC PERCEPTION • 90.0% of residents thought that the crime rate in their neighbourhood had remained the same or improved over the past year compared to 42.9% last year

• Only 50.0% of residents said they felt safe walking alone in their neighbourhoods after dark com-pared to 72.7% last year at the same time.


TARGETED COMMUNITY ACTIVITY Inspector Adrian Robertson said: “Detection rates for group 1-4 crime and for domestic housebreakings remained the best in the LPA. This was attributable to the efforts of local Officers, and the attention to effectively managing crime enquiries by local Sergeants. The detection rate for vandalism fell from 35.6% to 27.9 % and this requires attention over the next few weeks. It is worthy of note that the section has ex-perienced two incidents where multiple vehicles were vandalised, which skewed this result somewhat. It is still anticipated that these crimes will eventually be detected. It was heartening to note however, that the total number of crimes of vandalism fell by 27.1% (a reduction of 16 crimes). This was in part due to pro-active patrols by officers in hot spot areas, and high levels of visibility in the evenings in areas where van-dalisms are known to take place. Officers have been instructed to ensure that they provide their name, and a means of contact, to each member of the public they deal with. It is pleasing to


25


see that this appears to have been acknowledged by the standards of service responses, and we have seen a significant rise in the number of people ac-knowledging this fact (an improvement from 66.7% to 90.9%). The section has been keen to positively promote the successes they have achieved in reducing crime in recent months, and the use of social media and the conventional press to highlight successes in combat-ing crime to the public appears to have been benefi-cial. I was pleased that over 90% of the local com-munity now believed that crime had reduced in their area - because this is exactly what has been occur-ring for some considerable time now. We will con-tinue to communicate this positive message to our local communities via the press and at local commu-nity meetings. I note that the percentage of people feeling safe after dark has fallen from 72.7% to 50%. However, due to the small representative sample, I will reserve judgement on this until a definitive trend is estab-lished. The section remains committed to a highly visible local police presence in the community, and I am sure that there are many members of the com-munity who see officers on a regular basis, particular during the hours of darkness, and during the night time economy period in the town centre, where we have undertaken significant periods of patrols.”

SECTION 4: CARNOUSTIE Main areas of local community concern: anti-social behaviour, dangerous/careless driving, drug dealing/drug abuse and assault

CRIME Highlights • Reduction of 29% in groups 1 to 4 (20 crimes) • Reduction of 34.3% in vandalism from 35 to 23 ~ this was the best reduction across the LPA

DETECTION RATE Performance issues • Deterioration in the detection rate for groups 1 to 4 from 46.4% to 24.5%

• Deterioration in the detection rate for vandalism from 51.4% to 21.7%

STANDARDS OF SERVICE Highlights • An improvement of 5.3 percentage points in the percentage of customers who received an update on the progress of their enquiry from 87.5% to 92.8%

• An improvement of 12.5 percentage points relat-ing to overall satisfaction from 87.5% to 100.0%

PUBLIC PERCEPTION • 100.0% of respondents thought the crime rate had remained the same or improved over the past year, compared to 76.5% last year

• An improvement of 17.1 percentage points in the percentage of residents who felt safe walking alone in their neighbourhood after dark, from 57.9% to 75.0%


TARGETED COMMUNITY ACTIVITY Inspector Fiona Jarrett said: “It was pleasing to see that we had a reduction in general crimes of 29% (20 fewer crimes) when com-pared to the same time last year and a reduction in vandalisms of 34% (12 fewer crimes) which was the best in the division. This was due to pro-active polic-ing and high profile patrols within the area. We can still clearly improve our detection rates as they have reduced but it is still early in the recording period for the year to identify any trends. Vandalisms are espe-cially hard to detect and are often the result of anti-social behaviour due to alcohol so we will be target-ing these offenders. We appear to be meeting the targets with the public in relation to our standards of service and the public perception and all effort to continue this level of ser-vice will continue over the next month.”


26

POLICING ANGUS: Crime in more detail PERIOD APRIL to MAY 2011/2012 2012/2013 May Alone


known

DETECTIONS

number %

Made

known

DETECTIONS

number %

INC./DEC.

number %

Made

known

DETECTIONS

number %

GROUP 1

Murder 1 1 100.0% 0 0 - -1 -100.0% 0 0 -

Attempted Murder 0 0 - 2 2 100.0% 2 - 2 2 100.0%


Serious Assault 3 2 66.7% 8 7 87.5% 5 166.7% 7 6 85.7%

Robbery (Incl attempts) 0 0 - 1 1 100.0% 1 - 0 0 -

Child Cruelty/Neglect 2 2 100.0% 6 7 116.7% 4 200.0% 1 1 100.0%


Abduction 0 0 - 1 1 100.0% 1 - 0 0 -

Threats 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0 0 -

Others 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0 0 -

GROUP 1 - TOTAL 6 5 83.3% 18 18 100.0% 12 200.0% 10 9 90.0%

GROUP 2Rape 1 1 100.0% 4 1 25.0% 3 300.0% 3 1 33.3%

Assault with intent to rape 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0 0 -


Lewd & Libidinous practices 0 2 - 1 2 200.0% 1 - 0 1 -

Public Indecency 1 0 0.0% 1 1 100.0% 0 0.0% 1 1 100.0%

Others 0 0 - 1 2 200.0% 1 - 1 1 100.0%

GROUP 2 - TOTAL 14 11 78.6% 12 11 91.7% -2 -14.3% 9 7 77.8%

GROUP 3Housebreaking ~ domestic dwelling 18 6 33.3% 10 3 30.0% -8 -44.4% 7 3 42.9%



Theft, attempt theft from locked premises/property 8 3 37.5% 7 0 0.0% -1 -12.5% 4 0 0.0%



Convicted thief in poss.of tools etc. w.i. to steal 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0 0 -


Theft 179 98 54.7% 187 96 51.3% 8 4.5% 102 56 54.9%

Theft from motor vehicle 8 0 0.0% 4 0 0.0% -4 -50.0% 2 0 0.0%

Reset 1 1 100.0% 2 2 100.0% 1 100.0% 0 0 -

Embezzlement 0 0 - 1 0 0.0% 1 - 0 0 -

Fraud 15 12 80.0% 22 13 59.1% 7 46.7% 8 7 87.5%

Others 0 0 - 7 7 100.0% 7 - 0 1 -

GROUP 3 - TOTAL 275 138 50.2% 271 137 50.6% -4 -1.5% 139 77 55.4%

GROUP 4Fireraising 3 3 100.0% 6 1 16.7% 3 100.0% 0 0 -


Others 5 5 100.0% 4 3 75.0% -1 -20.0% 3 2 66.7%

GROUP 4 - TOTAL 213 75 35.2% 193 61 31.6% -20 -9.4% 93 29 31.2%


GROUP 5Public mischief & wasting police time 4 5 125.0% 6 6 100.0% 2 50.0% 2 2 100.0%

Escape or rescue from police custody or prison 0 0 - 1 1 100.0% 1 - 0 0 -


General attempts to pervert the course of justice 2 2 100.0% 4 5 125.0% 2 100.0% 3 3 100.0%

Sex Offenders' register offences 0 0 - 1 1 100.0% 1 - 0 0 -



Drugs - supply, with intent to supply etc 1 3 300.0% 8 9 112.5% 7 700.0% 6 6 100.0%

Drugs - personal possession 49 50 102.0% 44 44 100.0% -5 -10.2% 26 26 100.0%


Others 3 3 100.0% 6 5 83.3% 3 100.0% 4 4 100.0%

GROUP 5 - TOTAL 112 115 102.7% 112 113 100.9% 0 0.0% 59 58 98.3%



27

POLICING PERTH & KINROSS

CRIME

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

% / p

p Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

Groups 1-4 634 644 -1.6% 338 359 -5.8% 106 123 -13.8% 130 135 -3.7% 60 27 122.2%

- Detection rate 41.2% 57.8% -16.6 48.2% 59.3% -11.1 27.4% 56.1% -28.7 40.8% 60.0% -19.2 26.7% 33.3% -6.7

Violent Crime (G1) 20 28 -28.6% 15 19 -21.1% 0 4 -100.0% 2 5 -60.0% 3 0 ***

- Detection rate 95.0% 100.0% -5.0 93.3% 105.3% -12 0.0% 100.0% *** 150.0% 80.0% 70 66.7% 0.0% ***

Indecency (G2) 21 21 0.0% 9 7 28.6% 4 4 0.0% 4 9 -55.6% 4 1 300.0%

- Detection rate 52.4% 61.9% -9.5 44.4% 71.4% -27.0 50.0% 50.0% 0 75.0% 66.7% 8.3 50.0% 0.0% 50.0

Dishonesty (G3) 427 392 8.9% 228 215 6.0% 72 67 7.5% 91 91 0.0% 36 19 89.5%

- Detection rate 37.9% 65.3% -27.4 48.2% 68.8% -20.6 19.4% 61.2% -41.7 31.9% 68.1% -36.3 25.0% 26.3% -1.3

Mal Mischief, vandalism (G4) 166 203 -18.2% 86 118 -27.1% 30 48 -37.5% 33 30 10.0% 17 7 142.9%

- Detection rate 41.6% 36.9% 4.6 40.7% 33.9% 6.8 43.3% 45.8% -2.5 54.5% 30.0% 24.5 17.6% 57.1% -39.5

Robbery 9 6 50.0% 9 6 50.0% 0 0 *** 0 0 *** 0 0 ***

- Detection rate 100.0% 100.0% 0 100.0% 100.0% 0 0.0% 0.0% *** 0.0% 0.0% *** 0.0% 0.0% ***

Vandalism 149 185 -19.5% 76 106 -28.3% 27 45 -40.0% 32 27 18.5% 14 7 100.0%

- Detection rate 38.9% 34.6% 4.3 40.8% 32.1% 8.7 44.4% 44.4% 0 43.8% 25.9% 17.8 7.1% 42.9% -35.7

Domestic Housebreaking 30 13 130.8% 12 9 33.3% 5 2 150.0% 8 2 300.0% 5 0 ***

- Detection rate 3.3% 38.5% -35.1 0.0% 33.3% -33.3 0.0% 0.0% 0 12.5% 100.0% -87.5 0.0% 0.0% ***



POLICING PERTH

& KINROSS

SECTION 3

Perth City

SECTION 5

East Perthshire

SECTION 6

South Perthshire

SECTION 7

North and

West Perthshire

28



2012-13 Target

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

% / p

p Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change


94.0% 95.2% 100.0% -4.8 96.1% 100.0% -3.9 94.5% 100.0% -5.5 100.0% 100.0% 0.0 87.5% 100.0% -12.5


enquiry

85.0% 87.0% 89.3% -2.3 88.2% 83.3% 4.9 84.6% 85.7% -1.1 90.9% 100.0% -9.1 80.0% 100.0% -20.0



65.0% 77.4% 51.2% 26.2 80.9% 38.9% 42.0 73.3% 70.0% 3.3 76.5% 50.0% 26.5 77.8% 66.7% 11.1


following their contact to report a crime87.8% 58.3% 29.5 92.3% 37.5% 54.8 88.9% 71.4% 17.5 78.6% 66.7% 11.9 100.0% 100.0% 0.0




57.1% 41.2% 15.9 62.5% 40.0% 22.5 50.0% 66.7% -16.7 66.7% 25.0% 41.7 50.0% 50.0% 0.0


85.0% 86.1% 86.8% -0.7 80.8% 81.9% -1.1 89.5% 92.9% -3.4 94.1% 92.9% 1.2 80.0% 66.7% 13.3

Response Rate 10/31 (32.3%)74/216 (34.2%) 27/79 (34.2%) 19/52 (36.5%) 18/54 (33.3%)

KEY PERFORMANCE RESULTS: PERTH & KINROSS LPA SCORECARD - STANDARDS OF SERVICE - APRIL to MAY 2012


First Contact

- Reduction in satisfaction with service at first contact from 100.0% to 95.2%. This result exceeds the force target set at 94.0%.

- Reduction in identifying the person dealing with the enquiry from 89.3% to 87.0% although this still represented the highest result for this question across the force.

Updating the Public

- 26.2 percentage point improvement in updating the public from 51.2% to 77.4%. This result well exceeds the force target set at 65.0%.

When analysed by reason for contact - 87.8% of those who reported a crime were updated compared to 58.3% the previous year. An improvement was also evident in


Customer Experience

- Despite a reduction in overall customer experience from 86.8% to 86.1%, this result still achieved the force target set at 85.0%.

POLICING PERTH

& KINROSS

SECTION 3

Perth City

SECTION 5

East

Perthshire

SECTION 6

South

Perthshire

SECTION 7

North &

West Perthshire

29


Public Perception

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

% / p

p Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change

2012-13 Result

2011-12 Result

%/pp Change






past year

69.6% 74.2% -4.6 77.2% 69.5% 7.7 84.6% 73.7% 10.9 43.8% 72.2% -28.4 80.0% 100.0% -20.0





58.7% 66.7% -8.0 56.0% 63.3% -7.3 53.3% 75.0% -21.7 66.7% 60.8% 5.9 54.6% 85.7% -31.1


victim of crime



their neighbourhood

34.6% 26.2% 8.4 37.5% 23.3% 14.2 53.3% 29.2% 24.1 28.0% 31.8% -3.8 18.2% 14.3% 3.9



*Other includes:


etc

Response Rate


(46.7%)





Cause no concern:


Assault

Motor vehicle crime

Other

Robbery


(53.3%)


Other* (13.3%)




Cause no concern:


Assault

Motor vehicle crime

Robbery




(20.0%)

Cause no concern:

Antisocial behaviour

Assault

Housebreaking

Motor vehicle crime

Other

Robbery

Vandalism/graffiti







Other* (5.9%)

Cause no concern:

Assault

Motor vehicle crime

Robbery


(25.0%)





Other* (6.3%)

Cause no concern:

Assault

Housebreaking

Motor vehicle crime

Robbery

PERTH & KINROSS LPA SCORECARD - PUBLIC PERCEPTION ~ APRIL - MAY 2012

11/32 (34.4%)79/216 (36.6%) 26/66 (39.4%) 16/52 (30.8%) 26/66 (39.4%)

POLICING PERTH

& KINROSS

SECTION 3

Perth City

SECTION 5

East

Perthshire

SECTION 6

South

Perthshire

SECTION 7

North &

West Perthshire

30

Policing Perth & Kinross: Community Summaries ~ April to May 2012


SECTION 3: PERTH CITY Main areas of local community concern: danger-ous/careless driving, vandalism/graffiti and drug dealing/drug abuse CRIME Highlights • Reduction of 28.3% for vandalism (30 crimes)

DETECTION RATE Highlights • 8.7 percentage point improvement in detection rate for vandalism from 32.1% to 40.8%

Performance issues • 11.1 percentage point drop in detection rate for Groups 1 to 4 from 59.3% to 48.2%

STANDARDS OF SERVICE Highlights • An improvement of 42.0 percentage points in the percentage of customers who received an update on the progress of their enquiry from 38.9% to 80.9%

PUBLIC PERCEPTION • Only 56.0% of residents said they felt safe walk-ing alone in their neighbourhoods after dark com-pared to 63.3% last year at the same time.


TARGETED COMMUNITY ACTIVITY Inspector Martin said: “It was pleasing to see that efforts to co-ordinate our activities towards the reduction of high volume crimes, such as vandalism, continued to have some success. These crimes are often the ones that im-pact the most on local areas and the effort from offi-cers, as well as other agencies we work closely with, produced good results. Not only were there less crimes recorded but the efforts impacted positively upon the detection rate as well. We will not let this change our plans and will continue to work hard at all areas of our work on behalf of the Perth community. In much of our feedback, people said that they like to

be kept updated on the progress of their enquiry and our teams are working hard to achieve that; we have seen a notable increase in the number of people more satisfied in that regard. As always, we can try to achieve better and we will in an effort to continu-ally improve.

SECTION 5: EAST PERTHSHIRE Main areas of local community concern: danger-ous/careless driving, housebreaking and anti-social behaviour CRIME Highlights • Reduction in groups 1 to 4 of 13.8% (17 fewer crimes)

• Vandalism down by 40.0% (18 fewer crimes). DETECTION RATE Performance issues • Fall in detection rate for Groups 1 to 4 from 56.1% to 27.4%

• Deterioration of 41.7 percentage points in detec-tion rate for crimes of dishonesty from 61.2% to 19.4%

STANDARDS OF SERVICE Highlights • An improvement of 17.5 percentage points in the percentage of customers who received an update following their contact to report a crime from 71.4% to 88.9%

PUBLIC PERCEPTION • 84.6% of residents thought that the crime rate in their neighbourhood had remained the same or improved over the past year compared to 73.7% last year

• Only 53.3% of residents said they felt safe walk-ing alone in their neighbourhoods after dark com-pared to 75% last year at the same time.


31


TARGETED COMMUNITY ACTIVITY Sergeant Doogan said: “The following measures have been put in place in an effort to address the performance issues high-lighted: Anti-social behaviour ~ officers have been asked to undertake high visibility patrols in hot-spot areas and Special Constables have been tasked with focusing on youth related anti-social behaviour by visiting known haunts/public places with a view to the confis-cation of alcohol. Careless/Dangerous Driving ~ the Roads Policing Unit will assist in monitoring areas of concern in the section. Mobile Close Circuit Television (CCTV) has been requested in order to address the ‘boy racers’ complaints in Blairgowrie and the Community Impact team will also assist along with shift personnel. Domestic Housebreaking ~ the Community Impact Team will carry out valiant patrols with shift person-nel during the evenings. All shifts will target the known criminal fraternity in order to gather relevant intelligence in connection with vehicles currently be-ing used by active criminals.“

SECTION 6: SOUTH PERTHSHIRE Main areas of local community concern: danger-ous/careless driving and housebreaking CRIME Performance issues • Domestic housebreaking up from 2 crimes to 8 (300%)

DETECTION RATE Highlights • 17.8 percentage point improvement in detection rate for vandalism from 25.9% to 43.8%

Performance issues • Fall in detection rate for groups 1 to 4 from 60% to 40.8%

• Fall in detection rate for crimes of dishonesty from 68.1% to 31.9%

STANDARDS OF SERVICE Highlights • An improvement of 26.5 percentage points in the

percentage of customers who received an update on the progress of their enquiry from 50.0% to 76.5%

PUBLIC PERCEPTION • Reduction of 28.4 percentage points in the per-centage of residents who thought that the crime rate in their neighbourhood had remained the same or improved over the past year from 72.2% to 43.8%

TARGETED COMMUNITY ACTIVITY Inspector Iain Ward Said: "This has been a month of contrasts for the Section with some notable, positive results and some identi-fied areas for improvement. It is clear that our officers’ efforts in improving the quality of service they provide to the public are pay-ing dividends with some very good results in our lev-els of service. There has been a focus on ensuring that members of the public are updated regularly and I am glad to see that this has resulted in improve-ments, further improving upon the already high figure from last period. There is obvious work to be done in tackling domes-tic housebreaking in the Section with, albeit a small number being reported, a large percentage increase. I am confident that with the coordinated efforts of our colleagues in CID, we will see an increase in the de-tection rate in this area. There has been some focussed activity in relation to antisocial behaviour over the period which re-flects our results. Operation Dorado coupled with our drive towards the Summer Safety Campaign has re-sulted in a significant reduction in violent crime, in-creased detection rates for Group 4 crime, to an im-pressive 54.5%, whilst addressing the main concerns of our community, namely careless driving. “


32

SECTION 7: NORTH AND WEST PERTHSHIRE Main areas of local community concern: drug dealing/drug abuse, alcohol related crime and dangerous/careless driving CRIME Performance issues • Increase of 122.2% in groups 1 to 4 from 27 to 60

• Increase of 89.5% in crimes of dishonesty from 19 to 36

• 5 housebreakings recorded this year compared to none last year

DETECTION RATE Performance issues • 35.7 percentage point drop in vandalism from 42.9% to 7.1%

STANDARDS OF SERVICE Highlights • An improvement of 13.3 percentage points in the percentage of overall satisfaction from 66.7% to 80.0%.

PUBLIC PERCEPTION • Only 54.6% of respondents stated they felt safe walking alone in their neighbourhood after dark compared to 85.7% last year


33

POLICING PERTH & KINROSS: Crime in more detail

PERIOD APRIL to MAY 2011/2012 2012/2013 May Alone


known

DETECTIONS

number %

Made

known

DETECTIONS

number %

INC./DEC.

number %

Made

known

DETECTIONS

number %

GROUP 1

Murder 0 0 - 0 1 - 0 - 0 0 -

Attempted Murder 5 5 100.0% 1 1 100.0% -4 -80.0% 0 0 -


Serious Assault 6 7 116.7% 7 6 85.7% 1 16.7% 2 1 50.0%




Abduction 1 1 100.0% 0 0 - -1 -100.0% 0 0 -

Threats 3 3 100.0% 0 0 - -3 -100.0% 0 0 -

Others 0 0 - 1 0 0.0% 1 - 0 0 -

GROUP 1 - TOTAL 28 28 100.0% 20 19 95.0% -8 -28.6% 11 10 90.9%

GROUP 2Rape 1 3 300.0% 4 0 0.0% 3 300.0% 2 0 0.0%

Assault with intent to ravish 0 0 - 1 0 0.0% 1 - 1 0 0.0%


Lewd & Libidinous practices 2 0 0.0% 0 1 - -2 -100.0% 0 1 -

Public Indecency 7 3 42.9% 2 1 50.0% -5 -71.4% 2 1 50.0%

Others 1 0 0.0% 5 2 40.0% 4 400.0% 3 0 0.0%

GROUP 2 - TOTAL 21 13 61.9% 21 11 52.4% 0 0.0% 12 4 33.3%


Housebreaking ~ domestic non-dwelling 5 0 0.0% 12 1 8.3% 7 140.0% 4 1 25.0%





Convicted thief in poss.of tools etc. w.i. to steal 0 0 - 1 1 100.0% 1 - 0 0 -


Theft 256 154 60.2% 252 109 43.3% -4 -1.6% 154 67 43.5%


Reset 4 4 100.0% 1 1 100.0% -3 -75.0% 0 0 -

Embezzlement 1 1 100.0% 0 0 - -1 -100.0% 0 0 -

Fraud 26 35 134.6% 46 19 41.3% 20 76.9% 22 16 72.7%

Others 3 2 66.7% 4 2 50.0% 1 33.3% 2 0 0.0%

GROUP 3 - TOTAL 392 256 65.3% 427 162 37.9% 35 8.9% 248 102 41.1%



Others 10 7 70.0% 7 3 42.9% -3 -30.0% 3 1 33.3%

GROUP 4 - TOTAL 203 75 36.9% 166 69 41.6% -37 -18.2% 84 36 42.9%



Escape or rescue from police custody or prison 0 0 - 1 1 100.0% 1 - 0 0 -

Resisting arrest or obstructing police officer 14 14 100.0% 16 16 100.0% 2 14.3% 5 5 100.0%

General attempts to pervert the course of justice 8 6 75.0% 3 2 66.7% -5 -62.5% 2 1 50.0%

Sex Offenders' register offences 0 0 - 0 0 - 0 - 0 0 -






Others 8 6 75.0% 1 0 0.0% -7 -87.5% 0 0 -

GROUP 5 - TOTAL 139 133 95.7% 128 126 98.4% -11 -7.9% 67 66 98.5%



WHO TO CONTACT

Performance and Planning Unit

0300 111 2222

Email: [email protected]

www.tayside.police.uk

Twitter: @statspolice

This document is available on the force intranet and web site. It can be viewed there in large print by increas-ing the magnification on screen. You can listen to this document as a PDF file by click-ing on the ‘View’, menu, selecting ‘Read out aloud’ and ensuring your volume control is turned up.

Ongoing improvement depends on feedback from contributors and users and we would welcome your views. If you require further information about this re-port please use the contact below.

�

�

�

Documents

May 2012 - Performance Report