- RESTRICTED –

Operation CURB

Serious ViolencePrevention & Risk Management

Guidance Notes

July 2007

Protective Marking RestrictedFOIA Exemption

Suitable for Publication Scheme? Y/N NOTitle and Version Operation CURB Prevention & Risk

Management Guidance Notes v1Purpose To Support BOCU Planning

Relevant to TP/SCDSummary

Author and Warrant/Pay Number CI James COOKECreating BOCU/Branch & Unit SCD3

Date Created 9th July 2007Review Date 9th December

Chief Inspector James CookeSCD3 Serious and Organised Crime Prevention UnitRoom 235, New Scotland Yard, London SW1H OBJ

Tel. 64216 james.cooke@met.police.uk

1

- RESTRICTED –

Approach Summary &

Contents

PageIntroduction and Background……………………………………………………. 3

The Approach Principles………………………………………………………….. 3 - 4

Planning Phases and Stages:

Phase I – Preparation………………………………………………………………. 5 - 9 Management structure and control Staff capability The Problem Profile

Phase II – Audit and Mapping of existing Operations and Projects ………. 9 - 11 Multi Agency work areas Mapping of work SWOT Analysis highlighting linkages, gaps, duplication and opportunities for joint work

Phase III – Problem Solving and Prioritisation………………………………… 11 - 15 Partner Engagement and Information Exchange Risk Identification (victims, offenders and locations) Problem Solving Risk Assessment

Phase IV – Tactical Action Planning…………………………………………….. 15 - 21 Borough and Neighbourhood level Action Plan structure Tactical Interventions (victims, offenders and locations) Mix and Match to risk level Public reassurance and community “call to action”

Phase V – Tactical Plan Implementation……………………………………….. 21 - 24 Resource allocation Partner co-ordination Phasing and sequence of action

Monitoring, Evaluation and Performance……………………………………… 24 - 25

Appendix…………………………………………………………………………….. 26 - 61Appendix A – Borough and Neighbourhood Problem Profiling Template and Evaluation CriteriaAppendix B – Audit Template for Existing Multi Agency Projects and Operations directed

at serious violent crimeAppendix C – Risk Assessment Tools (Gangs and Individuals)Appendix D – Tactical Interventions (Victim, offender and location)Appendix E – Tactical Action Plan format example Appendix F – Public Reassurance Messages for a local Communications PlanAppendix G – Peer Group, Gang and Criminal Network Definitions

2

- RESTRICTED –

Introduction & Background

1.1 The prevention and management of serious violent crime has become increasingly important over the last 3 years, particularly as much younger offenders and victims have become affected by its symptoms.

1.2 Our experience and skills in managing violence have also increased dramatically through such programmes as Public Protection, Challenging Wards and Homicide Prevention on top of the empirical evidence of US projects such as Boston’s “Ceasefire”, the Chicago Alternative Policing Strategy and New York’s policing disorder initiative.

1.3 What is now required is a structured and co-ordinated approach involving new risk management systems, processes and appropriate tactical interventions, in collaboration with our principle partners such as Probation, Prisons, YOT, Health, Education, Housing, BTP and Tfl.

1.4 Violent crime affects neighbourhoods in many ways, manifesting itself in crimes such as street and commercial robbery, child abuse, domestic and hate crime, sex offending, gang and weapon offending and general public area violence.

1.5 It is imperative to understand the dynamics driving this offending which is based on an assortment of factors such as criminal gain, power and stat us, alcohol and drug abuse, mental health, self defence, belonging and retribution.

1.6 For organisational and legislative reasons the MPS has previously divided its work on violence along crime type lines. However, what is becoming abundantly clear is that our most dangerous and potentially dangerous offenders operate across all crime type domains 24/7. They do not observe such organisational or geographical boundaries.

The Approach Principles

2.1 The intention of these guidelines is to draw on this combined experience and propose a framework of approach involving:

The effective use of NIM products to profile violent crime in each Borough and ward neighbourhoods highlighting victim, offender and location typology good practice and the identification of the highest risk subjects and locations which are posing most cumulative harm from different crime types.

The use of auditing and mapping techniques to plot existing project and operational work on serious violence by both the police and key local partners. This should identify linkages, gaps, duplication and opportunities for co-ordinated effort.

The effective use of the MPS Problem Solving process to “unpeel” the more intractable issues and apply an appropriate response.

3

- RESTRICTED –

The use of risk assessment techniques to prioritise those offenders, victims and locations, which pose most danger. This should be based within a new public protection structure at BOCU level involving the collaborative working of various specialists such as Sapphire, Community Safety Units, Jigsaw, Child Abuse Teams, Gang/Gun desk, Mental Health Liaison Officers and the PPO scheme. This will enable finite resources to be applied to the most dangerous subjects through an enhanced public protection tasking and co-ordination process.

The development of a tactical action plan based on the above parts to address the specific neighbourhood problems with diversion, suppression and prevention measures. This will be balanced between victim, offender and location considerations and multi agency in nature.

Monitoring, evaluation and performance measures

2.2 Although Operation CURB is for an initial period up to the end of October 2007 it is strongly recommended that these guidelines are used to start building a longer term violent crime management infrastructure for the Borough.

2.3 These changes cannot take place overnight and it is estimated that the entire programme would take 3 years to establish in an effective and integrated way, however there is a great deal which can be accomplished in the short term 4 month period to get things started, focussed on:

1. A thorough Problem Profile which identifies the principle strategic and tactical issues across the Borough and within each ward neighbourhood

2. The identification of the most problematic offenders, victims and locations after scanning various internal and partner indices, ready for collaborative action

3. The engagement of each Safer Neighbourhood Team in setting up problem solving sessions and building community intelligence channels.

4. The establishment of a Public Protection Group structure under a suitably skilled manager to share intelligence and undertake joint tasking and co-ordination functions

2.4 There are three key police departments at the heart of this, the Safer Neighbourhoods, Crime Management, responsible for the specialist public protection units and partnership engagement with the local CDRP and other agencies.

4

- RESTRICTED –

Phase I – Preparation

Management structure and control

3.1 Operation CURB needs a Gold Group for the first 4 months to initiate, co-ordinate and monitor the range of measures required alongside key partners. The rationale for this is the critical youth violence risks being faced in most areas of London, which have led to over 22 teenage homicides since January by gun and knife, some involving groups or gangs.

3.2 It is recommended that the Gold Group is chaired by the Borough Police Commander or Local Authority CEO, under the auspices of the Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership.

3.3 The Gold Group membership should include:

o Borough Police Commandero Local Authority CEOo Safer Neighbourhood Chief Inspectoro Police Partnership Superintendent/Chief Inspectoro Police Superintendent/DCI Crime Managero Local Authority Community Safety Managero Local CDRP Chairo Local IAG Chairo Local PCCG Chairo Local Lead Probation Officero Local lead YOT Officer

3.4 The Gold Group will be responsible for overseeing and controlling the following work areas:

o Identifying and securing a project manager for the first 4 month period ideally on attachment/secondment terms initially.

o Initiating actions highlighted in the attached guidelines through the Project Manager

o Ensuring that the project is given high level direction to affect required changes

o Ensuring that there is alignment of multi agency resources to operational needs as they arise.

o Ensuring that there is an effective monitoring and evaluation process in place

5

- RESTRICTED –

Public Protection Structure

3.5 It is strongly recommended that the measures recommended within these guidelines eventually come under the auspices of an enhanced Public Protection structure which involves:

o The collaborative working of specialist units such as Gangs and Weapons, Sapphire, CSU, CAIT, Jigsaw, PPO, Mental Health Disorder under a Public Protection Group Manager (Supt/DCI Crime Manager)

o Eventually the co-location of the above units with key partners such as Probation, Children Services and YOT.

o A single co-ordination and tasking group for the Public Protection Group to allocate resources and apply for level 2 support from the Violent Crime Directorate.

o Comprehensive and integrated methods of risk management which: Identifies heightened risks in individuals and locations by

front line policing units attending individual incidents or collecting intelligence

Refers those identified risks using primary automated systems such as CRIS, CRIMINT, CADMIS, MERLIN and/or an enhanced 124D mechanism.

Assesses those risks using a low level generic cumulative ‘threshold’ test across crime types and then designating heightened risk cases into a new public protection group for full high level assessment.

Case manages those subjects and locations using a variety of tactics and controls within the management realms of the PPO and MAPPA schemes.

Monitors and reviews the risk in priority victims, offenders and locations to escalate or diminish the risk controls

o The enhanced use of the VISOR IT platform for the case management of

high risk cases designated to the Public Protection Group. This could include gang members who use different types of violence (sex offending, weapons, threats to kill).

o The available systems and processes are summarised below within Phase III

See Figure 1.1 Borough Public Protection Structure

6

- RESTRICTED –

The Problem Profile

3.6 Appendix A provides a suggested range of areas which need to be profiled to gain a firm understanding of the local characteristics of violence.

3.7 The statistical basis on which the profile is based should be robust to take into account seasonal variations and a 3 year span is recommended drawn from various indices such as CRIS, CRIMINT, CUSTODY, CADMIS. If there are good information exchange protocols in place further information should be drawn from the YOT, Children Services , Trading Standards, Environmental Health and Housing Indices within the local Authority.

3.8 Consider using the guidelines about profiling within the Jill Dando Institute publication “Become a Problem Solving Crime Analyst” by Ronald V Clarke and John Eck.

3.9 A strong Executive Summary is required

3.10 No one data source should be over relied on such as T65 CAD calls

3.11 Keep in mind that vast amounts of profiling has already been completed by various agencies especially within the hot spot Boroughs for example CtC Youth Surveys in the Trident Boroughs , The Challenging Ward Programme Profiles in Lambeth, Hackney, Haringey, Camden, Havering, Lewisham, Kingston and Croydon, the Crime Concern risk and protective survey in Southwark

3.12 The approach should be seen in three parts (a) Borough wide (b) neighbourhood and (c) level 2 perspectives on the Borough.

o A strategic overview should be provided by the BIU Higher Analyst across the whole Borough concerning:

The most dangerous and potentially dangerous offenders drawn up onto a composite list and sourced from the specialist Public Protection Units listed above.

7

- RESTRICTED –

Individual lists need to be compared and subjects appearing on different units indices given increased attention. The determining criteria should be the degree of risk ie severity of offending x frequency of offending x probability level of re-offending (across all violent crime types)

A composite list of the most vulnerable victims especially those that have been the victim of repeated violence. Again separate public protection unit lists should be compared and collated into a composite list of priority risks. The same type of criteria as above should be used and the view of the victim themselves about the likelihood of re victimisation given special attention.

Particular locations or hubs of violent crime activity should be highlighted such as pubs, clubs, streets, parts of estates and transport routes/stations.

Highlight the key interdependencies between victim, offender and location factors for instance the victimisation of people going to and from a club due to unfamiliarity with area and lack of transport facilities.

Highlight those offenders that are travelling into the area from other Boroughs and liaise closely with SM&PD Dept to map the import and export of violent offenders using CRIS and CUSTODY record indices. Try to establish the transport routes they have used and liaise closely with BTP Analysts

Describe geographically the main patterns of violence between Borough areas eg Residential Area Gang and Domestic violence to night time economy alcohol related violence.

o A tactical neighbourhood perspective should be gathered from the SNT Researcher and Analyst zeroing in on the hubs of activity and problem subjects identified in the overview document.

The Safer Neighbourhood Teams should be actively engaged in collecting specific victim, offender and location intelligence from a variety of sources within the community, local authority and voluntary sector such as:

Residents associations Estate caretakers and Housing Officers Hospital Casualty Units Detached Youth workers Safer School Officers and Teachers At risk repeat victims themselves Youth Peer Groups or Gang members themselves

particularly the younger elements using the Youth Engagement (Forward Intelligence Team tactics) Teams

Individual community informants (“nosey neighbour”)

This local perspective should better describe the tactical dynamics of violent crime in the neighbourhood.

8

- RESTRICTED –

3.13 Attention is drawn to the opportunity of completing an environmental/security survey of particular streets or problem locations, which are sources of high levels of crime. A particularly good example is that completed by SCD8Crime Prevention Design Advisor for the Challenging Ward area of Shoreditch, Hackney. See link \\aware.mps\SharedData\All HQ Departments\Specialist Crime\SCD3\SCD3(2)\SCrime Management\PROJECT WORK\CURRENT TASKS\86.Operation Curb\Shoreditch Environmental CPDA revisedv2.doc.This exemplar example identifies the spatial issues of crime which give the offender greater opportunities, the victim more vulnerability and the area a run down neglected feel, exacerbating a sense of neglect. The dangers of this are amply described in the broken windows theory of George Kelling USA.

3.14 Level 2 perspectives should be gathered by the Boroughs to enhance the understanding of violent crime and the following unit Analysts should be asked to contribute where possible:

o Trident and Trafalgaro SMPD concerning the travelling offendero BTPo SCD3 Criminal Network and Gangs Analysto CO14 Clubs and Viceo MIB Public Protection Units(Sapphire, CAIT, CSU, Jigsaw, Mental

Health)o SCD1 Homicideo VCD Blunto PPO Central Officeo MIB Drugs Directorateo TOCU

3.15 The Problem Profile should therefore be of three parts; one of overall strategic description and highlighting the highest risk offenders, victims and locations, secondly more detailed profiling of the most problematic neighbourhoods which are causing most impact on the Borough as a whole and lastly level 2 perspectives.

3.16 The key judgement will be if there is sufficient intelligence and analysis to support a comprehensive and clearly directed control strategy involving Reassurance, Intelligence, Prevention and Enforcement elements.

4. Phase II – Audit and Mapping of Existing Operations and Projects

4.1 Introduction

It needs to be recognised that a substantial amount of historical and current work on violent crime has and is being carried out on the Borough by a variety of agencies including the police. Many of these work areas will be unknown to each other and it is crucial that they are audited and mapped before commencing full scale problem solving.

9

- RESTRICTED –

An audit is recommended BUT this does not have to be a time intensive exercise as long as it captures the breadth and type of work being undertaken by different agencies.

By doing this the next phase of problem solving will be well informed and practitioners can be invited to be involved from key organisations working in the area.

4.2 Multi Agency work areas

Appendix B contains a template audit for the collection and scoping of different violent crime project areas.

Consider sending a copy of the audit template to the Local Authority Community Safety Manager who will be aware of all department and CDRP projects and operations on violent crime issues

The inclusion of all Police PATP type projects is NOT required for subjects and locations unless the scale of them justifies inclusion

Medium to large scale multi agency projects/operations which address victims, offenders and locations should be included. For example replica gun and domestic violence projects.

On going special work being undertaken by the specialist public protection units (listed above) should be included but only a general description is required on the template.

4.3 Mapping of work

Set aside a facilitated day to map the different projects and operations onto a print enabled white board (ESB Meeting Rooms) and consider ordering the contents in terms of projects/operations directed at different crime types together with their objectives and type of agency personnel involved. Are they area, victim or offender based.

In this exercise highlight the linkages between projects directed at a particular crime. Are they complimentary or a duplication of effort. Is there an opportunity of combining resources or a collaborative effort on different parts of the problem.

4.4 SWOT Analysis highlighting linkages, gaps, duplication and opportunities for joint work

Separately, assess the information gathered by using SWOT technique ie:o Where are the principle strengths in current projects and operations

particularly those that have been evaluated or show outstanding promise in early results.

o Where are the principle weaknesses in terms of duplicated effort and identified gaps of service provision.

o Are there any opportunities to combine projects or collaborative effort between them

o Do any of the projects/operations pose any threats in terms of fracturing community cohesion and reassurance.

Compile this analysis into a succinct report for the Project Manager and CDRP’s information.

10

- RESTRICTED –

5. Phase III – Problem Solving and Prioritisation

5.1 Introduction

The entire focus of Phase III should be on the more intractable problem areas of violence manifesting itself in terms of the most dangerous and vulnerable offenders, victims and locations. This will require effective risk identification methods, good information exchange protocols between agencies and effective organisational problem solving mechanisms to assess the relative risks across victims, offenders and locations and commence a measured tactical response in phase IV.

5.2 Management Structure and Control

It is recommended that the following management approach is taken to this Phase of work:

o The Public Protection (violent Crime) desk in the BIU together with the Safer Neighbourhood Analyst takes responsibility for the development of a thorough problem profile (as described above) which identifies the most problematic victims, offenders and locations. The composite lists of the most dangerous subjects and locations can then be reviewed on a regular basis based on daily incident information and intelligence.

o A separate problem solving structure is established by the Borough Problem Solving Lead and Advisor and divided into the following strands:

Strategic Themes such as transport routes/hubs using PSP form 301 led by an SMT member

Specific tactical issues under each strategic theme on PSP form 302 and led preferably by either the relevant Safer Neighbourhood Sgt or other key agency practitioner with expertise in that area. This will then give the ward neighbourhood accountability and responsibility for solving local issues.

o Set up a Joint Agency Group (JAG) for each problem being careful not to duplicate effort or representation. The JAG can be as big or small as needed commensurate with the problem. The JAG will then be responsible for further analysis on the problem from different perspectives, setting out response options and proposing a balanced tactical response as part of Phase IV.

o SCD3 utilised a level 2 Prevention Support Group for the Challenging Wards programme made up of key practitioners from different MPS departments and outside agencies such as BTP and this could be

11

- RESTRICTED –

reactivated to evaluate your problem solving work for gaps and opportunities on a regular basis.

5.3 Partner Engagement and Information Exchange

Partner engagement will be realised at different levels as this initiative progresses including:

o The Gold Group established to oversee the Operation CURB project made up of senior level representatives from key organisations

o The Joint Agency Groups formed to undertake problem solving around key strategic and tactical issues both overarching the whole Borough and within small ward based neighbourhoods.

o Within the Public Protection Management realm there will be three primary business areas which connect the BOCU to several key partners (a) the Children Services Directorate of the local Authority, (b) the Prolific and Priority Offender management group made up of YOT and Police officers under the local Crime and Disorder Partnership and lastly (c) the Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) made up of three responsible authorities, the Police, Probation and The Prison service together with other associated authorities such as Youth Justice Board, Health, Education and Housing .

Information exchange facilities exist in a variety of forms as well and these need exploiting to the Gold Groups full advantage including:

o More formal exchanges made regularly between the CDRP partners. There is now a requirement that the Borough will provide a 6 monthly strategic assessment of crime and drugs rather than relying on the previous 3 year CDRP audit and strategic plan. This allows for regular statistical analysis across different crime types gathered from many agencies. A fine example of this is the Haringey Partnership Data Report published by the Local Authority Community Safety Team to inform resource allocation and problem solving.

o The information and intelligence exchange requirements between responsible authorities and other related agencies managing high risk subjects on the MAPPA scheme. There is a duty to exchange intelligence about risk factors in individuals under the Criminal Justice and Courts Act 2001/3.

Risk Identification and Assessment (victims, offenders and locations)

5.4 Introduction

There are four principle risk management functions based on:

o Risk identification (gathered through direct front line policing and remote scanning of indices such as CRIS and CRIMINT)

o Referring those risks on for assessment and prioritisation.

12

- RESTRICTED –

o Assessing cases through the use of both a generic threshold test and in prioritised cases a much more in depth assessment.

o Case managing high risk cases with an appropriate and effective tactical action plan involving, in some cases, several partners

o Monitoring and Reviewing subjects and locations to determine whether an escalation or demotion of priority is required.

5.5 Risk Identification

Direct Risk Identification - Front Line Policing

At Borough level in accordance with the suggested Public Protection Model See Figure 1.2 the first function will be carried out through daily policing involving:o Response Teamso Safer Neighbourhood Teamso Safer Schools Officerso CID/Crime Squadso Front Receptiono Youth Engagement Teams (FIT Model)

Currently there are several risk identification tools available to such officers focused on subject and location issues:

o Describe the risk using free text on CRIS,CRIMINT and CADo By using Form 124D and the SPECCS model to identify risks in a

domestic incidento By using the Safe and Sound survey template for licensed premises

developed by CO14 Clubs and Viceo By using the CIMOS survey template of licensed premises developed by

SCD8o By using the SSAM survey template for schools/colleges developed by

SCD8o By Youth Engagement Teams using the new Youth Justice Board Gang

Risk Identification tool in collaboration with their local YOT.Remote Risk Identification

It is also recommended that indicative risk on CRIS and CRIMINT are remotely scanned for by the BIU using specialist data mining tools on a regular basis. These have been developed by MIB Homicide Prevention Unit and SMPD.

5.6 Risk Referral

The risk identification tools and risk entries on CRIS, CRIMINT and CAD referred to above should be sent to a mid tier Risk Assessment Referral and Designation Desk. In some areas of London this is part of the piloted RAMP structure and Process.

13

- RESTRICTED –

5.7 Risk Assessment

Threshold Type

Due to the scale of potentially dangerous persons and situations coming to the notice of police and our main partners on a daily basis several threshold assessment tools have now been developed based on the criteria of severity of violence x frequency violence occurs and likelihood that it will reoccur. The principle ones are:

o The Common Assessment Framework used by our key partners in social services and children services. This is likely to be extended to other partners such as Education and Health.

o A more generic police model is being developed by MIB and SCD3 for police purposes dealing with both subjects and locations

o The Gang Risk Assessment tool that is going to be used by YJB across London and which will form part of the ASSET and ONSET individual risk assessment.

The key however is that during the threshold Assessment, intelligence is assessed drawn from all the different Public Protection Specialist Units to determine the cumulative offending behaviour of the subject and subsequently the degree of risk.

This threshold test will be the responsibility of the BIU Violent Crime Desk

Full Assessment

If a subject or location passes this threshold assessment they will be designated by the BIU Violent Crime Desk to the Public Protection Group and assigned to a particular unit to lead.

It is recommended that where possible individual dangerous offenders or gang members having passed this threshold are placed onto the VISOR IT platform and case managed using this mechanism.

Eventually it is recommended that all such subjects are fully assessed using the basic OAYSIS method for adults as practised by the Prison and Probation Service and the ASSET method for young people. This will require police training.

Further specialist assessment tools such as Matrix 2000 are available for sex offenders.

5.8 Case Management

There will be three principle management realms for managing high risk cases within the public Protection Group:

o Children Services and Safeguarding Children operated by the local authority. This will involve case management of at risk families by health visitors. The Police Public Protection Manager should have close ongoing contact with this office particularly with regard to domestic and child abuse incidents coming to notice

14

- RESTRICTED –

o The Prolific and Priority Offenders scheme run between the police, YOT and CDRP for repeat offenders causing cumulative community harm through volume acquisitive, ASB or violent offending.

o The MAPPA realm for high risk violent and sex offenders. These can be subjects who have been released from prison after serving 12 months+, placed on the sex offenders register or have at least one conviction and the authorities believe they are potentially dangerous.

It is envisaged that the Public Protection Group will have its own integral Tasking and Co-ordination function to determine prioritisation after assessment and resource allocation. This mechanism will also allow for referral to MIB and the MPS Corporate TTCG process for level 2 resources if required.

It is noted that there may be occasions when level 2 subjects who live on the Borough concerned are placed within this Public Protection Group. For example a particularly dangerous Trident Gang member who poses a 24/7 life risk could become a MAPPA category 3 Critical Few subject.

5.9 Monitoring and Review

If the VISOR IT platform is used for case management and assessment purposes the software has in built monitoring and review procedures which are automatically flagged to the case officer.

6. Phase IV – Tactical Action Planning

6.1 Introduction

The effectiveness of the tactical plan will be dependent on the thoroughness of Phase I-III. If the prioritisation and understanding of the highest risk victims, offenders and locations has been completed, based on the cumulative harm they pose across crime types, an appropriate pro-active tactical response can be developed.

It is clearly appreciated that background reactive policing has to be maintained for all reported incidents and new intelligence, but if the Public Protection model described above is embedded, on-going risks and new risks can be continually re-evaluated and placed when necessary within the proactive tactical response.

Boroughs cannot afford to be distracted from the most problematic offenders, victims and neighbourhood locations as this is where their performance will be judged and where the bulk of crime will be sourced.

Borough and Neighbourhood level

6.2 Borough Wide Level

15

- RESTRICTED –

Tactical planning at this level should concentrate on:

o Thematic crime problems affecting the whole Borougho Creating effective partnership links with key local departments and

agencies to support the SNT’s.o Resourcing neighbourhood action plans with finance, expertise, personnel

and equipmento Making sure there are shared resources at level 1 between ward areas

and requesting level 2 resources where requiredo Mapping and co-ordinating neighbourhood ward activity to identify

linkages, gaps and stop duplicated effort

6.3 Neighbourhood Level

Each Safer Neighbourhood Team must take responsibility and accountability for proactive efforts in developing a tactical action plan for the area. They are closest to the issues and should be in the best position to understand the dynamics and people concerned. Furthermore there will be a number of community and local authority practitioners available to give direct support.

If the SNT has taken responsibility for key parts of Phase II-III the tactical response should be growing naturally out of these phases. They should have ownership over relevant Tactical Problem Solving Forms 302 and PATP location and subject targeting plans. All the experience from USA highlights the importance of this local ownership.

SNT’s should also be engaged fully with the Public Protection Group on BOCU to help manage priority victims and offenders with home visits, monitoring and follow up enforcement where required

6.4 Action Plan structure

With each PSP form 302 there should be a clear action plan at the end (See Appendix C) which should contain the following sections:

o The Outcomes sought (eg Community can use the location safely 24/7)o The Objectives (using SMART principles to achieve the outcome)o The method (for each objective)o Timescales (for each objective)o Outputs (eg no..of security surveys, leaflets distributed)o Resources needed (Personnel, time, finance and equipment)o Partners involved (who is delivering what on the action plan)o Development opportunities

6.5 It is essential that the action plan is formally signed off by the partners to undertake agreed work and they are made accountable for this to the Gold Group. Care and awareness should be exercised over partner business planning cycles and objectives to capitalise on existing work in accordance with Phase II principles.

16

- RESTRICTED –

Tactical Interventions (victims, offenders and locations)

6.6 Introduction

Below I have explained the main types of prevention centred on victim, offender and location issues. In Appendix D I have listed some of the many methods currently in operation or under development, which may be of use in preventing serious violence within your neighbourhoods. This includes methods for tackling Gang crime as well as individual violent offending.

6.7 Types of Tactical Intervention

Prevention is a multi faceted function and there is often a misconception that it is only about situational “locks and bolts”. Prevention work runs through every business area of policing and takes many forms including diversion, suppression, disruption, risk management and pure situational prevention.

6.8 Offender Centred

The are three principle management realms designed to risk manage and prevent violent offending at different points of the “risk escalator”(see figure 1.2):

6.9 Borough Children Services Directorate – This is run by a local Children Services Director and co-ordinates activity across several departments supporting children and families including social services, health and education. Part of its

17

- RESTRICTED –

remit is to identify and manage at risk families within which there is domestic violence and child abuse leading to offending behaviour in the children themselves. The curtailment of a child’s development in these circumstances is now clearly demonstrated through research undertaken by such agencies as the Wave Trust. The new HM Government Cabinet appointee for children and families also recognises this area.

6.10 Prolific and Priority Offenders scheme (PPO) – This comes under the auspices of the local CDRP and involves two principle partners the police and YOT. There are three strands to it (a) catch and convict repeat offenders (b) Deter and prevent and (c) Rehabilitation of offenders.

It is not however controlled by statute and is largely a voluntary partnership directed at volume crime by individual offenders which causes cumulative community harm. The criteria for selection is a wide one and currently “The London Approach” is changing to include more violent offenders involved in lower level peer group and gang offending. It is a vital component for managing mid tier risk offenders.

6.11 Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (MAPPA) - This is controlled by statute and its potential for managing higher risk individuals has yet to be fully exploited. It is designed as a multi agency case management system with in built information exchange and accountability requirements between core partners, police, probation and prisons. It is designed to control and divert sex and violent offenders using an assortment of techniques at three levels (a) within one agencies resources (b) with other local partners and (c) those termed the “critical few” who pose a 24/7 life threat. These are managed at chief officer level.

Each of the above realms uses a variety of specific tactics which I have listed in Appendix D these focus on control, diversion and suppression.

Victim Centred

There are two principle types of prevention focussed on victims:

6.12 Protection

Identified high risk repeat victims of violence such as domestic violence, robbery or gang crime can be managed using a victim management planning process. The plan’s constituent parts is made up of a mixture of elements such as personal attack alarms, safe rooms or areas that they can retreat to in crisis situations, a full monitoring process of home visits or full scale relocation of the victim away from the threat.

In the case of domestic abuse and child abuse the Community Safety Unit and Child Abuse Investigation Team must be involved to ensure standard and accountability in close liaison with the Safer Neighbourhood Unit.

In general areas where there is a high victimisation rate such as licensed premises, transport routes and hubs, going to and from school or high density entertainment areas there will be a need for protective security provided by policing agencies such as MPS, BTP and Town Centre Wardens

18

- RESTRICTED –

6.13 Behaviour and Awareness

Through education and training both the general community and the most vulnerable groups such as repeat victims, the young and the elderly can change their behaviour and awareness. This includes:

o The clothing they wearo Making sure they research the route they take to a strange areao Avoiding certain areas at key timeso Walking with purposeo Placing and use of high value IT itemso How to deal with confrontational situations to diffuse them.

6.14 Location Centred

At risk locations come in a variety of guises such as small business premises, transport stations and stops, pubs, clubs, key streets and estates. Certain areas are also crime drivers particularly where there is a drugs market which is underpinning the criminal community. This in turn is linked directly to individual violence levels due to cash needs and personal taking of psychotic inducing substances such as Skunk.

There are three principle strategic ways of preventing crime on such locations using proved methodology from risk management:

o Improving the design and layout of the location to provide better lines of sight and natural surveillance. This can also include product design to prevent violent crime.

o Improving the management systems and procedures for the location concerning such issues as cash security, staff supervision and search techniques

o Training the staff above to deliver high standard management of their safety and security. This should be mainstreamed into the broader management skills required.

In the case of drug market areas a much more energetic policing and enforcement regime is required with dealers and punters being put under constant pressure on the street and forced into rehabilitation programmes on arrest by using bail conditions and compulsory drug testing in the case of violent behaviour.

6.15 “Mix and Match” of Interventions to Risk Level

Not withstanding that there are strategic approaches to prevention focussed on offenders, victims and locations as above it must be kept in mind that every crime involves an interaction between all three parts to differing degrees. Therefore any tactical plan focussed on a particular problem MUST involve a

19

- RESTRICTED –

balanced mixture of tactics split between the victim, offender and location to achieve maximum impact.

This action plan should also reflect the level of risk in the situation and may require much more active policing suppression techniques in the short term in life threatening situations.

Use the model at Figure 1.2 to help choose interventions from Appendix D appropriate to the position of the situation on the risk escalator.

6.16 Use of Scenario Planning

Scenario planning is also very helpful in determining the mix and match required to a given set of typical situations around violent crime. There are several manuals on the “Intranet” which list tactical options for a given situation. (See front page left margin corporate manuals for gun crime, homicide and gang crime)

Public Reassurance Tactics and Community “call to action”

6.17 Part of the tactical response has got to be reassuring the community about the reality of the situation and the response of the authorities. Today much of the publics perception is driven by media stories nationally and locally. This can be dramatically negative and police awareness and use of local media and marketing campaigns is critical.

6.18 MORI carried out a survey (2,000 people aged 15+ in UK Feb 2007) of public perceptions of violent crime. The headlines were:

o Most people’s top concern was violent crime and violent offenderso Most people considered the police response to preventing violent crime

was least effective beside other policing areas such as public order, use of CCTV and treating people equally.

o In those local neighbourhoods where communication was high between the police and community about policing methods and success, confidence was commensurately high in them

6.19 The lesson from the survey is that local communities want to know exactly what their police are doing and how they can help to improve the situation outside their homes and businesses. This requires carefully crafted communication tactics using:

o The local Safer Neighbourhood Newsletter in particular. You have full control over this and the public have high levels of confidence in what you are telling them. However they don’t want to know about police statistics in too much detail but exactly what you want them to do to reduce crime. Eg reporting intelligence, keeping hedges/trees well maintained and removing graffiti and litter.

20

- RESTRICTED –

o The local newspaper, running initiatives to raise awareness and get a sense of a united and resilient community

o Using local Radio to do the same and get the debate going about key issues such as replica guns

6.20 At Appendix E there is a summary of key messages about serious youth violence which could be used in such a campaign

6.21 Public Meetings have their use also at critical periods such as youth murder BUT it should be kept in mind that they attract some people who have their own political agenda and can smother wider community concerns and priorities. There fore the above methods are often more effective.

6.22 The way in which victims of violent crime are treated will also have a dramatic impact on public reassurance as the victims family and friends will report good and bad police support to hundreds of people in due course.

7. Phase V – Tactical Plan Implementation

Resource allocation

7.1 Police Tactical and Strategic Tasking and Co-ordination Group (level 1&2)

Resource requests for covert and overt policing need to be described carefully on the PATP. Successful bidding will be based on the strength of your case and this needs to be anchored in the evidence of the phase I-III profile, audit and problem solving.

Keep in mind the scale of what can be achieved without further policing BUT by harnessing personnel from other agencies and the wider public. This could include the use of Trading Standard Officers, Environmental Health Officers and local Town Centre Management schemes

The PATP and linked profile and PSP forms 301 and 302 can be submitted by either the Safer Neighbourhood Team or the Public Protection units described earlier to the Borough TTCG. Further specialist help can then be obtained by submitting the request to the TP Co-ordination and Tasking Office and thereon to CO and SCD for key expertise as required from SCD7, 8 and 11 as required.

7.2 Borough Strategic Partnership & Crime and Disorder Partnership

Medium to long term financial assistance to support the tactical plan can also be sought vis the CDRP and the increasingly important Strategic Partnership, which has control over Local Area Agreement Funding. This fund is a pooled resource drawn from multiple department pots into a unified Neighbourhood Renewal source. The control of violent crime will be a primary area of business for this body to tackle education and youth offender diversion schemes for instance.

7.3 Charity, Trust and Business Support

21

- RESTRICTED –

Appendix F gives a list of potential funding sources from the charity and Business Sector. However it is recommended that contact is made initially with the regional officer working for the Safer London Foundation (A Charity set up by the MPS for Safer Neighbourhood Initiatives) They will guide the applicant to complete a funding plan.

A mixture of statutory, charity and Business support is going to energise a big local initiative providing synergy and plenty of media opportunities. Funding from multiple sources will attract further sponsors to sustain the initiative into the future.

Partner co-ordination

Local Level

7.4 Neighbourhood Ward Panels

Every ward in London has now got a neighbourhood panel aligned to the Safer Neighbourhood Team made up of community, business, voluntary sector and statutory authority representatives.

The purpose of these panels is three fold:o To assess and articulate local policing priorities from the communities

point of viewo To allow the police to present further intelligence about crime which will

affect the prioritisationo To act as a consultation conduit for new initiatives and problems

Keep in mind that policing prioritisation is a two way process and there will be factors the panel will not be aware of that should be taken into consideration. Police activity should not be entirely directed by the panel upwards, it has to be a two way process.

7.5 Joint Agency Groups (JAG)

These were described earlier under Phase III and can be used specifically as a problem solving working group either locally for neighbourhood issues or more strategically for thematic issues affecting the whole Borough.

The group should have clear objectives, terms of reference and appropriate representation from practitioners who are experts in that problem aspect. Keep in mind that different perspectives will help to reduce the problem to its component parts allowing a truly effective problem solving process

Borough Level

7.6 Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships

The CDRP’s were set up in 1998 under statute to Audit crime and Disorder, compile a 3 year strategy and action plan together with a co-ordination

22

- RESTRICTED –

responsibility. Most have set up a multi agency community safety Team for day to day management and hold meetings and working groups on various aspects of crime and disorder.

Many of the London CDRP’s have a Violent Crime Group working to the main Board specifically targeting this area. Contact between operational police units and this panel should be ongoing.

Now and in the future the increasing role of the Strategic Partnership in each Borough, which sits above the CDRP, must be recognised. Most finance will be controlled by this and police business cases for support will become increasingly important particularly asking for a Local Area Agreement funding Package.

7.7 Victim and Offender Management

Children Services Directorate

See above

Prolific and Priority Offenders Scheme

See above

Multi Agency Public Protection Panel (Borough and Prisons)

7.8 Please note that violent offenders can be referred for threshold and full assessment by any front line policing unit. See Phase III. If the risk of violent offending is high the subject can be referred to the Borough Jigsaw Team for case management if they meet the inclusion criteria (on sex register, just released from prison after at least a 12 months term or any one convicted of one offence and the police consider them a risk from serious violence)

7.9 It should also be highlighted that every HM Prison has a MAPPA board and pre release intelligence packs can be requested vide the Prisons Intelligence Unit of MIB. These can be used to develop a prevention/risk management plan for a London based violent offender. This facility and co-ordination area is seriously underused at present.

Phasing and sequence of action

7.10 Short Term

Prioritisation is the key. Which victims, offenders and locations present the greatest threat to life or source of serious injuries. This should be based on the aforementioned criteria of severity x frequency x likelihood of reoccurance.

Specific and tailored response required for each. See Appendix D Concentration on removing the threat or dramatically suppressing its impact

7.11 Medium Term

23

- RESTRICTED –

Public Reassurance and call to action campaign locally or Borough wide Implement phase I-IV as described above

7.12 Long Term

Comprehensive Tactical plan to sustain effort over next 3 years using resources from multiple sources

Monitoring and Review plan to re-evaluate tactical plan in light of changing circumstances.

Monitoring, Evaluation and Performance

7.13 Introduction

If the Tactical action plan is to be credible it needs to be (a) firmly founded on phase I-III high quality preparation (b) the objectives set need to be SMART and measurable and (c) Its implementation properly monitored and evaluated.

The industry estimate for investment time and finance on monitoring and evaluation is about 10% of the entire programme costs. This will enable bench mark data lines to be set and proper objective evaluation methods overseen either internally by the Quality Assurance Office of each BOCU or an outside evaluator

The objectives can be of two types, quantitative and qualitative meaning either specific number reduction or based on the quality of structures, processes and systems for violent crime risk management.

Setting Objectives and Performance Indicators – Suggested Areas

7.14 Quantitative

X% reduction in Homicide, Woundings (S18/20 type) and possession of knives and guns (all types) Based on reported/recorded or classified basis Borough wide and Ward by ward. Comparisons should be made monthly, quarterly and annually as PI’s for:o Total offences compared between time periods on the Borough as a whole

and by Wardo Wards compared with surrounding wards and similar London Wards

elsewhereo Boroughs compared with similar family type London Boroughso Comparison with MPS total increase/reduction %

X% reduction in offending incidents by identified high risk offenders residing on the Ward/Borough OR travelling to the ward to offend.

X% reduction in victimisation incidents of identified vulnerable victims residing or located within the Borough/Ward.

7.15 Qualitative

24

- RESTRICTED –

Establishment and development of an effective Public Protection Group on the BOCU incorporating:

o Public Protection Group Managero Co-location of key specialist units (Jigsaw, Gangs/Guns unit, CAIT, CSU,

Sapphire, Mental Health Liaison Officer, PPO staff and Compass staff)o Public Protection BIU Desk for threshold Assessments and case

designation/referralso Standard of NIM tactical and strategic violent crime assessment productso Standard of Violent Crime Problem Profileo Effective introduction of standardised threshold and full assessment

systems with key partnerso Expanded use of VISOR IT for case management across public protection

domain with risk assessment tools electronically available thereon.

7.16 Completion of Phase I-IV as described above to given standard criteria.

7.17 Appropriate training of front line staff and Public Protection Group staff in risk management systems and behavioural indicative signs in offenders, victims and locations

7.18 Monitoring Mechanisms

VISOR has inbuilt monitoring mechanisms for case management of high risk offenders and victims of violent crime.

It is suggested that each tactical plan for each ward and the Borough as a whole is monitored quarterly for performance against the objectives as set out above, by the Performance/Quality Assurance lead for the BOCU.

Attention is drawn to Harrow Borough’s violent crime Bi weekly monitoring report examples and Gold Group violent crime tactical NIM assessments, as good practice. See link………………………….

7.19 Evaluation

SCD3 established a multi disciplinary level 2 Evaluation and Support Group for the Challenging Wards Programme to review each phase of work as above and it is suggested that this is re-activated with new terms of reference to allow:

o Regular review of 32 BOCU plans for gaps and opportunities to improve their response to violent crime

o Act as a form of evaluation process for the 32 BOCU’s

This facility could be supported with professional support services and central business group oversight from Violent Crime Directorate.

25

- RESTRICTED –

APPENDIX APROBLEM PROFILE

PREVENTION GUIDANCE NOTES

Introduction

The following are suggested areas for enquiry and intelligence collection towards the NIM problem profile for each of the priority wards. They are designed to help develop a prevention strategy and action plan.

It is recognised that the basic profile of the five TP recommended wards (Camden Town, Coldharbour, Fairfield, Grove and Romford Town ) are markedly different to the three SCD recommended wards (Haggerston, Tottenham Green, New Cross). The former are largely town centre issues with a strong night- time economy whilst the latter are facing difficult gun and gang neighbourhood problems.

In this preliminary profiling stage focus falls on location questions for the TP wards and offender/victim management questions for the SCD wards.

Town Centre Wards

Location

Problem Pubs and Clubs o Location, size, typeo Management capacity and capability of each siteo Frequency, prevalence and type of crime incidents in and surrounding

each site (CADMIS, CRIMINT and CRIS)o Door supervision standards and search protocolso Staff training levels for VAP, management systems and design factors in

each location (Health and Safety, Fire Brigade, CPDA and CPO reports) Other Alcohol Supply Points

o Supermarkets, convenience stores and other off-licenceso Any intelligence or enforcement action taken historically

Main pedestrian arterial routeso Mapping of main routes taken into and out of areao Density, flow patterns and pinch points at key times (CCTV analysis)o Frequency, prevalence and type of crime incidents on and adjacent to

these routes Main transport Hubs

o Position, size and type (Railway, Underground and Bus stations. Bus stops, Cab and taxi ranks

o Frequency, prevalence and type of crime incidents at each hub inside and adjacent.

o Staffing capacity and capability levels at each Main arterial transport routes into and out of hubs

26

- RESTRICTED –

o Railway and roado Intelligence and reported crime incidents on these routes leading to action

area (BTP) especially VAP, alcohol and drug use.

CCTV and/or Police Helicopter sample surveillance and recording of key points at key times of day/week i.e. transport hubs, arterial pedestrian routes and problem locations for analysis.

Local Authority Noise Team data on call outs to locations and type, duration and result

Local Authority Environmental Health data on improvement notices and prosecutions pursued in action area under Health and Safety legislation.

Offenders and Victims

Home Address patterns for offenders (arrested/ intelligence). Plot across London Routes used into and out of area List of repeat offenders in action area across ALL VAP/ Public Order crime

categories (DCC2 to assist)(CRIS, CUSTODY)(NIM Subject Profiles) Classify separately under:

o Resident of areao Staff member of businesso Visitor from out of area.

List of repeat victims in action area across ALL VAP/ Public Order crime categories (DCC2 to assist) (CRIS, CUSTODY) Classify separately under:

o Residento Staff of business premiseso Visitor from out of area

Fear of Crime Survey results in action area.

Gun and Gang Crime Wards

Offender and Victim Management

SCD 10 (4) Problem profile NIM products regarding distinct communities in action area.

SCD 12 Criminal Network Live Matrix intelligence on local gangs and criminal networks

SCD 7 & 8 Problem and Subject Profiles relevant to offenders operating in action area across serious violent crime categories Homicide, Kidnap, Gun crime, Blackmail and extortion, commercial robbery and trafficking.

Repeat offenders and victims of gun crime and VAP operating in the area. Cross indices checks in TP and SCD to collate nominal’ of common interest in

VAP and Serious crime categories. SCD1,7,8. Jigsaw, CAIT, Sapphire, PPO, CSU and Jigsaw.

Capacity and capability of specialist units managing serious violence i.e. CAIT, CSU, Sapphire, PPO and Jigsaw teams

27

- RESTRICTED –

Use of SCD11 (7) Prison Intelligence Pre-release Intel packs and MAPPA co-ordination and liaison.

Existing gang and gun projects operated by police, other agencies or under partnership arrangements.

Supply and Use of Guns – A specific problem profile will be needed for the criminal supply and use of firearms within the Borough and the action ward in particular. Intelligence needs to be collected concerning the following stages of the supply and use chain.

Supply

Seven key stages have been identified in the SUPPLY chain and three general areas of consideration for firearms USE:

1. Component parts of Gun Crime

Primary weaponi. Air gunii. Blank Fireriii. Converted or reactivated weapon (For example ‘Brocock’)iv. Real weapon (Made revolver or pistol)v. Replica

Ammunition (manufactured and home made ’reload’ type)i. Primer capii. Smokeless explosive powderiii. Casing (normally brass)iv. Metal jacketed lead bullet

Body Armour

2. Sourcing

High street retailers Mail Order (Internet/ telephone or post) Illegal Armourers Conversion specialist tools Leakage from Legal Arms trade Peer group trading

3. Conversion and Assembly

Specialist Tools required Locations used Expertise needed (Internet/trade/acquired) Typical Signs of activity

4. Purchase ordering systems and payment

Telephone Internet Mail Order

28

- RESTRICTED –

Personally arranged (at pub/club or other key meeting places) Cash Credit card Goods in exchange ‘Hire’ arrangement

5. Supply Routes to Purchaser

Mail (Courier and Royal Mail) Road (private car/ mini cabs/ Hire vehicles) Underground/Overland Rail/Bus routes Personal delivery

6. Storage/Arming Locations Private address of purchaser Hirer’s address Private address of purchasers girlfriend or other associate Easily accessible 24hrs

7. Deterrent Factors Fear of detection Fear of losing status assets (car, money, property, etc) Fear of being shot and seriously maimed or killed (rival or police) Fear of prison sentence Community confidence reporting intelligence

USE

Offender Profile different types

o Criminal arming themselves to commit crimeso At risk person arming themselves for defensive purposeso Persons arming themselves for status reasonso Intermittent carrying at times of perceived risk

Carrying and actual Useo On the offenders person at all timeso Held at an easily accessible point 24hrso Carried on their behalf by less obtrusive persons. For example girlfriend or

young sibling

High Risk Locations/ Events Active gun criminals private address (inside and outside) ‘Crack House’ type locations Nightclubs Special Events (Private party or music event attracting particular client) Small Business Premises (Convenience stores/ Hairdressers) Schools Hospitals In vehicles while travelling

29

- RESTRICTED –

Victims Direct victims Indirect victims (siblings of gun criminal, other relations either being drawn into

crime themselves or intimidated into assisting the offender) Community (economy, fear, false role models, health care) Friends and associates in local neighbourhood gang.

30

- RESTRICTED –

Evaluation Framework for ward problem profiles

The overall aim of the problem profiles is to provide a comprehensive crime and intelligence picture for their respective wards. As such, the analysis itself must be based on sufficient evidence and data to support robust conclusions and recommendations.

The key threshold to be judged as fit for purpose is whether they are each sufficiently comprehensive and clearly directed to inform Intelligence, Prevention and Enforcement strategies.

The profiles, in their final formats, must be committal. A non-committal stance on the problems and proposed solutions in the wards is not useful to the Violent Crime Directorate or other central MPS resources.

The following criteria have been set as measures for an evaluation of the initial level 1 BOCU submissions that were sent to level 2 recipients:

Overall

1. Is the period of time covered by the source data and analysis sufficiently robust? (Three years was proposed and agreed on the 19th July)

2. Are the statistics robust?3. Has enough data been used as a base for the analysis and conclusions?4. Is the source data drawn from more than one database (eg CRIS and Crimint

and CAD)?5. Are all three major categories of violence considered in the profile? (The SCD

profiles are focussed in gangs and gun crime, but a wider consideration and analysis is expected in the victim and offender sections when looking at Nominals for example).

6. Is the Executive Summary clear, directed and concise?7. Is the victim-offender-location triangle clearly covered and referred to in the

document?8. Is there enough information and analysis to inform and assist level 2

contributors?

Offenders

9. Has a basic offender profile (age, sex, ethnic appearance) been carried out?10.Has the local PPO index been used?11.Are offenders contained in the document clearly linked to the core problems and

solutions?12. Is offending sporadic – ie motivated by situational and venue factors – or is it

repeat offending committed a small core group of criminals?

Location

13.Are the socio-economic and demographics of the wards covered in the report?14.Are the key venues analysed and the offences surrounding them considered?

31

- RESTRICTED –

15. Is the involvement of specialist MPS units considered in venue-based strategies or recommendations? (eg Clubs and Vice for problematic licensed premises)

16.Have mapping techniques been used to pinpoint hotspots?17.Are these mapped crimes cross-checked with temporal data?

Victim

18.Has a basic victim profile been carried out?19. In the case of robbery, has the property stolen been analysed?20.Has the level of repeat victimisation been considered?

32

- RESTRICTED –

APPENDIX B

Phase II Audit Existing Projects/Operations – Serious Violent Crime

TEMPLATE

Type of Violent Crime Addressed

Project/Operation Name & Manager

Objectives Start/End Date

Police/Agency Depts. Involved

Current Status & Linkages to other Projects

Guns/Weapons Gang Crime Alcohol and

Drug related VAP

General VAP Domestic/Hate Sexual Child Abuse Mental Health

Disorder

Quantitative targets Qualitative targets

(training, systems & structures)

Victim, offender or locational based

Local authority depts

CDRP managed Police Units LFB Voluntary

Sector

Progress Opportunities Constraints Linkages & Gaps

33

- RESTRICTED –

APPENDIX C

RISK ASSESSMENT/PRIORITISATION

GUIDANCE NOTES

PART A – GUIDANCE ON PRODUCING RISK/PRIORITISTION ASSESSMENT

A.1 Introduction to Risk Assessment

There are a number of different risk assessment processes currently used by the MPS and partner agencies, however many of these are specific to one crime type/offender and do not allow us to compare risks across the crimes and types of offending. The purpose of this form is to score the risk posed by individuals, groups, locations and/or crime series in order to inform tasking.

It is expected that the relevant NIM product and/or more in depth assessments used by partner agencies will be completed before the completion of the risk assessment form, and will be submitted with the form to inform the response.

The score given on the form should be evidence in the attached analysis.

A.2 Who has overall responsibility for the Risk Assessment?

The chair of the B/TTCG owns the risk assessment and should task from the intelligence provided when a BOCU response is required.

A.3 Who should be producing the Risk Assessment?

The risk assessment form should be completed by the analyst responsible for the initial analysis of the problem, however, this may be best carried our in partnership with other agencies who have an interest.

A.4 When should a Risk Assessment be completed?

A Risk Assessment form should be completed once sufficient analysis of the problem has been carried out to be able to accurate assess the problem and recommendations for actions to be made.

34

- RESTRICTED –

If the Assessment is not actioned at the B/TTCG or is submitted to the MIB and not actioned a new risk assessment should be completed when further intelligence has been obtained or there is a change in situation. This risk assessment can then be re-submitted to the Tactical Assessment and MIB if required.

A.5 Points to assist the production of a Risk Assessment

The accompanying analysis for the risk assessment should collate data and intelligence both from internal and external sources. Although the form asks specifically for CRIS and CrimInt data other sources of data should also be used to inform the assessment.

External sources that should be considered are; CDRP YOTs Local Authority, such as housing Health Schools/Education Mental Health

PART B – GUIDANCE NOTES

B.1 Brief description of risk

This section should give a brief description of the risk, for example;The ESB Gang are known to frequent the town park and are believed to be involved in robberies and drug dealing in the area at night. The level of violence used by the gang is increasing, and recently there have been several incidents in which it appears that rival gang members have been stabbed. It is proposed that this gang pose an increasing threat to members of the public

B.2 Intelligence Priorities

In this section you should indicate which priorities, at BOCU and MPS Level (via a drop down menu) and/or is a priority for a partner agency (please give the name of agency and the priority) the risk impacts on.

If the risk does not fall into any priorities or intelligence requirements but is an emerging issue (as defined by your Tactical Assessment) please give brief details of why the risk should still be considered.

Each priority the risk impacts on give a score of one, with an emerging issue scoring a total of two.

B.3 Total Score and Actions

The first part of the section will be automatically completed from the score inputted on the rest of the form.

35

- RESTRICTED –

The second part of this section should be used to record the decisions made at the different levels with regards to the identified risk. For example, whether what actions the B/OCU will take, whether it has been escalated to the MIB and so on.

B.4 Seriousness and Frequency

This section assesses the increase in offending in terms of an increase in seriousness and/or the number/frequency of offences and related intelligence. This should be judged by the increase in relevant reports on the CRIS and CrimInt systems, or intelligence from partners.

This section can also highlight expected increases, which may come from identified seasonal trends or specific events.

The scores should be evidenced in the associated analysis.

B.5 Harm

This section aims to assess the level of harm the identified risk may cause to individuals and communities, the level of public concern and the reputational risk to the organisation if the risk is not controlled.

Individual HarmThis is scored in two categories that assess the possible physical and psychological impact on a victim of the offence(s) and the likelihood of this impact.

For example, under Individual Harm, if an individual is known to have access to a firearm this could result in Death or Serious Injury, however if there is also intelligence to suggest that this is an imitation firearm, the likelihood of this happening is low, and would therefore score 3 under Individual Harm.

Community HarmThis assesses the possible impact the offender/offences may have on the community as a whole i.e. whether it is likely to increase tensions within a community and, again, the likelihood of this occurring.

Public/Community ConcernThis assesses the level of risk of repeat victimisation and increased fear within a community and is just assessed under high, medium and low rather than by possible outcome and likelihood.

MPS Reputational RiskThis section assesses the possible impact on the MPS if action is not taken to reduce the risk, and the likelihood of this happening.

For example, if a series of gang fights are not targeted and this results in a young person being seriously injured this would have a high impact on the reputation of the MPS, however, if there are already controls in place and there is little intelligence to

36

- RESTRICTED –

suggest that weapons are being used, this may be assessed as a low likelihood, thereby scoring 2.

Again, the scored given should be evidence in the attached analysis.

The scores in this section will be automatically averaged to give a final score.

B.6 Control

This section looks at the what controls are currently being used to reduce the risk; whether there are operations within other business groups that may impact; whether the risk is subject to other measures such as Challenged Wards for a Location or PPO scheme for an individual.

If a criminal network or gang are being assessed, and there are included on the CN Prioritisation Matrix, the scores from this matrix should also be shown. The MIB will be able to provide this information, and also whether the CN/Gang are in the Top 50. (Note: The CN Prioritisation Matrix is currently only used by SCD, however, a number of gangs and CN that are active at Borough level will also be included).

This information should then be scored using the descriptions shown.

B.7 Process

37

- RESTRICTED –

Once a possible risk has been identified, there are two possible processes:

Fast TimeIf the risk indicates that a fast time response is needed an initial Risk Assessment form should be completed with as much information as is available at the time and taken to the Daily Intelligence Meeting, this meeting will decide upon the action taken. This may be for the B/OCU to take action to reduce the threat, or that corporate resources are required, in which case the risk should be submitted the MIB Daily Management Meeting

Once the immediate threat has been reduced the risk should be re-assessed and the decision made whether full analysis and tasking is required. If so the risk should enter at the start of the process again.

Slow TimeOnce a risk has been identified the decision must be made in the Intelligence Unit to conduct further analysis, liasing with partners, and the relevant NIM product completed. Partners may also have Assessments that could inform the MPS Risk Assessment Process.

Once this analysis has been completed this can be used to evidence the scores given on the Risk Assessment form. This score, and associated recommendations should then be included in the B/OCU Tactical Assessment under Section 4 or 5 (depending on whether the risk falls within a Control Strategy Priority or is an Emerging Threat.

Recommendations for action relating to the risk should also be included, for example whether this is a sufficient risk to be escalated to the MIB and/or Corporate Tasking, or is an emerging risk that should be kept under review by the B/OCU.

The decisions made with respect to the risk, whether it be tasked or no further action must be recorded by the Action Manager at the TTCG.

If the decision is made to submit the risk to the MIB for further analysis and/or for submission to Corporate Tasking this must also be recorded in the Tactical Assessment and the Risk Assessment form and associated analysis submitted to the MIB.

The MIB will assess those risks submitted from across the MPS and task resources appropriately. If the risk is not accepted by the MIB this will be recorded in an action the Daily Management Meeting Minutes that will be published on MetBats. B/OCU are able to re-score a risk and re-submit to their TTCG and onto the MIB if further intelligence is received.

If accepted by the MIB, further intelligence development will be carried out and recommendations made for tasking. These recommendations may be for the B/OCU or Corporate Tasking and will be fed back via MetBats.

If a risk required corporate assets it will be included in the MPS Tactical Assessment to inform Corporate Tasking. All decisions made at this meeting will be recorded by the MIB Action Manager and disseminated to the relevant B/OCUs.

38

- RESTRICTED –

Risk Assessment/Prioritisation

This form allows comparison of the risk posed by offenders, crime series and/or criminal groups and should inform the way the MPS ranks these prioritise for the purpose of tasking. The form will allow for prioritisation at B/OCU and business group level,

Brief desription of risk

Location Individual

Crime Series Group

Intelligence Priorities

Is the risk a:Score

B/OCU Priority (please state)

MPS Priority (drop down menu)

MPS intelligence Requirement

Priority for Partner Agency?

Emerging Threat (please give details)

Geographic Scope BOCU Score Score1 1 Final Score2-5 2 06-10 310+/OMPD 4

Total Score

Seriousness & Frequency 0

Harm 0

Control 0

Total 0

Action

B/OCU

39

- RESTRICTED –

TP/SCD

MIB

Seriousness & Frequency

Has the frequency of offending increased, or expected to increase?Measurement Assessment Score Score

CRIS No increase 1Expected increase 2Some increase 3Significant increase 4

CrimInt No increase 1Expected increase 2Some increase 3Significant increase 4

Other Intelligence (please state) No increase 1Expected increase 2Some increase 3Significant increase 4

Has the seriousness of offending increased, or is likely to increase?Measurement Assessment Score Score

Use of violence No increase 1Expected increase 2Some increase 3Significant increase 4

Use of weapons (x2 if firearms indicated)

No increase 1

Expected increase 2Some increase 3Significant increase 4 Final Score

Targeting of vulnerable victims No increase 1 0Expected increase 2Some increase 3Significant increase 4

Harm

Individual HarmIndividual Impact LikelihoodMeasure Level High Medium Low ScorePhysical Death/Serious Injury 6 4 3

Injury 4 3 2No Harm 0 0 0

Community HarmCommunity Impact LikelihoodMeasure Level High Medium Low ScoreCommunity High Impact 4 3 2

40

- RESTRICTED –

tension/stabilityMedium Impact 3 2 1Low Impact 2 1 1

Psychological High Impact 4 3 2Medium Impact 3 2 1Low Impact 1 1 1

Public/Community ConcernMeasurement Level Score ScoreRepeat Victimisation High 3

Med 2Low 1

Fear/perception of risk High 3Med 2Low 1

MPS Reputational RiskLevel High Medium Low Score Final Score

High Impact 4 3 2 0Medium Impact 3 2 1Low Impact 2 1 1

Control

Is the risk currently the subject of a PATP/Operation?B/OCU CO

TP SO

SCD MIB

Are there any other methods of control currently being used?Please only answer under one headingLocation Drop down list - safer streets, challenged wards etc…

Other please state

Individual Drop down list -PPO, Mappa etc…

Other please state

Yes NoCN/Gang On CN Matrix

Harm SliepnirScore

Disruptions in last yr

ScoreCurrent interventions at 1

41

- RESTRICTED –

appropriate levelInterventions planned at B/OCU level, but assistance required

2

Research developed, but no capacity to pro actively target

3 Score

No current work on problem and no capacity to develop

4

42

- RESTRICTED –

APPENDIX D

Operation Curb – Tactical Options

Focus Group Type Name Description Link/ContactOffender Diversion, disruption

and suppression Youth Engagement Teams

1PS and 5 PC’s dedicated to Borough Youth Group Disorder:

Forward Intelligence Team (FIT) skills and application

Video/Photo recording of gang members and individual violent offenders

Identification & targeting of core gang members Walk and talk tactics with gang younger members,

intelligence gathering about planned disorder Regular weapon sweeps of streets & estates Irregular shift patterns Non use of gang terminology whilst on operational

patrol to stop status of association. High knowledge of surrounding Borough gangs

Work in partnership with:

Local Authority Rapid Response Team of Mediators:

20 trained mediators (some former gang members) on 24/7 call out to spontaneous or planned disorder

Diffuse situation to prevent loss of life or serious injury

Wear tabards operationally to ID themselves Well known and trusted by young people as

objective Hand back control to police when necessary Help to divert gang members into diversion schemes

such as that run by the MPS and LFB to train and mentor young people into employment with LFB.

PS Mark Allen Tower HamletsOperation Ashford

43

- RESTRICTED –

London Gang Mediation & Transformation Service

Gang Dismantlement

Independent Central Project Manager/Operations Manager with Team of professional mediators on 24/7 call out for priority Boroughs:

Call out to critical incidents by SIO/Borough Duty Officer to identify and diffuse tensions between gangs and individuals

On going daily intelligence gathering and mediation activity in priority Boroughs

Independent service separate from police and local authority

High standard training and central management co-ordination

Opportunity to link to Youth Engagement Teams Identification of gang members seeking exit from

situation at signal moments of crisis and ongoing

Work in partnership with Safer London Foundation to:

Place gang members on ASPIRE programme for mentoring, employment training and guaranteed job places.

Seek re location if necessary with support of MPS SCD6 and local authorities

VCD, SCD7 and SCD 8 specialise in gang dismantlement using a variety of tactics and approaches including:

o Surveillance and identification of core members and association network.

o Arrest and conviction of core memberso Asset confiscation of convicted core members using

Proceeds Of Crime Act provisions

Insp Tony Shell SCD3

Det. Supt. Neil Basu SCD7(12)

DCI Ian Chiverton VCD

44

- RESTRICTED –

Offender control/management

Boyhood to Manhood Programme

Leap

PPO Scheme

Southwark Based Charitable Community Project working with high risk local gang members using:o Mentoringo Leadership trainingo Employment trainingo Job placement

Approach now supported by HM Government “Calling the Shots” Methods available online or hard copy materials

Management structure and Tactical Plan for medium risk offenders of volume violent crime involving:

Catch and convict repeat offenders:o Fast track CJS submissions

Prevent and deter repeat offenders by:o Referring them to YIP and YISP programmeso Bail packageso ASBO/ABC conditions over associations,

behaviour, places of frequent and travel limits

Rehabilitation Plan:o Mentoringo Employment trainingo Job placemento Post prison/youth custody rehabilitation plan

and management plan

Decima Francis

Carol Lord TPHQ

45

- RESTRICTED –

MAPPA

School Exclusion Pupil Management

Civil Injunctions

Tactical Case Management of Higher risk violent & sex offenders in Prison and Borough involving:

o Association, places of frequent and residence management plan

o Re call to prison facility based on behaviouro Employment training and job placemento Re location plan if necessaryo Regular monitoring and home visitso Exchange of information and intelligence on the

subject between agencies under statute to determine risk levels

o Opportunity to place SCD and Borough high risk violent offenders for management

o Opportunity to case manage subject both in prison and on release using intelligence packs about offending behaviour and association network.

Opportunity for Safer Schools Officers to develop management plan for excluded pupils in liaison with Pupil Referral Units to:o Ensure attendanceo Monitor behaviouro Enforce ASBO/ABC conditionso Inclusion on further sport and employment diversion

programmes locally

o S222 Local Government Act allows for civil injunctions against council tenants causing violence with much lower proof threshold combined with imprisonment and financial penalties for infringement

o Town Centre management Schemes can also use civil injunctions and Civil Damage Claims against

DS Keith Giles VCD

Paul Dunn TPHQ

46

- RESTRICTED –

Asset Confiscation

DSU/CHIS Tasking

Immigration Status Action

Drug Intervention Project

persistent violent offenders impacting on retail premises under the Home Office Safer Shopping Award

Borough Financial Investigation Units and SCD6 Asset Confiscation Unit have powers and skills in identifying assets before and after conviction for seizure and confiscation denying the means for violent criminals to continue a criminal lifestyle under the Proceeds of Crime Act

CHIS’s can be tasked and interviewed to collect proactive information about preventing/disrupting the supply routes and sources of weaponry such as guns, CS gas, Taser’s and replicas.

Violent offenders identified on Borough as either a new or existing threat should have their immigration status checked as a matter of routine with the Immigration and Nationality Service (part of SOCA). Often deportation action can be taken thereby disrupting and preventing future behaviour.

Violent crime offenders should be routinely drug tested on arrest to establish connections locally with the drug market. The discretionary powers of the duty officer Inspector should be utilised on an on going basis in such areas where the drugs market is prevalent.

Michael SchuckBritish Retail Consortium

DCI Tristram Hicks SCD6

DI Paul Richards MIB Drugs Directorate

47

- RESTRICTED –

Victim Protection Witness Protection

At Risk Families & Children

Safe Indoors

Safe Inside

Victims of violent crime may become subject of an “OSMAN” type situation whereby the police become aware of a life threat to them and/or their family. There are various options for protecting them:

o Simple warning and personal risk reduction plano Low risk cases re located within the Borougho High risk cases given emergency accommodation

and identity change by SCD6o Long term High risk cases given re location

accommodation and assistance under the Home Office witness protection scheme

The Childrens Services Directorate within every Borough has a range of resources and options for identifying and preventing risks in problem families affected by violence caused by drugs, alcohol or general criminality, in particular:o Health visitor visits and monitoringo Parent support serviceso Referral to Child Abuse Investigation Team MPSo Referral to CSU unit MPSo Care procedures

Facility for repeat victims of domestic violence to have a refuge within the home (room) which is reinforced to prevent entry in crisis moments of abuse without recourse to refuges. Seen as cost effective and preferred by victims

Same principle as above but for members of the public to use on the streets when they fear being attacked. Provided with help points similar to LT Underground System. Locations in foyers of Banks and stores available 24/7. Being piloted by SCD7 and Lambeth

SCD Reserve

Children’s Services Director

Stephen Govier Lambeth Business Against Crime Partnership

DC Mark Beale SCD7 Flying Squad

48

- RESTRICTED –

Raid Control

Operation Vanguard

Personal Alarms

Product Design

Business Against Crime Initiative.

Package of measures for small business premises such as convenience stores, pharmacies and betting offices including vulnerable to violent attack by robbers or violent individuals:o Staff trainingo Cash control in time lock safeso Cash till securityo CCTV

SCD7 prevention operation for Borough cash transit routes vulnerable to violent attack involving:o Natural surveillance of transit vehicles by Borough

police and PCSO unitso Covert surveillance of repeat victim routeso Targetting of repeat offenders

Personal attack alarm for individuals and buildings provided by CPO officers BOCU out of a range of options appropriate to risk level.

There are several agencies involved in product and system design to prevent crime including violence:

o The Central St Martins Design Centre which uses the genius of young graduate and undergraduate design students to products such as hand luggage and furniture in pubs and restaurants to secure the customers to a higher degree. This agency is open to commissioned studies by Boroughs and MPS

o The ACPO Safer By Design Product and system range including the Car Park Accreditation scheme

Det Supt Bob Cummings SCD7

DI Paul Anstee SCD3

DI Paul Anstee SCD3

49

- RESTRICTED –

Behaviour & Awareness

Education & Training

Dorothy. Com Educational Product Range which includes school video and teaching materials for young peoples security and conflict resolution,

The Home Office Toolkits Range for victim prevention methods at home, work or in public places. This focuses on behaviour patterns which can reduce vulnerability

Location General Policing WeaponSearches

Operation Sphere

BTP Operation Shield Weapons Arches at Transport stations to scan for knives and other weapons.

High visibility policing of routes used by school students to and from school to prevent robberies and violent attacks, some gang related

This could potentially be extended to high risk routes by the provision of buses to get students across streets not in their home area to attend school and thereby prevent inter gang rivalry tensions

ANPR/ Neon Type Ops.

CCTV

Use of directed stops by local spotters and ANPR mobile units to detect suspect vehicles known to police for weapon searches. Due to the current movement of violent offenders across London associated with gang crime it is recommended that regular Neon Operations are conducted on the central London Thames Bridges to filter the main interface between north and south London.

Town Centre CCTV systems could be used much more effectively with a Bronze Intelligence cell being established to collect suspect movement data and direct uniformed interception

Such systems can also be used to monitor high risk

50

- RESTRICTED –

Situational Prevention

High Visibility Policing

o CIMOSS Survey and Action Planning

o Safe and Sound

o All Bar Noneo SAMMS

School survey and Action planning

Neighbourhood Watch Schemes:o Businesso Residential

pubs and clubs for entry by known violent offenders and direct police interception for stop/search. If combined with an exclusion injunction power this can be most effective

Most effective in directed and timed way around problem locations at set times identified in the Phase I profile

High Risk Location Survey and Action Planning Systems based on design, management systems and staff training

Locally developed watch schemes for Businesses and Residents with different levels of sophistication and information exchange.

Brick Lane Small Business Crime Initiative (SBCI) which uses Broadband Technology, Internet Portal and Business security package. BT in Partnership with MPS

DC Jo Poole SCD8

Insp Andy Shortland CO14

CI James CookeSCD3

CI James Cooke SCD3

51

- RESTRICTED –Replica Gun Project - London

Pilot project for SE 5 Borough Gang Project to control availability and possession of all types of replica guns through code of practice, store management standards and surrender scheme. Partnership between MPS and LA Trading Standard Officers

Community Resilience and Resistance

Value Life(Gladesmore School Haringey)

Operation Quadrant

Local Haringey school Initiative to drive up awareness and intolerance of violent gun and gang crime by demonstration and production of campaign materials

Community Engagement Project with distinct communities in London affected by violent crime. Full time volunteers engaged in 5 pilot Boroughs with Somalian, Tamil, Indian, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Turkish community. Partnership between central Lancashire University and MPS.

52

- RESTRICTED -

APPENDIX E

EXAMPLE – ACTION PLAN FORMAT

Asian Small Business Crime InitiativeDemonstration Project

Tower Hamlets – Brick Lane

Action Plan 2002-4

Objective 1. To reduce crime (reported & unreported) inside and environs of small business premises within Brick Lane E1 by 30% over 18 months

2. To increase staff reassurance about safety and crime levels over 18 months.

3. To increase standards of the built environment outside business premises to improve safety, movement and legibility for visitors, residents and staff.

4. Effectively disseminate good practice concerning a process and structure for small business crime initiatives across other London commercial districts.

Method Objective 1-31. Establish a partnership action group comprising of

about 5 representatives from the Brick Lane police team, Tower Hamlets Council, Ethnic Minority Enterprise Project, Brick Lane Business Association and London First.

2. Design, commission and complete a small business crime audit for the action area covering:

Profile area by business type, location, employees Internal risk assessment for each premises on areas of

design, work methods and training External risks for safety and crime based on built

environment features( lighting, lines of sight, junction/street design, mixed land usage, rubbish collection, security grills and pedestrianisation). To be compiled in collaboration with the Met. Police Public Reassurance Project Team at TP HQ.

Victim profiling including features which make customers and staff more vulnerable to crime

Offender profiling concerning both opportunist and persistent offender features

3. Costed risk management plan for each site and area in general covering:

Street environment design and management to make routes in, through and out safer. See 2 above.

Internal measures to counter crime based on design, equipment and work methods

Staff training in countering violence, drug abuse, fraud,

53

- RESTRICTED -

burglary and theft4. Develop a more effective CCTV management plan with

Newham to include: Targeted use for known persistent offenders. Consider

setting up trial facial recognition system Enforcement of parking violations. ANPR and traffic

process system Timetabled intensive surveillance for problem

premises/areas. Dedicated CCTV operator with radio communications.

CCTV footage to be incorporated into audit research. See above.

5. Consider the incorporation of a radio link system for all business premises. To be linked to Newham CCTV control room, Brick Lane police office and any future warden or PCSO scheme.

6. Set up a new Business Crime Information Exchange system to connect business premises with the latest target criminal and crime method intelligence. This will incorporate a written briefing sheet and internet connection to the BICS system or a new site. Information exchange protocol to be developed between police, business’s, council and emep.

7. Consider setting up a civil/criminal exclusion order scheme for convicted/suspected repeat offenders to debar them from entering member premises in the future. Those entering in defiance of order could be subject of burglary charges.

8. Develop a warden scheme for the action area to act as ‘eyes and ears’ for police and council with radio connection to CCTV control room and police.

Objective 2

1. Apply for accreditation under the Home Office Safer shopping Award and on completion market award publicly in correspondence, street signs and promotional materials

2. Survey staff before, during and after initiative concerning reassurance levels

Objective 4

1. Market project to other commercial districts of London using the Asian Marketing Group(AMG) magazine and journal facilities.

2. Set up a new web site or incorporate project on existing site( Palladin communications, MPS or Tower Hamlets council site)

3. Develop a small business crime booklet focussed on

54

- RESTRICTED -

micro business’s with Palladin Communications and London Chamber of commerce and industry.

Time Table & Milestones

1. Set up action group and hold inaugural meeting. By end Dec.2002

2. Action plan agreed by partnership action group. By end January 2003

3. Audit (incorporating risk assessment) designed and commissioned. By end June 2003.

4. Audit completed incorporating a full crime risk management plan. By end of September 2003.

5. Full time manager to be appointed. By end of May 2003. 6. Funding/Resources plan completed and presented to key

partners. By end of Feb. 20037. Marketing plan completed. By end of Feb. 2003 8. Agreed action plan presented to Asian Business

Association Forum. By end of Feb. 20039. Interim short term actions implemented including CCTV,

information exchange system, exclusion order scheme, staff training and radio link. By September 2003

10. Individual risk management plans implemented for each premises on basis of vulnerability(repeat victim) covering design, work methods and equipment. By December 2003.

11.Safer Shopping Award achieved. By March 200412.Environmental improvements implemented. By March

2004Resources 1. A full time Co-ordinator/ Town Centre Manager will be

required. Salary £30-35K. Funding application to be made to GOL and Home Office claiming special project status. Seek match funding with local borough resources. Appointee to take over project by end of May 2003

2. Funding plan to be developed for all aspects of action plan with costings, sources and benefits for both capital and revenue expenditure. By end of Feb. 2003

Linkages & Partners

Metropolitan Police Service. Ch Insp Colin Morgan, Insp Mark Lyall, Sgt Darren Sharp

Brick Lane Business Association. Mahmoud Rouf. Ethnic Minority Enterprise Project. Badrul Islam Tower Hamlets Council London First ‘Partnership in Policing’ centre. Rachel

Goodison and Sgt James Cooke Asian Marketing Group. Kalpesh Solanki Government Office For London. Ellie Roy Home Office Business Crime Unit. John Denham Palladin Communications. Warwick Baldwin London Chamber of Commerce and Industry. Peter

Bishop

Outputs Action plan Crime risk & environmental audit

55

- RESTRICTED -

Crime risk management plan X no. of premises implementing management plan Marketing plan Crime reduction booklet Web Site Exclusion Order Scheme CCTV management plan Warden Scheme Manager appointed Radio link scheme Computerised Information Exchange Scheme X no. of environmental improvements Safer Shopping Award

Outcomes 30% reduction target in reported crime Increased staff reassurance Disseminated good practice Improved and safer environment for staff, visitors

and residentsDevelopment Opportunities

Long term development into a full Business Improvement District which will sustain and fund improvements using surcharge mechanisms authorised under HM Government’s urban improvement bill.

56

- RESTRICTED -

APPENDIX F

Key Messages

Safer Schools

– Know when a pupil is excluded, flag up as an increased risk of being victim/offender of violent crime

– Peer mentoring will help reduce the chance of offending behaviour

– Knife awareness programmes for school delivery

– Work with Education Welfare Officers to help manage the school children who are most likely to be involved in violent crime

– Think of the parents and brothers and sisters of those caught up in acts of violence, are there other ways to prevent the violence

For the Community

– All need to play our part, discuss things with your children, emphasise the importance of safety

– Check your sons and daughters bedrooms for weapons

– Advise young people to be better aware of personal safety, particularly boys

– We want people to be free to go about their daily business

– Look around you and if you do see something that you think could turn into a violent fight, report it straight away to the police on the emergency number

– Trust your instincts. If that little voice inside you says something is not quite right don't ignore it. Always walk confidently and with purpose

– Always try to look as if you know where you are going.

– Most Town and City centres now have comprehensive CCTV systems which has been installed for your safety familiarise yourself as to where the cameras are and when walking through the City alone try and stay on streets where the cameras are.

– Dark alleys, waste ground, alleyways, short cuts.

– Keep to well-lit streets if possible.

– Be aware of what is happening around you and remember if you are wearing a personal stereo you won't be able to hear what is going on.

57

- RESTRICTED -

– If you see a something you are not happy with or you think you are being followed cross the road. If you feel threatened don't be afraid to ask for help from passers by, or go into a place where there are other people (pubs, restaurants, etc).

– If there are no such places about, knock on a house with a light on and ask for help. But don't go inside, just in case.

– If you are threatened make as much noise as is possible, shout, scream or set off your personal attack alarm. If you haven't got an alarm they can be purchased from most good hardware or DIY stores and only cost a couple of pounds. This will draw attention to you and again don't be afraid to ask for help.

– Remember you can use reasonable force to defend yourself so don’t be afraid to fight back

– It may be alright to kick out, punch or bite to effect your escape, but please bear in mind you might have to justify what you have done later later.

58

- RESTRICTED -

APPENDIX G

59

- RESTRICTED -

60

- RESTRICTED -

Peer groups, gangs and organised criminal networks

Flagging criminal groups in CRIS and CrimInt

1. The Metropolitan Police Service requires clear, unambiguous and mutually exclusive corporate definitions to ensure a consistent MPS-wide understanding of different levels of group criminality.

2. Academic research previously undertaken for the MPS defined peer groups, gangs and organised criminal networks. Work has been undertaken to ‘operationalise’ that research – that is, translate it for MPS systems and processes.

3. These definitions are being piloted in the South East London boroughs co-operating in the ‘5 Boroughs Gang Project’.

4. A flow chart has been developed to inform decisions about which definition applies to any particular group.

5. The following CRIS flag should be used to indicate gang-related crime (or crime-related incidents); it should be used in the same way as the existing DV and RI flags.

GA: Gang-related crimeGA: Gang-related crime6. This should be routinely reviewed by borough BIUs, and will also be

centrally reviewed by SCD.

7. More generally colleagues should start using the following terminology in CRIS, CrimInt and other applications and products:

Peer GroupPeer Group

GangGang

Organised Criminal NetworkOrganised Criminal Network8. Please continue to use the QQGangsQQGangs keyword in CrimInt, pending the

rollout of CrimIntPlus

9. Further work has been done to develop categories (and definitions) of individuals related to gangs, and a second flow chart developed. Colleagues should start using the following terminology immediately:

Gang MemberGang Member

Gang AssociateGang Associate

Non-Criminal AssociateNon-Criminal Associate10. If you have any questions, please contact Emma Muir (SCD7): 020

7161 4384 (Metcall 784384)

This note is only intended as a brief overview: for fuller details, please see the paper “Operationalising the definition of a gang” by Gavin Hales and Emma Muir.

61