Surrey PEEL 2016
Legitimacy
How legitimate is the force at keeping people safe and reducing crime?
To what extent does the force treat all of the people it serves with fairness and respect?
Surrey Police treats all of the people it serves with fairness and respect. The Chief Constable’s vision for the force is to ‘make the county as safe as it can be’. This vision and is set out in the force’s ‘plan on a page’ and understood by most staff. In HMIC’s legitimacy report 2015 we reported that some complaints could have been locally resolved rather than being subject to a full investigation and often took too long to bring to a conclusion. As a result of action the force has taken 50 percent of complaints are resolved locally as opposed to 20 percent previously.
The force uses a wide range of methods to communicate with the public. These include social media. The force understands the importance of communicating with community groups who may have less trust in the police by using a variety of means. It is not clear how the force assesses and uses the feedback from the public or how consistently and effectively subsequent action taken is communicated to them.
Areas for improvement
- The force should improve how it identifies and understands the issues that have the greatest impact on public perceptions of fair and respectful treatment.
How well does the force ensure that its workforce behaves ethically and lawfully?
The force has good systems in place to ensure that its workforce behaves ethically and lawfully. The Code of Ethics is well understood by most staff. There are good procedures for managing the vetting of its staff, including staff being re-vetted on promotion or transfers to certain posts where they are exposed to more risk. There is more that it could do to identify the risk of officers and staff abusing their authority for sexual gain. The ACU’s control strategy prioritises sexually predatory officers and where inappropriate behaviour is reported a thorough investigation takes place. However, the force needs to be active in seeking intelligence from sources such as women’s refuges, in ensuring that supervisors receive training to identify the signs of predatory behaviour, and in making all staff aware of what is expected of them and of the consequences if their actions do not reach the required standard. The results of misconduct hearings are circulated both internally and externally to the general public.
In our 2016 national overview of police legitimacy, we recommended that all forces should have started to implement a plan to achieve the capability and capacity required to seek intelligence on potential abuse of position for sexual gain. In 2017, we reviewed of the plans put in place by all forces to in response to this recommendation.
Abuse of position assessment – Surrey Police
Areas for improvement
- The force should improve how it clarifies and reinforces standards of behaviour to its workforce, in particular when dealing with vulnerable people, including victims of domestic abuse.
To what extent does the force treat its workforce with fairness and respect?
Surrey Police treats its workforce with fairness and respect but, as the PIYN model unfolds, there is more to do in connection with staff workloads (particularly the workloads of APT staff) and in ensuring there is a consistent and effective PDR system. The force has consulted widely about its change programme and communicated this to its staff in a number of ways. In the main the changes have been well received, but some frontline staff feel under pressure as a result of high workloads and a lack of appropriate skills to deliver what is required. The force has made a significant investment in wellbeing services (£1.25m). An in-house nurse led Occupational Health Team with links to the national wellbeing initiative provides appropriate support for staff and will refer staff for physiological or psychological advice and treatment where required. The performance assessment process is not effective. Most staff have a PDR but the quality is mixed. Some staff have only limited or general objectives. Staff generally do not feel engaged with the process or recognise its benefits.
Areas for improvement
- The force should improve how it identifies and understands its workforce’s wellbeing needs.
- The force should improve how it manages individual performance.