Observations, learning and good practice from 2024 force management statements
Contents
Print this document
Summary
In this document, we outline the findings from our assessment of around 60 percent of force management statements (FMSs) in England and Wales in 2024 (the sixth version of the FMS). We also build on observations and learning from previous FMS versions.
At the time of writing this guidance, we have assessed FMSs in the following forces:
- Avon and Somerset Constabulary
- Bedfordshire Police
- Cheshire Constabulary
- City of London Police
- Cleveland Police
- Dorset Police
- Gloucestershire Constabulary
- Greater Manchester Police
- Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary
- Hertfordshire Constabulary
- Kent Police
- Lancashire Constabulary
- Leicestershire Police
- Lincolnshire Police
- Merseyside Police
- Norfolk Constabulary
- North Wales Police
- South Wales Police
- South Yorkshire Police
- Staffordshire Police
- Suffolk Constabulary
- Warwickshire Police
- West Mercia Police
- West Midlands Police
- West Yorkshire Police
We aim to use these findings to:
- support forces to produce FMSs that better inform their strategic planning and meet national guidance (in this document, we use ‘national’ to mean England and Wales);
- provide advice to forces in producing better FMSs; and
- highlight areas of good practice and innovation, as well as where FMSs need to improve.
In this document, we outline 12 high-level learning points and give an assessment against these. We also give advice and good practice examples. In September 2024, we shared these with forces at the FMS practitioner’s meeting.
It is important to note that this document isn’t a set of rules for writing the FMS. Instead, it contains our findings from the first half of forces we reviewed, and some advice that may help when writing future versions. We continue to encourage forces to explore how to produce an FMS that best fits their needs, and we will continue to support FMSs that are consistent with the FMS guidance.
Forces should complete all sections of the FMS
We aren’t prescriptive on the format of the FMS. Forces use different styles of FMS presentation, with many using PowerPoint to be more visual. But forces do need to follow the structure of our Force management statement: Guidance and template for forces by assessing all demand areas and covering all four steps where these are relevant. Some forces don’t use all demand areas on the template in their FMS. This may be because forces consider them low risk or there is no change from the previous year. Also, some forces use different headings to the subcategories of demand in their FMS, using the names of teams or functions that deal with that demand instead. Using all demand areas in the template makes sure there is consistency across FMSs. It also helps us and the forces to understand the greatest risks and pressures facing policing.
Advice
Forces need to risk assess all areas to check whether they are low risk or if anything has changed.
Forces should follow the headings of the subcategories of demand.
While forces should risk assess and analyse all demand areas, they can give minimal information on the areas that are risk assessed as low or where there is no change.
Forces should follow all four steps separately, instead of merging them together.
Good practice example
Bedfordshire Police includes all demand areas in its FMS risk assessment but only gives further information for those that scored over the risk tolerance level. In this way, its FMS focuses on high-risk areas but it can still show that it has risk assessed all demand areas in the FMS and therefore understands the risk they present.
Forces should provide supporting evidence for all sections
The FMS is a large document split into 12 sections. Within these there are around 60 demand areas. It is challenging to discuss the key issues and evidence while not making the FMS too long. In trying to make FMSs shorter, or suitable for a PowerPoint presentation, forces may not provide enough evidence, analysis and data in steps 1 and 2. Forces should include data analysis in a separate document as evidence of the risk assessment. It is likely that forces do have this evidence but they haven’t included it in the FMS to keep the document shorter.
Advice
We recommend using data to support steps 1 and 2.
We suggest forces don’t include a lot of data, so we recommend including the analysis of the most salient data and the important information instead.
Forces can include projection charts, tables and data to make the FMS more visual, break up all the writing and make sure it is based on evidence.
If forces want to keep their FMS short, they could put data in appendices, but this does mean that readers need to switch between documents to understand the statements made.
Analysis is important so we recommend forces use data to support statements.
Good practice examples
Cleveland Police produced two documents: an FMS document which was a summary of all the information for all sections, and a second document which contained all the supporting information for all sections.
Bedfordshire Police included demand projections in an appendix, which shortened the length of the FMS.
Forces should use risk assessment models to identify high areas of risk
Forces should carry out a risk assessment to identify the highest risks they are facing. These should be discussed in the summary statement. Forces can choose between three risk assessment models to identify areas of risk. We have provided more details in appendix A. These are:
- MoRILE organisational risk assessment (ORA): includes 22 questions assessing steps 1 and 2 of the FMS, as well as governance, performance, planning, policy and finances.
- Demand and asset 5×5 risk assessment model: uses data and information from a broad range of assessments, as well as professional judgment to assess demand and assets on a 5×5 model.
- Thematic MoRILE: assesses harm, volume, trend and organisational position (capacity and capability); it is better suited to FMSs that are also in the strategic assessment but is not well suited to assess organisational functions.
We suggest each force uses the model that best suits its needs.
Advice
Use consistent and objective risk-assessment processes
When assessing risk, the FMS lead/team should make sure the process is consistent and objective. They should make sure that risks in the FMS are the same as risk assessments used elsewhere. Some forces have identified areas as low risk (green) in their FMSs that are assessed as higher risk in their strategic assessments and are force priorities. On the other hand, other forces highlight some demand areas as high risk in the FMS; but we found in our PEEL assessment that these risks aren’t covered in other force documents such as the control strategy
Forces should include FMSs in their strategic planning
Many forces use the FMS to support their strategic planning. This can help forces to identify priorities for their own work and the police and crime commissioner’s police and crime plan, as well as capacity and capability gaps. Many forces use the FMS to inform their financial planning and budget setting. This includes informing change programmes such as priority-based budgeting, so that resources are used for the force’s priorities and highest risks.
Some forces update the FMS regularly as part of their ongoing strategic planning. This includes regular assessments of demand, performance and the workforce. This is good practice and also makes the FMS easier to update. While we require FMSs as part of our PEEL inspections, thematic inspections and to help monitor force performance, forces are also seeing how useful an FMS can be for strategic planning.
Advice
Use the FMS to inform strategic and financial planning
Complete steps 1 and 2 of the FMS before setting the budget. Use this to inform resources and investment (step 3) and identification of any risk (step 4).
Use the FMS to inform force priorities. Some forces use the FMS as their strategic assessment to inform their control strategy priorities. Forces that have a separate FMS and strategic assessment should make sure the two documents are linked and consistent.
The FMS should be part of the change programme as forces can use it to identify risk areas and demand pressures. Forces can also use the outcome of change programmes to inform actions to address demand (step 3) and unmet demand and residual risk (step 4).
Good practice examples
Cheshire Constabulary and West Mercia Police use visuals to show how the FMS informs strategic planning.
Bedfordshire Police, West Mercia Police and West Yorkshire Police all show the links between their FMS and financial planning.
Greater Manchester Police and Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary show how their investments are linked to risks discussed in the FMS.
Bedfordshire Police and Cheshire Constabulary make their FMSs central to the priority-based budgeting process.
West Mercia Police uses the workforce section (section 11) to develop a medium‑term workforce plan, forecasting workforce and training requirements, which is similar to medium-term financial plans (MTFPs).
West Yorkshire Police has used section 11 to follow the same format as the National Police Chiefs’ Council’s ‘Strategic Assessment of the Workforce’ to inform their strategic workforce plan.
Cheshire Constabulary updates its FMS quarterly to inform ongoing strategic planning and risk assessment.
To make the annual production of the FMS more efficient, South Wales Police provides a quarterly update and gap analysis to strategic boards, which identify risks that may become local or strategic risks.
West Yorkshire Police organises strategic planning days and discussion around new areas of focus by updating the FMS every six months, including new demand projections in high-risk and high-priority areas, areas of performance improvement and deterioration, new and emerging threats and a PESTELO assessment update.
Step 1: Current and projected demand
Good FMSs combine a wide range of information to understand current and future demand, but some FMSs don’t include demand projection charts
Understanding of current demand is generally good within step 1. But future demand is less well understood, and many FMSs don’t include demand projection charts. FMS teams often use professional judgment to predict demand. But this should be supported by data, including demand forecasting, environmental scanning and information from partner organisations.
Some forces use PESTELO factors to help think about future demand or capacity and capability issues. When used, PESTELO analysis is sometimes at the beginning of the statement or in an appendix, but it should also be in all relevant sections to help understand potential changes in demand. Forces may not include data and analysis from partner organisations in their FMS as it can be difficult to get from them.
Advice
Forces should make sure that predictions are consistent and objective by using any demand analyses work that has been developed by corporate services and performance functions, for example to inform operating models.
Forces should also consider other factors affecting future demand, including socioeconomics, PESTELO thinking, information from partner organisations and professional judgment.
Confidence levels in data are useful, as they help forces to recognise limitations in predictions, particularly for areas of demand which are underreported or hidden.
Forces that don’t have a dedicated environmental scanning function could still include PESTELO by asking the subject matter leads from each function to use the PESTELO framework as part of their considerations of future demand.
Good practice examples
Bedfordshire Police, Cheshire Constabulary, Lincolnshire Police, Merseyside Police and West Yorkshire Police all include demand projection charts in their FMS, and support these with other data, including PESTELO, workload and professional judgment (examples in appendix B).
Cleveland Police uses demand analyses to inform its operating model and inform the FMS, for example: response, the criminal investigation department, investigation, domestic abuse, child abuse, vulnerable adults and Operation Soteria, which is a victim-centred and suspect-focused police approach to rape and serious sexual offences.
Merseyside Police uses demand profiling to understand links between demand, availability of resources and performance, which includes focusing on demand according to crime severity.
Several forces include PESTELO information in their FMS, including Cleveland Police, Lincolnshire Police and West Mercia Police, and provide this information in their summary statements.
West Yorkshire Police has a detailed PESTELO appendix and includes PESTELO in each section, using demand projection and key events charts to show internal and external causes of demand, and to understand demand in context (examples in appendix B).
West Mercia Police has a 2030 plan that identifies the top ten trends that are likely to affect the force and, as part of the FMS, subject matter experts used the PESTELO framework to structure their analysis of demand.
Norfolk Constabulary, South Wales Police and Suffolk Constabulary run a partnership survey with questions that are related to the four steps of the FMS.
There are a wide range of data sources and assessments that could help forces understand current and future demand
Forces use a range of information to help them understand current and future demand. But forces could be better at using existing information for most demand areas. This information would improve their FMS and make the sections consistent. Forces carry out internal assessments for other purposes. They could use these to help understand current and future demand without creating more work.
Advice
The following information could help inform most section 1 demand types:
- demand projection charts;
- demand analyses;
- priority-based budgeting (demand and productivity changes), which includes a focus on external changes in demand for services;
- performance information;
- intelligence problem profiles;
- PESTELO, census and futures data;
- data from partner organisations (for example, community safety partnerships, safeguarding partners, NHS data, ambulance data, A&E data);
- police and crime commissioner or mayor’s office (including violence reduction units); and
- subject matter experts, including workloads of functions, view on projections.
Inclusion of wider assessments would add information to the FMS and make sure it is consistent with other force assessments. These include:
- intelligence (strategic assessment, regional strategic assessment, national strategic assessment), for section 8;
- public order public safety threat and risk assessment, for section 9;
- armed policing strategic threat and risk assessment, for section 9;
- counter corruption threat assessment, for section 11;
- violence against women and girls strategic assessments, for section 6;
- violence reduction unit assessments, for sections 4 and 8;
- workforce assessments, for section 11 and informing step 2; and
- assessments against Strategic Policing Requirement threats, for sections 6, 8 and 9.
FMS leads should identify who has the above information.
Step 2: Workforce assessment
Forces usually discuss workforce assets in the FMS, but may not discuss non-workforce assets in detail, or provide enough supporting evidence
When discussing workforce assets in their FMS, most forces mention capacity, capability, security of supply (recruitment and retention) and well-being. But many FMSs don’t support statements with evidence. Forces do not discuss non-workforce assets such as equipment, building and vehicles in as much detail, although some forces do give information about these in their FMS.
Advice
The following information could help inform step 2:
Capacity and security of supply
- Forces can use budget establishment data to identify capacity gaps and security of supply issues.
- Forces can use Police Objective Analysis and value for money profiles to show how they distribute resources across all functional areas and how this compares to the Most Similar Groups or national average.
- Forces can use priority-based budgeting (service analysis) that includes a focus on resource and cost.
- Forces can use investments made as a result of the last FMS or financial plan to show improvements in both capacity and capability.
Capability
- Forces can use skills or training needs analysis to identify any gaps in skills.
- Forces can use data to identify gaps in training or accreditation and whether they are meeting training requirements.
- Forces can use training plans to show how they are addressing any compliance issues or capability gaps.
- Forces can use information about protected learning time, continuing professional development and external training to show how they are improving capability and skills.
Serviceability, well-being and condition of the workforce
- Forces can use sickness data to show whether any of the functional areas have higher levels of sickness and what types of sickness they are.
- Forces can use the Oscar Kilo National Police Wellbeing Survey or local personnel surveys to identify well-being issues across functional areas, for example hindrance and stress challenges, fatigue and emotional energy.
- Forces can use occupational health data to see where and what functions have higher levels of referrals or where demand for services is higher.
- Forces can use workload data to understand what demand functions are facing and whether this affects well-being.
- Forces could assess supervisory ratios, as not enough supervision could mean officers and staff need more support.
Non-workforce assets
- Forces can assess availability and efficiency of non-workforce assets including vehicles, equipment (in particular IT), and buildings; where there isn’t enough data, these could be qualitative assessments.
- Forces can use IT investments as evidence that they are meeting demand in a more efficient way.
Good practice examples
Merseyside Police and West Yorkshire Police include Police Objective Analysis and value for money data in all relevant sections to show how resources are allocated compared to the Most Similar Groups and national average.
Hertfordshire Constabulary assesses data across all sections of its FMS and uses it to inform decision-making and highlight any issues that need to be addressed.
Staffordshire Police includes information about capacity, capability, condition and performance.
Most forces need to improve performance analysis and include more performance information to help identify priority areas
Most forces use some performance information, in particular changes in crime and outcomes over the last 12 months. But they could also use performance information more widely to understand their risk and performance priorities. There is not enough analysis to show how investment in an area will improve performance.
The performance function is a separate demand area in section 10 (Knowledge management and IT) but some forces don’t include an assessment of this function in their FMS. In our 2023 PEEL spotlight report ‘Police performance: Getting a grip’, we recommended forces needed to understand and improve their performance The FMS is a key document where a force can provide an assessment across policing and across different frameworks.
Advice
Forces could use a range of performance data and frameworks to understand performance and include these in relevant sections of the FMS, such as the Digital Crime Performance Pack, annual data returns, police and crime plans, the Crime Survey for England and Wales, criminal justice dashboards, victim satisfaction, public confidence, outcomes and use of protection orders.
Forces could include comparisons with the previous year and with the Most Similar Groups and national position to assess performance.
Public confidence and victim satisfaction data are good indicators of legitimacy and performance from the public’s perspective, so police and crime commissioners could run community consultation surveys to provide data around public confidence.
Forces could include our gradings, causes of concern, recommendations and areas for improvement to show how effective they are in these areas.
In section 10, forces can explain how the performance framework is effectively managing performance, including the governance and accountability processes in place.
Where there has been investment in an area or investment is planned, forces should outline how this has improved performance or how it will in the future.
Good practice examples
Several forces, including Cheshire Constabulary and West Mercia Police, provide details of the performance framework and how this informs planning and accountability.
Cleveland Police and Greater Manchester Police use performance to understand demand in their FMSs.
West Yorkshire Police includes performance as a separate heading in all relevant sections and colour codes performance, and assesses risk by comparing performance to previous years, Most Similar Groups and national data.
Step 3: Prioritisation and planning
Most forces show how risks identified in steps 1 and 2 connect to step 3 but very few identify the costs of any changes, how long they will take and how they will affect demand
Many forces show how risks identified in step 1 (current and future demand) and 2 (assessment of the workforce to meet that demand) connect to step 3. But step 3 has always been difficult for forces. Forces may discuss what is being done to address demand but don’t describe any specific changes that will be made to address future demand. Some FMSs are very long, making it difficult to identify what specific changes are being introduced. Few forces discuss the expected timescales or costs of changes and very few explain the expected results of these changes. Also, many don’t discuss how the actions described in one section could affect another.
In the majority of FMSs, it is unclear how the changes described in step 3 are being put in place and monitored as part of the force’s strategic planning and governance arrangements.
Advice
Forces should clearly explain the specific changes they are making as part of step 3.
In developing step 3 actions, forces should consider:
- uplift and investment decisions
- productivity changes made as a result of change programmes such as priority-based budgeting;
- service-level option decisions made as part of priority-based budgeting;
- new operating models, shift patterns or different ways of working;
- planned or new science, technology or innovations that aim to reduce demand or improve efficiency or productivity;
- upgrading skills or capabilities to address capability gaps;
- policy changes; and
- partnership initiatives which may affect demand.
Using a table format may help forces be more specific and concise, and could also help to identify the cost of any changes, how long they will take and their expected benefit.
Forces should consider how they will make changes and check their progress.
A range of information sources could help with step 3, for example:
- subject matter experts;
- corporate development functions (transformational change);
- IT;
- learning and development leads; and
- research and innovation leads, a role within each force which is linked into the Office of the Chief Scientific Adviser.
Good practice examples
Bedfordshire Police, Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary, Hertfordshire Constabulary and Lincolnshire Police display step 3 actions in a table and identify the costs, expected results and timescales.
Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary includes the costs of step 3 actions in its Finance section, which shows good links between strategic and financial planning.
Greater Manchester Police and West Mercia Police discuss which of their goals from the previous year they have met.
West Yorkshire Police include all step 3 actions in relevant plans (strategic, tactical and departmental), and its step 3 table shows the governance arrangements that monitor its planned changes.
Step 4: Risk management
Our changes to guidance have improved forces’ discussion of risk
Step 4 has always been difficult for forces. It is a challenge to discuss unmet demand and what risk this presents. But since we improved our guidance, most forces have included more information in step 4. Some forces include new information in step 4 that hasn’t been covered in step 3, but this is appropriate because step 4 is about the demand that won’t be met following the changes made in step 3.
Advice
Forces should make sure there is a clear connection between steps 3 and 4.
In step 4, forces should focus on the effects of the changes made in step 3 and any unmet demand or risk that is left; while any new information about risk should be discussed in either steps 1 or 2.
MoRILE ORA is a good model to identify risk as it helps forces to assess the initial risk gap (before step 3) and the residual demand gap (after step 3).
Risk managers may be able to help with assessment of risk.
Forces need to consider how the identification of unmet demand and risk then informs their risk management processes.
Good practice examples
Gloucestershire Constabulary and Hertfordshire Constabulary structure their risk assessment around risk to meeting demand, harm to the public and harm to the organisation.
Gloucestershire Constabulary uses the FMS to develop ‘investment proposals’ to inform chief officer decisions; if investment isn’t supported, it affects the risk scores to meeting demand, harm to the public and harm to the organisation.
West Yorkshire Police uses step 4 to identify any new risks that should be considered for the local or strategic risk registers.
The FMS doesn’t always match what we find during inspections
The FMS is very important for our inspection activity. Our FMS leads discuss the FMS with force liaison leads before the inspection. But sometimes the content of the FMS doesn’t match the force liaison leads’ assessment.
Advice
Force FMS leads need to consult with subject matter experts for demand types to make sure the FMS is accurate and realistic.
It is useful to include a wide range of people, as this will give the force many operational and strategic perspectives.
Learning for specific sections
Finance
- Forces generally write finance sections well, and outline the current and future position based on a four-year MTFP.
- Most FMSs include assumptions that have been used for the MTFP.
- Good FMSs show the link between strategic planning and financial planning.
- Few FMSs show the cost implications for step 3 actions and how these are included in financial planning.
- Some FMSs don’t discuss the budget gap or how it will be addressed.
- Most FMSs describe financial pressures and any budget gaps, but they don’t give enough detail about how these will be addressed.
- Better FMSs discuss the plans to address the gaps (including service level options) and how any savings will be included in the MTFP.
Well-being
- Most FMSs have good descriptions of the units and resources in place to deal with well-being demand (psychological assessment and support, occupational health, TRiM, employee assistance programmes, well-being champions, peer support).
- Many forces don’t include sickness trends, which means there is a gap in forces’ understanding of well-being demand.
- Few forces include future influences on well-being demand.
- Forces could use the National Wellbeing Survey for well-being data (emotional energy, fatigue, hindrance stressors and challenge stressors) or local personnel surveys.
Responding to the public
- Most forces write these sections well and there are consistent themes across the FMS.
- Forces often don’t report which incidents are emergencies and priorities.
- Many forces don’t discuss the number of cases that are resolved without deployment.
- The availability of resources to meet demand and high levels of inexperience in response are common themes.
- Many forces include how response operating models are changing to meet demand, the introduction of technology and the implementation of Right Care Right Person.
Prevention and deterrence
- Forces cover a wide variety of issues and functions in this section which makes it difficult to identify any key themes.
- We will make expectations for this section clearer in our FMS guidance.
- Forces don’t discuss alcohol and the night-time economy enough.
- Forces often assess this section as lower risk but abstractions (neighbourhood officers being diverted away from their main duties) are a threat to the neighbourhood policing model, and many forces are addressing this in step 3 actions (abstraction policies).
- Very few forces include public confidence data, and we are changing our guidance as a result.
Investigations
- Most forces identify this section as being high risk, with common issues being detective capacity and capability, increasing demand in custody and criminal justice, and more complicated and increasing digital investigative demand.
- Forces often discuss demand pressures of accreditation in scientific services, digital forensics and intelligence.
- There is a lack of focus on outcomes data, crime performance and victim satisfaction data even though it would be appropriate in this section.
Protecting vulnerable people
- Many FMSs don’t include all the protecting vulnerable people areas of demand.
- Many forces don’t mention strategic policing requirements around violence against women and girls or child sexual abuse; but all forces already run assessments of violence against women and girls which could be used for this section.
- Most forces talk about Operation Soteria, a victim-centred and suspect-focused police approach to rape and serious sexual offences, and the effect this will have on demand and training requirements.
- Key common themes are detective capacity and capability, making sure officers have completed training requirements, and well-being issues.
Managing offenders
- Most FMSs include all the demand types required in this section.
- Most forces identify risk in this area as increasing and more complicated demand around registered sex offenders.
- Most forces also predict increases in demand around Integrated Offender Management.
Managing serious and organised crime
- Forces don’t always cover serious and organised crime in their FMSs well, and they miss out or merge together many of the demand types.
- Forces could use their own strategic assessments, regional strategic assessments and the national strategic assessments to improve this section.
- Most forces don’t discuss compliance with the strategic policing requirements for serious and organised crime enough.
Major events
- Forces don’t generally cover major events are very well in their FMSs.
- Many FMSs include functions that aren’t required in this section.
- Forces can use the public order public safety threat and risk assessment and armed policing strategic threat and risk assessment to improve their understanding of public order and armed policing.
- Forces rarely include civil emergencies, national cyber incidents and terrorism (prevent functions) in the FMS.
- For the civil emergency section, forces could improve the assessment of broad civil emergency threats by using local resilience forums’ assessment of risk.
- Forces should also cover compliance with the strategic policing requirements for terrorism, public order, civil emergencies and national cyber incidents.
- Forces generally identify public order and road policing demands increasing.
Knowledge management and IT
- Few FMSs include how the force uses technology to improve policing or reduce demand, which includes digital strategies or roadmaps.
- We have changed our FMS guidance to focus increasingly on science, innovation and technology, following the recommendation from Phase 1 of the Policing Productivity Review.
- IT and information management remain areas of higher risks for forces with growing demand and issues around capacity and capability due to the competitive labour market.
- FMSs often don’t include performance and intelligence in this section. Forces sometimes discuss intelligence in sections 5 or 8 and performance in section 11.
- Forces should show how the FMS is used for strategic planning and performance management.
Force-wide functions
- Most forces discuss all required functions in detail in their FMSs.
- Forces generally cover environmental effects under fleet and estate (vehicles and buildings).
- Many forces take the opportunity to include all enabling functions in this section.
- Professional standards, HR and learning and development remain areas of higher risk in FMS due to increasing demand and capacity issues.
- Few forces draw on professional standards department threat assessments to identify corruption threats.
Appendix A: risk assessment models
MoRILE organisational risk assessment (ORA)
For more information, please contact national lead Kate Pearce at West Mercia Police (kathryn.pearce@westmercia.police.uk).
Demand and Asset 5×5 Model
For more information, please contact Edward Major at Bedfordshire Police, who developed this model and has provided support to a number of forces (edward.major@beds.police.uk).
Bedfordshire Strategic Demand Assessment: Methodology
The Strategic Demand Assessment (SDA) compares demands at a strategic level across the full range of Bedfordshire Police operational and support services, including those provided in collaboration with other police forces. It identifies the demand risks faced by all functions, informing decisions on where to review and allocate resources to meet current and future resource gaps. The SDA uses data and information from:
- The professional knowledge of functional and strategic leads.
- The 2020/21 Strategic Intelligence and Organised Crime Assessment.
- The 2020/21 Serious and Organised Crime Local Profile.
- The 2020 Regional Organised Crime Unit Strategic Threat and Risk Assessment.
- The 2020 BCH Joint Protective Services Strategic Threat and Risk Assessment.
- The 2020 Bedfordshire Police Priority Based Budgeting programme.
- The Bedfordshire Police, three force and seven force change programmes.
- Bedfordshire Police internal performance data and performance reports.
Assessing and comparing demand risk
The Strategic Demand Assessment combines multiple aspects of demand into two dimensions (current and future), which are then subject to graded judgements. The resulting two-dimensional model enables meaningful strategic comparison across all functions:
Asset shortfall (effectiveness in managing current demand)
How critical are the shortfalls in the force’s assets to effectively manage current demand?
Uses a five-point scale:
- Low (assets shortfalls are having no notable impact on effectiveness)
- Moderate (some strains, for example, over budget, or regular use of overtime)
- Substantial (some lower priority tasks are being delayed or impacted, but key tasks are being prioritised and managed adequately)
- Severe (some key tasks are at risk of being delayed or managed inadequately)
- Critical (larger proportions of key tasks are at risk of being delayed or managed inadequately).
This depends on:
- The level of current demand.
- The sufficiency and effectiveness of force assets to manage that demand to an acceptable level.
Future demand trend
The trend in demand.
Uses a five-point scale:
- Decreasing significantly
- Decreasing slightly
- Stable
- Increasing slightly
- Increasing significantly
This depends on:
- Short and long term past trends.
- Local, regional, national and global environmental factors that are likely to affect demand in the future.
The SDA process and outcomes inform ongoing budget and strategic planning decisions to manage functions facing the highest demand risks, through appropriate representation in:
- budget planning;
- the Force Annual Delivery Plan and Control Strategy;
- partnership delivery plans; and
- the Force, BCH and regional business change programmes.
Demand risk strategic heatmap
Both asset shortfall and future trend measure demands using a five-point scale. The established BCH 5×5 strategic risk matrix is used to map the demands, with the greater weighting applied to asset shortfall (current demand).
| 1. Low asset shortfall | 2. Moderate asset shortfall | 3. Substantial asset shortfall | 4. Severe asset shortfall | 5. Critical asset shortfall | |
| 5. Demand increasing significantly | 11 (moderate demand risk) | 16 (substantial demand risk) | 20 (severe demand risk) | 23 (severe demand risk) | 25 (critical demand risk) |
| 4. Demand increasing slightly | 7 (moderate demand risk) | 12 (moderate demand risk) | 17 (substantial demand risk) | 21 (severe demand risk) | 24 (critical demand risk) |
| 3. Demand stable | 4 (low demand risk) | 8 (moderate demand risk) | 13 (substantial demand risk) | 18 (substantial demand risk) | 22 (severe demand risk) |
| 2. Demand decreasing slightly | 2 (low demand risk) | 5 (low demand risk) | 9 (moderate demand risk) | 14 (substantial demand risk) | 19 (severe demand risk) |
| 1. Demand decreasing significantly | 1 (low demand risk) | 3 (low demand risk) | 6 (low demand risk) | 10 (moderate demand risk) | 15 (substantial demand risk) |
Measuring demand risk
The established BCH strategic risk matrix divides risks into five zones. Applying the heatmap principles to the SDA divides the demand risk faced by each operational policing function into the same five zones:
- Low demand risk
- Moderate demand risk
- Substantial demand risk
- Severe demand risk
- Critical demand risk
The Bedfordshire Police Risk Management Policy sets the risk tolerance at a score of 12 (that is a moderate risk) for most risk categories. The aim of risk management is, where practical given internal and external constraints, to establish mitigations that bring risks to or below the risk tolerance. Applying this principal, the SDA identifies those functions where greatest attention is needed to bring the demand risk within the risk tolerance level.
Appendix B: demand projection examples
West Yorkshire Police (including key events chart)
Lincolnshire Police
The forecast for the number of Domestic Abuse Crimes is anticipated to increase by 62% between 2022/23 and 2026/27 from 10,994 to 17,764 (66% increase excluding 2020/21 Covid impact)
Merseyside Police
Option 1
VAWG: Approximately 40% of VAWG offences are Domestic Abuse. Predictive Analysis of VAWG crimes (see below diagram) indicates:
- A sharp increase in July ’21 has been followed by a static trend (albeit sporadic discrete monthly volumes) to October ’22;
- Since then, there has been a reduction in crimes thereafter;
- The HOCR changes to recording behavioural crimes (FY23-24) will have impacted this — certainly, within recent months; and
- After an 8% reduction in 23/24, there is a forecast of 0.5% increase in 24/25, followed by a 2.4% reduction consecutively for the subsequent two years 25/26 and 26/27.
Option 2
Cheshire Constabulary
Bedfordshire Police
Back to publication
Observations, learning and good practice from 2024 force management statements