In 2023–2025, we carried out a PEEL inspection of Norfolk Constabulary. PEEL stands for police efficiency, effectiveness and legitimacy.
We inspected how well the force performed in several areas of policing. Most of these areas were then graded as outstanding, good, adequate, requires improvement or inadequate.
Find out more about Norfolk Constabulary
More information about the PEEL assessments
Our inspection assessed how good Norfolk Constabulary is in ten areas of policing. We make graded judgments in nine of these ten as follows:
We also inspected how effective a service Norfolk Constabulary gives to victims of crime. We don’t make a graded judgment for this area.
We set out our detailed findings about things the constabulary is doing well and where the constabulary should improve in the rest of this report.
We also assess the constabulary’s performance in a range of other areas and we report on these separately. We make graded judgments for some of these areas.
In 2014, we introduced our police efficiency, effectiveness and legitimacy (PEEL) inspections, which assess the performance of all 43 police forces in England and Wales. Since then, we have been continuously adapting our approach.
We have moved to a more intelligence-led, continual assessment approach, rather than the annual PEEL inspections we used in previous years. Forces are assessed against the characteristics of good performance, set out in the PEEL Assessment Framework 2023–2025, and we more clearly link our judgments to causes of concern and areas for improvement.
It isn’t possible to make direct comparisons between the grades awarded in this PEEL inspection and those from the previous cycle of PEEL inspections. This is because we have increased our focus on making sure forces are achieving appropriate outcomes for the public, and in some cases we have changed the aspects of policing we inspect.
Our reports contain references to, among other things, ‘national’ definitions, priorities, policies, systems, responsibilities and processes.
In some instances, ‘national’ means applying to England or Wales, or England and Wales. In others, it means applying to England, Wales and Scotland, or the whole of the United Kingdom.
I am satisfied with some aspects of the performance of Norfolk Constabulary in keeping people safe, reducing crime and providing victims with an effective service. But there are areas in which the constabulary needs to improve.
Norfolk Constabulary is outstanding at recording crime. The constabulary has a team that checks each report of crime or antisocial behaviour is recorded correctly. We carried out an audit of this for our inspection, which showed an almost 100 percent compliance rate. While I commend the constabulary on this performance, it should keep the cost and benefit of this team under review.
Officers understand the importance of appropriate behaviours and communicate effectively with the public when carrying out stop and search. The majority of stop and search cases we examined had reasonable grounds recorded. The constabulary has strong external scrutiny and challenge of its use of stop and search. This is an improvement since our 2020/21 inspection.
I am pleased with how the constabulary communicates with its communities and reduces harm caused by antisocial behaviour. It has tailored its work to meet the needs of different communities and has robustly applied antisocial behaviour legislation. The constabulary has sustained its good performance in preventing and deterring crime. But its recording of antisocial behaviour needs to improve.
Since our last inspection, the constabulary has made a significant effort to review and improve its investigative standards. This has led to improvements in its ability to achieve well-supervised, better-quality investigations. I commend Norfolk Constabulary on the progress it has made. I recognise the constabulary has a higher charge/summons rate compared to other forces in England and Wales. But it needs to do more to always achieve appropriate outcomes for victims.
I have some concerns about how the constabulary is responding to the public. In particular, it needs to improve how long it takes to respond to incidents at all levels. The 101 call abandonment rate is too high and, although the number of 999 calls answered within 10 seconds is higher than in most other forces in England and Wales, it is just below the national target. Norfolk is the fifth largest county in the country. The constabulary receives a lower-than-average number of 999 calls and its 101 calls are within the typical range compared to other forces across England and Wales.
I also have concerns about how the constabulary is managing demand in the multi‑agency safeguarding hub (MASH). Important information about victims isn’t always being shared with other agencies and there is insufficient oversight of standard risk domestic abuse cases. The constabulary could miss opportunities to safeguard vulnerable adults and children.
I am pleased with the way the constabulary has reacted to our immediate concerns about how it is managing the risk posed by registered sex offenders in the community and safeguarding children at risk of online abuse. It has reduced the workloads of personnel working in these areas. The constabulary responded to our early feedback on inspection findings and personnel are now complying with College of Policing authorised professional practice standards for visits. I will monitor progress in these areas.
Norfolk Constabulary has effective processes to manage its daily work. Performance data information is of high quality, with clear summaries for senior leaders so they have the information they need to oversee performance effectively and make informed decisions.
But the constabulary hasn’t yet sufficiently invested in new technology to help it increase productivity. It should identify opportunities to develop more sustainable approaches to managing changing demand by making better use of digital solutions.
Funding is in line with other forces in England and Wales and 5.9 percent of neighbourhoods in Norfolk are in the top 10 percent most deprived in England and Wales.
The constabulary has identified some cultural and leadership issues as a result of a workforce survey. I am pleased to see that the chief officer team has committed to addressing the survey findings and putting things right.
Norfolk Constabulary is open to acting on the improvements identified in this inspection. I will monitor its progress in addressing the findings of this report.
HM Inspector of Constabulary
Using the College of Policing leadership standards as a framework, in this section we set out the most important findings relating to the constabulary’s leadership at all levels.
Senior leaders have clear plans and priorities for the constabulary and operational activity focuses on these. The constabulary has a plan on a page that directs its operational activity and aligns with the chief constable’s mission and the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner’s four objectives. We found that the constabulary concentrates on making sure it has the right people in the right place, and investment focuses on its strategic plans and priorities.
We found leaders want to understand how the workforce feels about working in Norfolk Constabulary. The constabulary carried out a people opinion survey in 2023, which provided it with detailed information. Senior leaders are responsible for acting on the survey findings. The constabulary is working to create a culture of inclusivity, fairness and trust. This will encourage officers and staff to raise concerns and will promote a stronger sense of organisational justice.
The constabulary’s strategic leaders face an ongoing challenge in preparing for and adapting to the future. Leaders should continue to be future-focused so that the constabulary can adapt to change. Forward-thinking leaders will help the constabulary to create sustainable solutions and provide the public with an efficient service.
The constabulary hasn’t made enough investment in new technology to help it increase productivity and carry out processes more efficiently. It should develop more sustainable approaches to managing changing demand by making better use of technologies, such as automations and robotics. We also found inefficient processes created additional demand. For example, people calling back to get an update adds to the control room’s workload.
We found some first-line leaders weren’t confident in managing the welfare of their teams or challenging inappropriate behaviour, because of a lack of training. The constabulary is investing in its leaders through the Stripes course and the Leading with CARE and the Right Education programmes. Investing in its leaders will improve their skills and set the standard for good leadership.
The constabulary works well in multi-agency teams to lead problem-solving solutions across different communities. We found the operational partnership teams had high levels of knowledge and experience in solving antisocial behaviour. They were confident in using appropriate legislation to prevent further incidents. This collaborative working between Norfolk Constabulary and partner agencies has a common objective of making communities safer.
More detail on Norfolk Constabulary’s leadership is included in the main body of the report.
The reducing crime assessment sets out what Norfolk Constabulary is doing to reduce crime and how effective this action is. This assessment doesn’t include police recorded crime figures. This is because they can be affected by variations and changes in recording policy and practice, making it difficult to draw comparisons over time.
Norfolk Constabulary shows a good understanding of current and future demand. Technology such as My Beat and My Team directs officers to areas in which there are problems, so they are in the right place to prevent and detect crime. The constabulary focuses well on early intervention. It uses the volunteer police cadets as one route to help steer young people away from offending by recruiting them as cadets. The constabulary effectively manages people who regularly commit crimes such as theft and burglary through a strong focus on positive outcomes and the frequent use of antisocial behaviour civil orders.
The constabulary’s neighbourhood policing teams work well with communities to understand and meet their needs. They are building trust and confidence with the public, and they encourage them to share information to help deter crime. The local communications officers and local beat managers work together with seldom heard communities to tailor communications to what a community wants and needs.
The constabulary works well with other agencies. This helps it develop long-term, sustainable plans to find the root cause of repeat problems and to carry out activities that will benefit communities. When crimes occur, officers and staff generally take positive action to arrest offenders. Investigations are well supervised, helping to bring about the most appropriate outcomes for victims of crime.
The overwhelming majority of recorded grounds for stop and search are reasonable. This shows that officers are using their powers appropriately, with confidence and where relevant. The constabulary understands and improves the way it uses stop and search powers through analysis and monitoring at constabulary meetings and at community scrutiny panel meetings. It can show its use of stop and search is fair and effective and is helping to reduce crime.
Norfolk Constabulary should improve its recording of antisocial behaviour linked to crime. Our crime data integrity audit showed only six out of ten incidents of personal antisocial behaviour were recorded appropriately. The constabulary also needs to respond to incidents within its own set timescales and update callers if there is likely to be a delay in officers attending.
More detail on what Norfolk Constabulary is doing to reduce crime is included in the main body of the report.
This section describes our assessment of the service Norfolk Constabulary provides to victims. This is from the point of reporting a crime and throughout the investigation. As part of this assessment, we reviewed 100 case files.
When the police close a case of a reported crime, they assign it an ‘outcome type’. This describes the reason for closing it.
We selected 100 cases to review, including at least 20 that the constabulary had closed with the following outcome type:
Where a person has been charged or summons for the crime.
Although our victim service assessment is ungraded, it influences graded judgments in the other areas we have inspected.
Call handlers use a structured process to assess calls that takes into account threat, harm, risk and vulnerability. They identify repeat victims, meaning that the constabulary is fully aware of the victim’s circumstances when considering what response to give. Call handlers are polite and give victims advice on crime prevention and on how to preserve evidence.
The constabulary doesn’t always respond to calls for service appropriately. And it doesn’t always respond within set timescales or always inform victims of delays in officers attending. This means victims’ expectations may not be met and they may lose confidence and disengage with the police.
The constabulary has effective crime-recording processes. It makes sure that all crimes are recorded correctly and promptly.
We set out more details about the constabulary’s crime recording in the crime data integrity section below.
In most cases, the constabulary investigates crimes in a timely way. And it completes relevant and proportionate lines of enquiry. The constabulary supervises investigations well and keeps victims regularly updated. Victims are more likely to have confidence in a police investigation when they receive regular updates.
A thorough investigation increases the likelihood of perpetrators being identified and arrested, providing a positive end result for the victim. In most cases, the constabulary took victim personal statements, which give victims the opportunity to describe how that crime has affected their lives.
When victims withdraw support for an investigation, the constabulary considers progressing the case without the victim’s support. This can be an important way of safeguarding the victim and preventing further offences from being committed. The constabulary records whether it considers using orders designed to protect victims, such as a Domestic Violence Protection Notice or Domestic Violence Protection Order.
The Code of Practice for Victims of Crime requires forces to carry out a needs assessment at an early stage to determine whether victims need additional support. The constabulary usually carries out these assessments and records all requests for additional support.
The constabulary closes crimes with the appropriate outcome type. It records a clear rationale for using a certain outcome. It asks victims for their views when deciding which outcome type to assign to a closed investigation. When appropriate, the constabulary can provide an auditable record of the victim’s wishes. The constabulary informs victims of the outcome code assigned to the investigation.
Norfolk Constabulary is outstanding at recording crime.
The Home Office Counting Rules, which provide the standard for crime recording in England and Wales, have changed since the last time we inspected the constabulary for crime data integrity.
This change mainly relates to the way forces record violent crime. This means we can no longer compare the findings from this audit to those from previous audits.
We estimate that Norfolk Constabulary is recording 98.0 percent (with a confidence interval of +/- 1.6 percent) of all reported crime (excluding fraud).
We estimate that the constabulary is recording 99.0 percent (with a confidence interval of +/- 1.6 percent) of sexual offences.
We estimate that the constabulary is recording 96.1 percent (with a confidence interval of +/- 3.7 percent) of violent offences.
The constabulary’s data for victims of crime shows that age and gender are well recorded, but ethnicity and other protected characteristics aren’t well recorded. The constabulary should be collecting this information to understand the extent to which each protected group is affected by crime, how this differs from those without the protected characteristics, and whether a different response is needed for these victims.
In this section we set out our main findings that relate to crime data integrity.
The constabulary has continued to record rape offences effectively. In our audit we found that 38 crimes of rape should have been recorded and all 38 crimes were correctly recorded. Rape is one of the most serious crimes a victim can experience. Therefore, it is important that crimes are recorded accurately to make sure victims receive the service and support they expect and deserve.
The constabulary records crimes against vulnerable victims effectively. We examined 70 records involving vulnerable adults and child protection cases. In those records, 44 crimes should have been recorded and all 44 were recorded correctly. Recording crimes committed against the most vulnerable people in society is particularly important. Failure to record these crimes can result in perpetrators not being identified or brought to justice.
Although the constabulary records crime effectively, there is still some delay in the time it takes to record crime. Two out of every three crimes took over 24 hours to record. Recording crime without delay helps make sure that victims receive the support they require as soon as possible. It also helps to establish an effective investigation.
Norfolk Constabulary is adequate at using police powers and treating people fairly and respectfully.
In the year ending 31 March 2023, Norfolk Constabulary recorded 8,341 use of force incidents. This was an 8.5 percent increase compared with the previous year. But this was still 8,929 fewer than we estimate should have been recorded, based on the number of arrests during this period. This may mean that the constabulary still isn’t recording all its use of force incidents.
People from ethnic minority backgrounds account for 5.3 percent of the local population in Norfolk, but we found that they account for 8.5 percent of use of force incidents. This could be because officers are using force disproportionately and more frequently on people from ethnic minority backgrounds.
Data shows that in the year ending 31 March 2023, Norfolk Constabulary was an outlier for subject injuries. 8.1 percent of its use of force incidents resulted in the subject being injured compared to the average of 5.1 percent across forces in England and Wales.
The constabulary needs to better understand this data and take steps to address any identified issues.
Figure 1: Proportion of use of force incidents resulting in subject injury across forces in England and Wales in the year ending 31 March 2023
Source: Police use of force statistics, England and Wales: April 2022 to March 2023 from the Home Office
In this section we set out our main findings that relate to police powers and treating people fairly and respectfully.
During our inspection, we reviewed a sample of 201 stop and search records from 1 January 2023 to 31 December 2023. Based on this sample, we estimate that 89.1 percent (with a confidence interval of +/- 4.2 percent) of all stop and searches by the constabulary during this period had reasonable grounds recorded. This is an improvement compared with the findings from our previous review in 2021, when we found 66.5 percent (with a confidence interval of +/- 5.5 percent) of stop and searches had reasonable grounds recorded. Of the records we reviewed for stop and searches on people from ethnic minority backgrounds, 19 out of 20 had reasonable grounds recorded.
Based on population data from the 2021 Census, Black people were 4.7 times more likely than White people to be stopped and searched in Norfolk, compared to 4.1 times across England and Wales. Asian or Asian British people were 0.3 times less likely than White people to be stopped and searched in Norfolk compared to the average disproportionality rate of 1.4 across England and Wales. The constabulary should take steps to consider the reasons for these disparities, so it can make sure it is applying the powers fairly.
In year ending 31 March 2023, Norfolk Constabulary found the item sought in 27.2 percent of stop and searches carried out. This is within the normal range for forces in England and Wales and indicates that the use of stop and search is effective.
The introduction of prompt words and new technology has helped officers to better understand how to record grounds. The See, Know, Suspect model is well understood. Posters are displayed in police stations reminding officers to record the reasons why they have stopped and searched someone. New technology called OPTIK allows officers to create stop and search records from their mobile devices. It automatically generates fields on the stop and search form for officers to complete.
In addition to the first-line supervisor review of all stop and search records and dip sampling of the interaction on body-worn video, inspectors also review a sample of stop and search records. The constabulary told us that in December 2023 it carried out 161 stop and searches. Inspectors reviewed the records for 110 of these stop and searches. This means that the constabulary can identify any good or poor practice and resolve problems early.
In our previous inspection in 2020/21, we identified that some elements of the internal governance of stop and search and use of force needed to improve. In our 2023–25 inspection, we found the constabulary has acted on our findings and governance of stop and search and use of force has become well established. There are meetings that link into each other and review key performance metrics, such as compliance with reasonable grounds, supervisor reviews, training and trends around disproportionality. At these meetings, constabulary-level data is dip sampled and reviewed, which helps the constabulary to better understand the way it uses its powers and to identify any trends.
The constabulary has a community scrutiny panel that meets monthly to review and discuss a randomly selected number of stop and search records and use of force reports. The panel is made up of people from diverse backgrounds and of different ages and genders. The meetings are led by a member of the public who has been trained in how to chair a meeting. The panel assesses how an officer carried out a stop and search to make sure the process was fair, and that the person being searched or subjected to force was treated appropriately. The panel provides feedback to the constabulary and individual officers on positive and poor practice. For example, the panel identified that handcuffs were used inappropriately during some searches. This was fed back to the constabulary’s training team for future learning.
All community scrutiny panel meetings are held in person. This may limit their membership because some people who are unable to travel to meetings will be prevented from joining, such as people with disabilities or parents with childcare responsibilities. The constabulary has taken advice from its information compliance and data protection officer, who has advised that the meetings wouldn’t meet legal requirements if they are held online. But there may be benefits in the constabulary exploring this further with other forces that hold their panel meetings online.
We found that frontline officers’ knowledge of the community scrutiny panel and its role was limited. The constabulary is addressing this with additional communications; this should help improve awareness.
New recruits receive training in unconscious bias and cultural awareness. They watch videos of people from different backgrounds talking about their experiences of being stopped and searched. Officers told us they take part in role-play as part of their training to help them improve their communication skills. The constabulary told us that beyond new recruits, it is training the wider workforce in unconscious bias and cultural awareness through the new culture change programme called the Right Education. This programme aims to improve understanding of what behaviours create a fair and inclusive culture, as well as behaviours that show respect for cultural difference. Treating people with respect and fairness while carrying out a stop and search helps to build good community relations and increases trust in the police.
The constabulary told us it currently can’t comply with the new College of Policing national curriculum for stop and search and use of force annual refresher training. From April 2024, the mandate is for a two-day course rather than one day. But the constabulary told us it may not have the capacity and capability to meet this new requirement. We understand the chief constable has agreed with the College of Policing, with its support, that full compliance will be achieved by April 2025.
Norfolk Constabulary is good at prevention and deterrence.
In this section we set out our main findings that relate to prevention and deterrence.
Norfolk Constabulary listens and responds well to its local communities. To do so, it uses face-to-face meetings as well as online and written information for the public.
Local communications officers are based at police stations. They work with dedicated community engagement officers and beat managers to provide the public with information and respond to the priorities communities identify.
For example, beat managers hold in-person priority-setting meetings with the public every three months. The issues communities say are important to them often become constabulary local priorities for the area concerned. The constabulary updates the public on its actions to address problems, using the ‘you said, we did’ model.
We found the constabulary prioritises working with people who may traditionally interact less often with police or have lower levels of trust and confidence in the police. Community engagement officers are aware of this focus and tailor their activity to these groups. The officers work with the equality, diversity and inclusion team to understand any sensitivities or trust issues so they can make sure their work with communities is appropriate. For example, primary schools in Great Yarmouth have a high number of children from migrant backgrounds. In partnership with schools, the officers use a dedicated school-to-parent email system to ask parents what the priorities should be. They invite families to the priority-setting meetings, which they hold at the school. This is helping to build relationships that will support future work with these communities.
Beat managers regularly review constabulary and partnership data to stay aware of repeat incidents of antisocial behaviour and repeat callers in their areas. They work with the operational partnership teams, local authority Early Help Hubs and charities to resolve community problems. For example, in Great Yarmouth, homeless people were sleeping in the stairways of blocks of flats. Neighbourhood teams worked with housing organisations and charities to support the homeless community and to clear the litter in the stairways that was affecting flat residents.
Some beat managers have specialist training in crime prevention and use these skills to work with partner agencies to design out crime and antisocial behaviour. For example, in an area of Norwich called The Lathes, open alleyways, hidden steps and overgrown hedgerows were helping to create an environment that was attracting drug dealing and associated issues, such as drug-related litter. The beat manager, with the support of Norwich City Council, the local housing association and community leaders, redesigned the area to reduce antisocial behaviour. Alleyways were gated up, hedgerows cut back and litter cleared. The constabulary told us there was an improvement in the environment for the residents of The Lathes and a reduction in criminality.
Specialist antisocial behaviour officers in the operational partnership teams work closely with partner agencies and beat managers to tackle the causes of antisocial behaviour. In our review of ten problem-solving plans, we found detailed scanning and analysis sections that were proportionate to the problems being identified. This is in line with the OSARA problem-solving model. But in our review, we also found that some supervisors weren’t reviewing plans as often as they should. Two of the plans had no supervisor review at all. A lack of supervisory oversight could mean that opportunities to resolve antisocial behaviour earlier are missed. The constabulary should make sure its supervisors regularly review all problem-solving plans.
Antisocial behaviour officers from the operational partnership teams regularly carry out a quality assurance review of problem-solving plans. They offer advice or guidance to those responsible for the plans.
The constabulary uses a variety of specific antisocial behaviour powers to prevent antisocial behaviour taking place or getting worse.
In the year ending 31 March 2023, Norfolk Constabulary issued 285 civil orders for antisocial behaviour (Criminal Behaviour Orders, Community Protection Notices, civil injunctions and section 34 dispersal powers) in 9,950 antisocial behaviour incidents, giving a ratio of 2.9 percent. This is higher than the average of 1.3 percent for forces in England and Wales.
Figure 2: Ratio of civil orders issued for antisocial behaviour to antisocial behaviour incidents across all forces in England and Wales in the year ending 31 March 2023
Source: Data collection and analysis from His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services
Note: Civil orders for antisocial behaviour include Criminal Behaviour Orders, Community Protection Notices, civil injunctions and dispersal powers (under section 34 of the Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014).
In our previous inspection, we found the constabulary didn’t routinely evaluate and assess its measures to address antisocial behaviour. In our 2023–25 inspection, we found it has made improvements. Before closing a problem-solving plan, the person responsible for the plan, relevant teams and the problem-solving team carry out an in‑depth assessment. This assessment makes sure all responses have been completed before the plan is closed. In some cases, a new plan is created if the original problem has changed significantly. The constabulary shares plans using a new digital application called My Beat. When appropriate, the constabulary consults communities to make sure the problem has been resolved.
The constabulary uses a structured risk assessment process to identify high-harm antisocial behaviour. It has a risk process map that shows clearly the activity required for different levels of antisocial behaviour. An incident risk score determines what action the constabulary or partner agencies needs to take. If an incident is scored four or less, it is reviewed by the relevant operational partnership team to decide on any further activity. If an incident is scored five or above, a neighbourhood officer will attend to speak with a victim to obtain more information and complete a secondary risk assessment. A supervisor reviews the assessment before allocating the case to an appropriate team. For cases deemed high-risk, the constabulary carries out immediate interventions to reduce the risk with increased oversight at senior level. This means the victims most in need of police support are identified and responded to quickly.
In our crime audit, we reviewed 50 incidents classed as antisocial behaviour. We identified ten crimes which should have been recorded, but only six were recorded correctly as crimes. This could mean the constabulary doesn’t always recognise that victims of antisocial behaviour can also be victims of crime, and that extra measures may be needed so they receive suitable support.
The constabulary has a strong cohort of 146 special constables. They give their time to support neighbourhood officers in specialist operations, such as car meets at Great Yarmouth, and dealing with public order and police activities involving roads.
In 2024, special constables are leading the introduction of a project called Sandi Starfish. A volunteer who has connections with the local authority is involved in the project, which has created a stronger working relationship between police and the authority. The project aims to make it easier for the emergency services to find children who have gone missing on the beach and to reunite lost children with their parents. It divides a beach into zones. Parents are advised to note which zone they are in and to take a picture of their child. Posters and leaflets have been distributed across coastal resorts to raise awareness of what people need to do and to encourage parents to be prepared before they get to the beach. This approach helps to keep children and families safe while at coastal resorts.
The constabulary’s active volunteer programme means local people can get involved with the police. This helps to build good community relations. It also helps the constabulary to find out what really matters to communities and act on that understanding.
We found neighbourhood officers are often diverted away from their neighbourhood beat areas to cover for shortages of response colleagues.
For example, for a day during the period of our inspection, a complete neighbourhood team was reassigned without notice to support response colleagues. Sometimes diverting officers is pre-planned, for example when covering public order during the summer. But we found it was often unplanned, for example when assisting with complex missing people cases, high-risk domestic abuse cases or responding to calls. Officers told us this makes them feel less valued by the constabulary and that their work isn’t as important.
The constabulary has a policy that outlines the amount of time it is acceptable for a beat manager to be diverted from their main duties. It has a system to measure the rates of planned diversions, but not for unplanned diversions. To overcome this, it asks beat managers to complete a survey at the end of each shift to record any unplanned diversions. But this only gives a snapshot. The constabulary is aware of the negative impact diverting officers has on neighbourhood teams. It is introducing a policy to make sure it has a consistent and fair approach to diverting officers from their neighbourhood duties.
We found there is no formal standardised training for new neighbourhood beat managers. Each district develops its own training. The number of days of training each beat manager gets differed. Some new beat managers had no training at all.
The majority of beat managers have received training in the problem-solving model OSARA. We found continuing professional development is more consistent and happens twice a year. It covers the core areas of a beat manager, such as civil orders, and working with partner agencies and Neighbourhood Watch. The constabulary told us it is in the process of putting these training sessions on its intranet as a central learning resource.
Some beat managers and other key personnel in neighbourhood policing roles have attended a four-day crime prevention training course that gave them a crime prevention qualification. This training was provided by the Police Crime Prevention Academy. A continuing professional development event is planned to help them to maintain and build on their knowledge.
The constabulary should consider introducing standardised initial training for newly appointed neighbourhood beat managers.
Norfolk Constabulary requires improvement at responding to the public.
In the 82 cases we examined, only 49 cases had a response to the incident that was within the required attendance time (whether downgraded or not). Delayed responses can lead to the constabulary missing opportunities to safeguard victims or collect evidence. The constabulary needs to introduce the right levels of oversight to improve how it responds to incidents. It also needs to improve the way it prioritises its response to incidents, and how quickly it responds.
If the constabulary doesn’t understand how good it is at answering calls and responding to incidents, it will find it more difficult to improve the service it provides.
The constabulary told us that, in the year ending 31 March 2024, 21.9 percent of calls to its non-emergency 101 number were abandoned by callers before they were answered. As set out in the National Police Chiefs’ Council 2020 national contact management strategy principles and guidance, forces with a switchboard should aim to have an abandonment rate lower than 5 percent.
High abandonment rates for non-emergencies may mean callers go on to make inappropriate calls to the 999 system. It also means a force has a degree of risk that isn’t understood or addressed, as the content of any abandoned call and the risk it may have contained is unknown.
The constabulary has worked to understand abandonment in more detail. It can see which callers have moved to its digital platforms for help after abandoning the call. It can also see which calls that were abandoned are then made again within 24 hours.
We found that sergeants based in policing districts have been given responsibility for managing calls into the control room that have been risk assessed as suitable for a police response within 24 hours. They hadn’t had training or guidance on how to do this and had limited knowledge of the constabulary’s expectations. Sergeants hadn’t been trained in using the structured risk assessment model called THRIVE and hadn’t been given instructions on reviewing and reassessing the calls in the backlog. We found calls in the backlog were sometimes three or four weeks old. The number of people calling back to ask for an update had increased because they hadn’t received a timely response. This means there could be risk that isn’t being identified or managed in an appropriate way. And victims of crime aren’t getting a timely service or being protected.
In this section we set out our main findings that relate to how well the constabulary responds to the public.
In the year ending 31 December 2023, Norfolk Constabulary answered 87.1 percent of 999 calls within 10 seconds. This is slightly below the expected standard of 90 percent within 10 seconds, but still higher than the percentage of 999 calls answered within 10 seconds in most other forces in England and Wales. The constabulary is working hard to meet the national target. Members of the public should be reassured that if they dial 999 to ask for help from Norfolk Constabulary, the call will be answered quickly.
We found senior leaders consistently assess performance data in relation to call handling, to identify themes and to inform decision-making. This approach has worked well to keep emergency call handling close to the national standards.
Figure 3: Proportion of 999 calls answered within 10 seconds by forces in England and Wales in the year ending 31 December 2023
Source: 999 call answering times from BT
We found response officers had good knowledge of the golden-hour principle. This means they manage crime scenes effectively and make use of opportunities to gather evidence within the first hour of arriving at an incident. They provide their detective colleagues with good-quality handovers for investigation.
But we also found that response sergeants were unable to attend incidents to support their officers because they were managing competing demands. Sergeants were finding it difficult to give enough support to an inexperienced and young workforce. They could only support their officers at more serious incidents or when the control room inspector directed them to do so. In our victim service assessment, 25 out of 42 cases we reviewed had effective and appropriate supervision for response deployment.
In our previous inspection, we found the constabulary wasn’t using a structured triage and risk assessment process well enough to identify vulnerable callers. In our 2023–25 inspection, we found it has made improvements. As part of our victim service assessment, we found that in 96 of the 99 calls we reviewed, the constabulary did record a structured triage and risk assessment. And the record of the triage was accurate and meaningful in 82 out of 96 cases. Appropriate and relevant information was obtained in 91 out of 99 cases, meaning the constabulary was able to prioritise calls at times of high demand.
At the time of our inspection, the constabulary had recently introduced a new recording system for call handlers to help them identify vulnerability at point of contact. THRIVE call scripting gives prompts and questions for the call handler to ask based on the answer to the preceding question. The initial question is based on the incident type selected by the call handler. The system will lead the call handler through several questions. It aims to support a better THRIVE decision and gives call handlers more confidence. The system is new, so it is too early for us to assess the effect it will have.
In our previous inspection, we found call handlers weren’t always giving preservation of evidence advice or crime prevention advice to callers. In our 2023–25 inspection, we found this has improved. In our victim service assessment, we found that call handlers gave preservation of evidence advice in 36 out of 38 calls we reviewed. They gave crime prevention advice in 39 out of 45 calls we reviewed. This means the constabulary is securing evidence at the earliest opportunity to support investigations and helping people to prevent further crimes.
A new team has been created to deal with callers by video, called the rapid video response team. This team has a sergeant and six officers, who use technology called Good Sam to speak with domestic abuse callers who have been risk assessed and have consented to its use. The video call allows face-to-face contact with the caller. The officers can carry out necessary risk assessments and deal with the call without response officers being deployed. This has two advantages: victims are more likely to co-operate when there has been a quick response and it frees up response officers’ time, improving efficiency. The constabulary told us in the cumulative period leading up to 1 February 2024, 81 percent of available rapid video response team appointments were completed, 76 cases had a positive outcome and 83 percent of victims would use the service again.
Norfolk Constabulary is adequate at investigating crime.
In our previous 2020/21 inspection, we identified the constabulary’s new crime allocation policy as innovative practice. This had a risk-based approach and included principles of professional, victim-centred discussion. In our 2023–25 inspection, we found that the way this policy has been interpreted has unfortunately led to delays in allocations, among other problems. Supervisors from different teams are spending a lot of time discussing and negotiating with each other as to which team will take on crimes that need allocating, with the criminal investigation department appearing to have the final say.
The current interpretation of the policy is generating inconsistencies in the crime types allocated to both response and district crime units. Young and inexperienced officers are working on complex cases beyond their skill set. We also found confusion between teams about what they were expecting to investigate and how any perceived inappropriate crime allocations could be resolved.
The constabulary isn’t always achieving acceptable outcomes for victims of crime. It has low numbers of crimes that are solved following investigations. It needs to understand the reasons for this and work to achieve better outcomes for victims.
In the year ending 31 December 2023, Norfolk Constabulary recorded 51,115 victim-based crimes. Of these recorded offences, 14.7 percent were assigned an ‘offences brought to justice’ outcome. This was the highest outcome rate for offences brought to justice compared to other forces in England and Wales.
Figure 4: Percentage of victim-based crime recorded by Norfolk Constabulary and for all forces in England and Wales by selected outcome types in the year ending 31 December 2023
| Outcome types | Norfolk outcome rate | England and Wales outcome rate |
| 1 – Charged/summonsed | 9.5% | 5.3% |
| 2 & 3 – Caution – youths & adults | 1.4% | 0.7% |
| 8 – Community resolutions | 2.5% | 1.5% |
| 9 – Prosecution not in the public interest (Crown Prosecution Service decision) | 0.1% | 0.0% |
| 10 & 21 – Prosecution not in the public interest (police decision) | 0.2% | 0.7% |
| 14 – Evidential difficulties (suspect not identified but the victim declines or is unable to support) | 8.8% | 5.6% |
| 15 – Evidential difficulties (suspect identified; victim supports police action) | 13.0% | 12.6% |
| 16 – Evidential difficulties (suspect identified; victim does not support or withdraws support) | 30.5% | 20.7% |
| 17 – Prosecution time limit expired | 0.5% | 0.2% |
| 18 – Investigation complete – no suspect identified | 24.0% | 43.2% |
| 20 – Action undertaken by another body/agency | 2.8% | 1.5% |
| 22 – Diversionary, educational or intervention activity | 0.5% | 0.3% |
Figure 5: Proportion of victim-based crimes assigned a ‘charged/summonsed’ outcome (outcome 1) by Norfolk Constabulary between the year ending 31 March 2015 and the year ending 31 December 2023
In the year ending 31 December 2023, the proportion of victim-based crimes assigned outcome 16 (evidential difficulties: suspect identified, victim does not support further action) by Norfolk Constabulary was 30.5 percent. This value was a reduction from the rate of 31.5 percent the previous year but was still higher than the average for forces in England and Wales of 22.4 percent.
Between the year ending 31 December 2023 and the previous year, the proportion of victim-based crimes assigned outcome 14 (evidential difficulties: suspect not identified, victim doesn’t support further action) by Norfolk Constabulary remained constant at approximately 8.8 percent. This value was higher than the average for forces in England and Wales.
We found the constabulary does audit and scrutinise disposal outcomes, including when victims don’t support further action. But it isn’t clear what it does with the findings, such as addressing any themes, giving feedback to investigators or providing training. Leaders should be confident they fully understand the reasons for specific outcomes, whether the outcomes are appropriate and what improvements are required to provide justice for victims.
In this section we set out our main findings that relate to how well the constabulary investigates crime.
In our previous inspection, we found the constabulary wasn’t always carrying out a victim needs assessment so that additional support measures could be put in place. In our 2023–25 inspection, we found it has made improvements. There is a focus on looking after victims and making sure their needs are met during investigations.
Officers we spoke with told us their supervisors check that the victim has been contacted regularly, to update them on important changes, such as if a suspect has been arrested or bailed, as well as to give more routine updates. When a suspect is charged, the victim comes under the care of the victim and witness care team. This team reassesses a victim’s needs to establish if there have been any changes since the initial assessment took place. A member of the team is then allocated the case and maintains contact with the victim until the case goes to court. For cases that don’t go to court, a detective inspector carries out a quality assurance check to make sure the victim has been updated before the case is closed. Victims of more serious offences, such as rape, receive a tailored letter.
By looking after victims, keeping them updated and involved, the constabulary is minimising the risk of victims withdrawing from the criminal justice process. It is also helping to increase their faith in the criminal justice process. But delays in the court system mean victim contact and support can be required for a long time.
In our previous inspection, we found that the constabulary needed to make sure supervisors reviewed investigations and that the quality of investigations needed to improve. In our 2023–25 inspection, we found that the constabulary has improved in these areas. It has introduced a checklist called the eight-point plan for the start of an investigation and a checklist called the seven-point closure plan for the end of an investigation, which have provided a consistent framework. Officers we spoke with during the inspection were familiar and confident in using both checklists.
In our victim service assessment audit, we assessed 92 of 100 investigations as effective. We found appropriate investigative opportunities were taken from the outset and throughout the investigation in 92 of 100 cases. We found appropriate investigation plans in line with the College of Policing authorised professional practice guidance in 83 of 87 cases. This is a significant improvement on our last inspection.
Evidence-led prosecutions are when a victim doesn’t want to pursue a criminal case but there is enough evidence to bring an offender to justice without the victim’s consent. We found officers had a good awareness and knowledge of evidence-led prosecutions and a culture of wanting to secure a positive outcome for a victim if they withdraw. We saw many examples of successful prosecutions for high‑risk domestic abuse and serious sexual assault cases. This means vulnerable victims and witnesses are safeguarded even though they may not feel able to support a prosecution themselves.
During our inspection, investigators spoke positively about their experience of evidence-led prosecutions, portraying a positive culture within the constabulary. The eight-point plan encourages both investigators and supervisors to explore whether the constabulary can pursue a prosecution if victims withdraw consent.
In our crime audit, we found that the constabulary considered evidence-led prosecutions where appropriate in 10 out of 11 cases.
Operation Engage is a small team of experienced detectives led by a senior officer that provides an enhanced service to victims of rape and serious sexual offences. The team carries out video-recorded interviews with victims and keeps them updated throughout the investigation. Detectives running rape and serious sexual offences investigations spoke highly of the team and valued the support it gave them and victims. They told us fewer victims have withdrawn from the criminal justice process since the team started.
The constabulary has created new teams of police officers based across its districts to support the frontline. The make-up of the teams ranges from a minimum of three constables and one sergeant to eight constables and one sergeant, based on the demands of the district. Each team is led by a dedicated district crime unit inspector. Supervisors from these teams negotiate daily with response, custody and criminal investigation department colleagues to decide what crimes they will take on to assist with demand management.
During our inspection, we found officers on these teams had manageable workloads with clear investigation plans and supervisory oversight. They were dealing with cases in a timely way and carrying out reasonable and proportionate enquiries. Although the teams were new, we found they were working well.
The constabulary has developed a new digital data product called My Team to help supervisors assess their teams’ workloads. This product allows supervisors to monitor outstanding suspects, as well as to identify where suspects are linked to multiple offences. It alerts supervisors when statutory time limits are approaching and helps them to manage caseloads. Although the product was in the early stages of constabulary-wide development, sergeants and inspectors told us it is helping supervisors and managers prioritise and manage performance.
The combination of district crime units and the My Team digital data product has improved the positive outcomes the constabulary achieves for victims. We were told that in the 12 months before May 2024, the constabulary achieved a 20 percent improvement in performance with the introduction of My Team.
A new interactive data-led dashboard is being developed for the district crime units. This will help them better manage their work with their teams and districts and identify the demand that would benefit the most from support. The dashboard will help highlight key information such as investigative delays, statutory time limits approaching or multiple cases with the same suspect.
Norfolk Constabulary requires improvement at protecting vulnerable people.
In our previous inspection in 2020/21, we identified the constabulary’s use of Domestic Violence Protection Notices (DVPNs) and Domestic Violence Protection Orders (DVPOs) as an area for improvement.
In the year ending 30 September 2023, Norfolk Constabulary recorded 11,427 domestic abuse-related crimes, and made DVPO applications in 0.3 percent of these crimes. This DVPO application rate was one of the lowest rates across forces in England and Wales. Norfolk Constabulary only considers DVPOs for high-risk cases. This is contrary to the aim of DVPNs and DVPOs, which is to reduce the ongoing risk of violence for all victims of domestic abuse, not just those that are at high risk. During our 2023–25 inspection, we found some cases where orders hadn’t been considered or approved by a senior officer.
The constabulary’s own audit of 199 finalised domestic abuse cases showed a decline in the use of protective orders and notices in preference for police bail.
But the constabulary does have clear processes for monitoring the orders it obtains.
The constabulary’s current approach means that opportunities to protect vulnerable victims are being missed.
It is important that officers attending a domestic abuse-related incident assess the potential risk of serious harm to the victim. To do this, they complete a risk assessment questionnaire and carry out research to identify any previous domestic abuse. They then grade risk levels as high, medium or standard.
The constabulary has a domestic abuse safeguarding team that completes specialist secondary risk assessments for cases assessed as medium or high‑risk. It makes sure victims are referred to the right agency, such as social services, and that any safeguarding measures are put in place. But it doesn’t carry out these assessments for standard-risk cases, meaning vulnerable adults and children aren’t being referred to relevant partner agencies at the first opportunity.
The constabulary’s processes for standard-risk cases aren’t audited or scrutinised to make sure the risk to vulnerable people is managed appropriately. The system has no automated process or guidance on how repeat incidents should be considered for raising from standard to medium-risk. Officers decide on a case‑by‑case basis. This means that a victim considered high-risk in relation to a previous incident may be left as standard-risk and the constabulary won’t know. The current process means the constabulary may not fully understand the risk within domestic abuse cases graded standard-risk, or if it is doing enough to keep vulnerable people safe.
In our previous inspection in 2020/21, we found the multi-agency safeguarding hub (MASH) had a backlog of around 400 medium-risk domestic abuse cases. The constabulary had recently introduced a new risk-based matrix to prioritise these backlog cases according to risk levels. Despite this, during our 2023–25 inspection we found there were still backlogs in medium-risk cases, which ranged from 162 to 268 cases. The constabulary told us the backlog can be as high as 500 cases.
The constabulary allocated two extra officers to the MASH to help manage increasing demand. It also regularly uses overtime to manage the backlog of referrals awaiting secondary review. Despite these measures, backlogs remain. We found some referrals waiting for assessment were over five weeks old because the MASH didn’t have the resources to complete timely referrals. The constabulary has highlighted the MASH’s capacity to meet demand as an area of high risk.
During our audit of MASH referrals, we found cases where the constabulary hadn’t shared information about vulnerable people, including children, with other agencies. We also found it had missed important information about the history of a family because it hadn’t carried out wider research. We found a case where it hadn’t updated a victim of high-risk domestic abuse about the arrest and bail of the perpetrator.
This sharing of information from police systems is vital in keeping people safe. If it isn’t shared, partner agencies may make decisions without understanding the full risk picture for the victim and family. This may mean vital support or intervention isn’t offered to those vulnerable people who need it most.
The domestic abuse partnership perpetrator approach involves the constabulary and partner agencies referring perpetrators of high-harm domestic abuse to a behavioural change programme. The programme is run by a charity called The Change Project and involves 12 face-to-face sessions. Both the perpetrator and the victim are consulted for their views before the perpetrator is referred to the programme. The aim of the programme is to prevent the perpetrator repeating harmful behaviour towards either the same or another victim. At the time of our inspection, the constabulary told us that 52 people had been referred to the programme and 11 had completed it. Of those 11, only two had been identified as reoffending.
In this section we set out our main findings that relate to how well the constabulary protects vulnerable people.
The College of Policing has designated the 13 main disciplines of public protection. These have become known as the 13 strands of vulnerability, and they are addressed in the National Vulnerability Action Plan.
The constabulary’s own plan reflects the National Vulnerability Action Plan. Each strand has its own action plan and key performance measure, which is centrally governed by the overarching public protection and vulnerability board chaired by a chief officer. Important meetings report into the board. For example, it has a domestic abuse delivery group. Its meetings are chaired by a detective chief superintendent and are attended by senior representatives from teams that respond to domestic abuse calls for service, investigate domestic abuse cases and safeguard victims and witnesses. It reviews key performance metrics to help the constabulary understand progress in all activity on domestic abuse.
The constabulary is closely scrutinising performance and holding senior leads to account. It is making sure vulnerable victims and witnesses are appropriately identified, supported and safeguarded while it pursues perpetrators.
The constabulary uses an external provider to get feedback from victims of domestic abuse on their experiences of the criminal justice process. The domestic abuse safeguarding team within the MASH also contacts victims by telephone to assess their level of satisfaction. When the new rapid video response team has been used, the constabulary asks for feedback to help better understand its use.
The independent advisory group is a stakeholder group made up of members of the community who provide feedback and make suggestions about changes to police practices. We found a well-represented and established independent advisory group that has a positive relationship with the constabulary.
This means the constabulary is actively pursuing opportunities to learn from victims and the wider community and to improve its services.
The domestic abuse safeguarding team based in the MASH manages Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme applications.
The Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme, also known as Clare’s Law, gives any member of the public the ‘right to ask’ the police if their partner might pose a risk to them, based on any previous history of domestic abuse or violence. The ‘right to know’ allows the police to proactively share information with individuals about their partner’s previous history of abuse or violence.
During our inspection, we found the constabulary’s governance and oversight of the scheme included performance information tracked at senior level. The constabulary told us that between February 2023 and February 2024 it received 1,188 applications. In this period, it had an average disclosure time of 22 days for ‘right to ask’ and 32 days for ‘right to know’. Forces should make disclosures within 28 days. The constabulary made disclosures in person 134 times, by telephone 37 times and by video call 74 times.
In the year ending 30 September 2023, 30 percent of Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme ‘right to ask’ applications resulted in Norfolk Constabulary making disclosures.
In the year ending 30 September 2023, 35.9 percent of disclosures by Norfolk Constabulary were made under the Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme ‘right to know’ process.
The constabulary is complying with the required legislative processes and timescales for the Domestic Violence Disclosure Scheme. This is important because those who ask for information about a partner’s potentially abusive history need a prompt response. This helps reduce the risk of harm. Potential victims can then make an informed decision about staying in the relationship. The disclosure process is also an opportunity for other agencies to offer advice and support to potential victims.
The constabulary told us it has been difficult to get partner agencies to attend multi‑agency risk assessment conferences (MARACs). So it has changed its approach and moved away from scheduled conferences. If a case requires a MARAC, it is now arranged within a couple of days and just the one case is discussed. The constabulary said this has improved partner agencies’ attendance and involvement. We observed a MARAC and found it was well run by the chair. The MARAC set clear actions with time frames. And it considered the voice of the victim, which the police and the independent domestic violence adviser presented.
Frontline officers have received training in a new domestic abuse risk assessment tool. The constabulary told us the domestic abuse risk assessment is a more effective way of identifying risk for domestic abuse victims. The assessment requires officers to record any relevant history of previous reports of domestic abuse to help identify the correct risk level. Mandatory training in using the new tool was rolled out to all frontline officers and attendance was tracked. The constabulary told us since it introduced the domestic abuse risk assessment officers are identifying more cases as above standard-risk. This is because officers are identifying repeat cases more effectively and are considering the increased risk over time.
Norfolk Constabulary requires improvement at managing offenders and suspects.
At the time of our inspection, the constabulary had a high ratio of offenders to offender managers. This ratio was 63:1. 26 percent of these were high‑risk offenders. Authorised professional practice says an offender manager shouldn’t have a caseload of more than 50 offenders and less than 20 percent of them should be high-risk offenders. Although the constabulary has a plan in place to address this, at the time of our inspection, numbers were still high. The constabulary needs to continue to focus on this issue.
If workloads are high, the constabulary may miss opportunities to manage offenders. It may also increase the risk of further reoffending and the risk to the community.
Management of sexual offenders and violent offenders (MOSOVO) personnel have limited confidence in using Cyacomb. This is a digital tool which can scan large quantities of digital content. As a result of their limited confidence, personnel aren’t making use of it. Instead, they are reviewing devices manually without the necessary training or skills to do so effectively.
This means the constabulary could be missing information that would help safeguard potential victims and could also be missing opportunities to gather evidence for prosecutions.
We found that the safeguarding children online team wasn’t reassessing suspects every 28 days for the level of risk they pose to children on the internet. This 28-day timescale is according to its own policy. We also found it wasn’t completing checks on suspects who had been released on police bail.
This means the constabulary may miss opportunities to manage risk posed by a suspect.
In this section we set out our main findings that relate to how well the constabulary manages offenders and suspects.
Early in our inspection, we identified that a significant number of personnel working in the MOSOVO team hadn’t received the relevant training for their role. As a result, they didn’t comply with the College of Policing’s required standard for carrying out this work. Personnel told us they weren’t receiving any continuing professional development and were feeling deskilled. This means they may not fully understand their role and may not be able to properly identify risks while managing offenders. We raised our concerns with the constabulary immediately, and it acted quickly on our feedback.
During our later fieldwork inspection phase, we found that all personnel in the MOSOVO team had now been trained. In addition, two personnel had been trained so that they can train new team members and run continuing professional development days. The MOSOVO team now complies with College of Policing standards.
The lead agency, together with other agencies, should supply a risk management plan for all registered sex offenders, which should be collated on the Violent and Sex Offender Register (ViSOR). We found cases where the Probation Service was the lead agency but hadn’t uploaded a risk management plan. Instead, police offender managers were completing and then uploading a risk management plan with risk level. This doesn’t comply with College of Policing authorised professional practice. The offender managers in partner agencies may each assess the risk differently, leading to confusion in managing the offender. In these instances, the police should raise this with the partner agency for action.
We found the safeguarding children online team was struggling to keep up with the number of referrals from the National Crime Agency. The team used to carry out two search warrants a week on suspects but are now doing three or four a week. This means personnel don’t have the opportunity to catch up with other work. Cases assessed as high-risk get actioned first, which means the lower risk cases get delayed. We raised our concerns with the constabulary early in our inspection. In response, the constabulary increased the number of personnel in the team, which has made workloads more manageable. The backlog of 259 cases waiting for action has reduced to 236. Cases waiting for trial have increased from 29 to 36 and the backlog of cases waiting for search warrants has reduced from 21 to 2.
The constabulary told us the processing time for analysing digital evidence in the safeguarding children online team was between eight and nine months, despite the shorter timescale given in its processing policy. Even with dedicated digital media investigators who triage devices while the search warrant is being carried out, it still takes a long time to get digital evidence. The constabulary can’t say how long it takes for a suspect to be charged because this depends on the time it takes to get digital forensic evidence.
The constabulary told us the safeguarding children online team will be allocated more personnel: another detective sergeant, two detective constables, two police staff investigators and one intelligence development officer. This should help with backlogs.
The constabulary has personnel who are trained to view indecent images of children. But it wasn’t aware that they shouldn’t view this for longer than four hours in a working day.
In our early inspection work, we found that personnel were viewing and grading indecent images of children for too long without a welfare break. The personnel were viewing these images for up to six hours in one working day. This isn’t in line with College of Policing authorised professional practice, which is no more than four hours in a working day. We raised this with the constabulary, which acted on our concerns by updating its policy and introducing better supervision and support.
During our inspection, officers showed they understood the requirements of the new bail legislation, under the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. They understood the importance of the safeguarding aspect of bail and of reviewing risks against each case for bail extension.
Bail is discussed at strategic performance meetings, such as the managing offenders subgroup. We found that local supervisors had good knowledge of their teams’ cases involving suspects on bail, keep local records and discuss bail with officers during one-to-one meetings.
A sergeant leads the central bail management team. The team monitors bail, making adjustments if needed to reflect changing timescales, and sends early prompts to officers when bail dates are approaching.
Digital technology is also helping with bail management. A bail app gives a summary of bail dates so that officers can see immediately which cases need action.
We found the safeguarding children online team was unable to monitor bail and enforce any breaches due to high workloads. We raised this with the constabulary early in our inspection. It acted on our concerns, making changes and putting measures in place so that bail is monitored regularly.
The constabulary knows the number of Sexual Harm Prevention Orders and Sexual Risk Orders in place across the constabulary area. The public protection unit reviews all orders to quality assure and check for compliance with legislation. Any conditions attached to the orders are also monitored by the same team. Sergeants give advice to colleagues in other teams on applications and appropriate conditions to apply for.
In the year ending 6 April 2023, 85 Sexual Harm Prevention Orders and 2 Sexual Risk Orders were issued in Norfolk. The constabulary has introduced a new process that triggers a review of all Sexual Harm Prevention Orders six months before their expiry date. A supervisor will consider whether an extension is required to manage continued risk.
Norfolk Constabulary is adequate at building, supporting and protecting the workforce.
We found some sergeants weren’t skilled or confident in managing the welfare of their teams or challenging inappropriate behaviour. They told us they hadn’t been trained in people management. One sergeant had a team member who was self-harming. The sergeant said they were expected to give this person welfare support, both on and off duty, but felt they didn’t have the skills to do so.
The constabulary expects sergeants to attend the Stripes course. The course covers important skills needed to be an effective operational supervisor, such as managing critical incidents, managing investigations, managing people and supporting team well-being. The constabulary told us it is working on aligning the course with the College of Policing’s national leadership standards.
The constabulary should make sure first-line leaders attend the Stripes course as soon as possible.
It hopes that once all sergeants have attended the course, they will be effectively equipped and trained, and feel more confident in supporting their teams, individuals and communities.
All police officers and staff should be having regular professional development reviews (PDRs). These involve a series of conversations for individuals and their line managers to plan and subsequently review performance and professional development over a 12-month period. The workforce should see them as effective and value them.
We found most members of the workforce don’t value the PDR. They felt it was only relevant if someone was interested in promotion. Some officers working in the more rural parts of the constabulary hadn’t had a PDR for over a year. Others saw it as a tick-box exercise. PDR training offered by the human resources department wasn’t often taken up. The constabulary told us that its 2023/24 completion rate for PDRs was only 23.3 percent.
A low completion rate may mean some members of the workforce aren’t having regular one-to-ones with their line managers and their career ambitions aren’t being discussed or recorded.
In this section we set out our main findings that relate to how well the constabulary builds, supports and protects the workforce.
Personnel in high-risk roles told us they aren’t offered additional support, except for a voluntary psychological screening survey. We were told there was a stigma attached to completing the survey. Some officers in specialist teams who had completed it had experienced negative consequences, such as having restrictions or adjustments put on them based on the survey findings.
The constabulary told us it offers several services for those in high-risk roles, such as access to a psychologist and stress assessments carried out by the well-being team. But we found the officers and staff we spoke with weren’t always aware of what is available. The constabulary should take steps to address this.
The constabulary has several well-being and support options listed on its intranet, such as the employee assistance programme. This is also in the employee handbook, which details other offers of support and guidance, such as trauma risk management (TRiM), physiotherapy, neurodivergent buddying, well-being champions and advocates, mental health first aiders and chaplaincy services.
We raised our concerns about the MOSOVO and safeguarding children online teams with the constabulary early in our inspection. It acted on our concerns and has introduced enhanced welfare support in a new well-being policy. This sets out minimum standards for personnel, requiring that anyone newly joining these teams receives psychological screening. The constabulary has an improved workplace area for personnel to relax and take breaks in. The constabulary has also appointed a welfare supervisor. All these measures were new, so it is too early for us to assess the effect they will have.
TRiM is a trauma-focused peer support system that is designed to identify people who need help after experiencing trauma. The constabulary told us it has trained 100 TRiM practitioners to offer that help. But some members of the workforce said that it is no longer offered automatically. Instead an officer has to make a request. Some officers told us they don’t know how to ask for it and some said they weren’t aware of it at all. We found some evidence that the constabulary has communicated about TRiM as part of wider information on well-being issued jointly with Suffolk Constabulary. But it wasn’t clear who the communications had been sent to. The constabulary should make sure the workforce is aware of what TRiM is and how to access the support when required.
The constabulary offers a variety of career development opportunities aimed at members of the workforce from underrepresented groups. These include:
The constabulary intranet is the central hub where the workforce can find more information on opportunities under the title ‘The Best I Can Be’. But when we spoke with individuals from underrepresented groups and their supervisors, we found not all of them knew what was available, or how they or their teams could access this information. At the time of our inspection, the constabulary couldn’t provide data on the take-up rate for these opportunities. It is hoped the new learning management system, which had just gone live during our inspection, will record this data.
A noteworthy example of the constabulary acting on feedback from an under‑represented group is its introduction of Taser courses and fitness sessions for female officers. Female officers had told the constabulary they didn’t feel comfortable training alongside their male colleagues. The courses have been well received and are now considered good practice.
The constabulary has bespoke workforce focus groups called listening circles, which it created in response to the national Our Black Workforce Survey. The groups use some of the findings from the survey to suggest improvements. For example, adapting a coaching and mentoring programme for officers and staff from ethnic minority backgrounds.
The constabulary has introduced a new team inspector model for its response policing teams. Each team has an allocated inspector, who works alongside it. The inspector provides consistency in local leadership and improves officers’ access to welfare and support. Team inspectors get to know their officers and are better informed about performance or welfare matters. Supervisors told us they welcomed the change, because they felt better supported and that their own welfare was being looked after by someone they knew. This model is new, so it is too early for us to assess its impact.
In our previous inspection, we found the constabulary was experiencing a high number of new officers leaving the constabulary early in their training period. The constabulary carried out research into the issue and reviewed the reasons why officers were leaving. In response to its findings, the constabulary created internal teams called community support units to help retain new recruits. These units are made up of new recruits and are led by a police sergeant.
In our 2023–25 inspection, we found each of these units is led by an experienced and trained sergeant, who coaches and supports student officers through a 15-week phase of their two-year Policing Education Qualifications Framework programme. The sergeant closely supervises the students while they learn the different aspects of operational policing. The new units are designed to bridge the gap for new officers between their tutorship period and moving to independent patrol. If an officer needs more focused training support, the community support unit has the time to allow a slower pace of learning. New recruits we spoke with gave very positive feedback about their time in the unit.
The constabulary asks new recruits to complete a short well-being survey after each set of shifts. This gives the constabulary feedback direct from the recruits on how they feel that week and means it can make interventions if needed. In 2023, it received 109 responses to the survey, which resulted in six interventions.
A newly introduced intervention approach is the ‘Say and Stay’ interview, which is led by the HR team. This offers anyone thinking of leaving the opportunity to speak with someone independent of their line manager. The constabulary can then better understand the reasons why a person may want to leave. As this is a new approach, it is too early for us to assess the effect it is having.
The constabulary is responding to a workforce survey it carried out to understand what it is like working in Norfolk Constabulary. Question areas included well-being, supervision, culture, organisational justice and senior leadership. The survey had a high response rate of 64 percent. It gave the constabulary rich data to review and help identify where changes to working practices may be needed. For example, it introduced a new shift pattern to help with demand on response teams. It has created a new communications hub on the intranet to share findings from the survey.
Important findings from the survey included some unhealthy workplace culture and unprofessional behaviour by some members of the workforce. The constabulary responded by creating a new course called Valuing Difference – The Right Education. The aim of the training is to give line managers the skills to create a working environment that builds trust and confidence, in which the whole workforce is treated ethically and with respect. Attendance on the course is compulsory for all managers and is tracked. During our inspection, we spoke with some managers who had attended the course and they said it was thought-provoking.
The constabulary told us another major finding from the survey was personnel experiencing harassment, discrimination, bullying or victimisation. More than 300 respondents indicated they had experienced one or more of these. 29 percent said this was from a senior leader, 22 percent from a line manager and 20 percent from a peer.
After the survey, the constabulary made senior leaders responsible for addressing the findings with their departments. It also provided them with guidance on how to communicate with their teams. The chief constable set timelines for senior leaders to update the chief officer team. The information was used in chief constable video blogs to update the workforce. The trade union UNISON told us it has been involved in making sure the workforce survey findings are acted on.
This shows the constabulary is acting swiftly to address issues the workforce raises. The chief constable is committed to regularly providing feedback to the constabulary under a ‘you said, we did’ model.
In our PEEL workforce survey, we identified that:
But in our PEEL workforce survey we also found that 92 percent of respondents (1,080 of 1,173) agreed that their line manager creates an ethical working environment and 88.9 percent of respondents (1,043 of 1,173) agreed their line manager models high standards of behaviour.
Norfolk Constabulary’s leadership and management is adequate.
The constabulary needs to develop more effective approaches to how it identifies and addresses various forms of demand. For example, the constabulary is aware of ‘failure demand’ arising from calls coming into the control room from people wanting an update or chasing a delayed response. But the constabulary needs to do more work to address the actual causes of this demand.
The constabulary also needs to develop more sustainable approaches to how it addresses sources of external demand. For example, some calls from the public don’t result in an incident or crime being recorded. The constabulary has some understanding about the underlying causes for these demands. But it is managing them by investing additional resources in its switchboard function. This will help to prevent some call demands being placed on the control room. But the constabulary needs to make sure it fully understands the underlying causes for these demands, so it can take appropriate and sustainable action to reduce them. This will also help it to reduce demand in all areas and provide a more efficient service to the public.
The constabulary told us it has identified some areas where it could be more efficient, such as constant observation of a person detained in custody and dealing with missing people. It is commissioning exploratory work to make improvements. This will help the constabulary save money and be more productive.
The constabulary isn’t currently making the most of the technology it has available to help it increase productivity. This is restricting progress. We were encouraged to see some use of digital solutions, such as Power BI. These can replace manual and time-consuming processes with a fully automated way to present data and management information.
But we also found some internal processes were creating additional demands for the workforce. These included processes that could be completed more efficiently by technology. The constabulary isn’t currently using automations or robotics for repetitive tasks that are currently being completed manually. The constabulary lacks capacity within IT to fully develop the technologies.
But the constabulary has recognised this gap and has developed clear plans to address it. They include investing extra resources and creating a new operating model that will be introduced later this year. The constabulary told us it is confident these plans will create the extra capability and capacity it needs to make better use of technology. The constabulary needs to make sure these changes are carried out as planned because they will help it become more efficient and meet its future challenges more effectively.
In this section we set out our main findings that relate to leadership and management.
The constabulary has created a strategic plan on a page. This plan considers the police and crime commissioner’s ‘Police, Crime and Community Safety Plan 2022–24’. It clearly communicates the constabulary’s objectives and priorities to the workforce. We found copies of the plan clearly displayed and the workforce we spoke with were aware of the plan and understood its priorities.
The constabulary has effective processes to manage its daily work with high-quality performance data information. Clear performance summaries mean managers don’t need to ask analysts to carry out extra work.
Senior leaders have the information they need to oversee performance effectively and to make informed decisions. The constabulary is also good at using data to help assign and co-ordinate resources through daily management meetings. This makes sure the constabulary can manage its daily demands effectively and meet the needs of its communities.
We also found the constabulary was making good use of its force management statement. It uses this document to help it assess current and future demands and identify risks. This helps it to develop its plans as part of strategic operational planning processes.
The constabulary has developed a range of leadership training programmes. These are designed to provide its leaders with the skills they need to be effective. They are provided jointly with Suffolk Constabulary.
The constabulary provides sergeants with the skills they need through its Stripes course. As mentioned in ‘Building, supporting and protecting the workforce’, this course is for any officer who is either newly promoted, or has passed the law‑based exam and is interested in promotion, or is already in acting or temporary positions. It is designed to provide the essential skills needed to manage teams and supervise operational incidents. But at the time of our inspection, we found that not many sergeants had been on the course because of the limited capacity of the learning and development team.
In the year ending 31 March 2023, the constabulary had 319 sergeants’ positions. At the time of our inspection we were told that 97 people had completed the Stripes course. But only six of those were sergeants.
The constabulary also provides the Leading with CARE programme, in collaboration with Suffolk Constabulary. CARE stands for connectivity, accountability, risk competence and energy. This is an ongoing course for leaders during their careers. It is linked to the College of Policing’s Senior Leadership Programme.
The programme is available to all police officers and staff. It provides a blended range of packages across different levels of leadership, designed around the constabulary’s vision and mission principles. It includes online courses, workshops, masterclasses and peer support. Any officer or staff member wanting promotion must complete the programme, and this is recorded in their annual performance appraisal.
Police leadership is a crucial factor that helps a force provide effective services through a well-led and motivated workforce. The constabulary must make sure its learning and development teams have the capacity they need. This will help make sure that its leadership training plans are available at the earliest opportunity and that managers at all levels have the necessary skills and abilities to lead effectively.
The constabulary has a dedicated organisational change team called Horizons. The team works on various projects that improve the constabulary’s internal processes and how it operates.
The constabulary has effective processes to manage these projects. It showed us how it evaluates the benefits from its investments. For example, crime outcomes improved after it introduced district crime teams.
Operational officers and staff have mobile devices that now use OPTIK software. They can easily access constabulary systems, processes and data, so they can carry out their work efficiently and complete most tasks while working within their communities.
The constabulary has an effective approach to financial management and uses an outcome-based budgeting model to help set its budgets. The forecasts within the medium-term financial plan are based on realistic assumptions about future funding and planned expenditure.
In the year ending 31 March 2023, Norfolk Constabulary received a total of £224m in funding (£241,850 per 1,000 population). Of this, 39.4 percent (£88m) was raised through the council tax precept. The constabulary’s council tax precept funding is in line with the average precept funding for all forces in England and Wales.
The constabulary received funding from a 5.2 percent rise in precept for 2023/24. It allocated this to maintaining its current levels of service. Despite this, the constabulary still needs to find savings to have a balanced budget. The constabulary has identified where it will make savings in 2024/25. It told us it still needs to decide where it can make savings after 2024/25. The constabulary has a good track record of making savings and is confident it will be able to achieve them.
The constabulary’s capital expenditure for the financial year 2023/24 was £12.5m. It used this to invest in IT, improve its buildings, replace its vehicle fleet and invest capital in projects. The constabulary also generates external income of more than £100,000 annually through its drone academy. It provides drone pilot training for its workforce and offers places to other police forces and external agencies. This helps to cover the running costs of the drone academy.
The constabulary uses its reserves prudently. But it has had to draw on reserves frequently to make investments and to support the revenue budget. In the year ending 31 March 2023, the constabulary held general reserves of about £4.8m, which is an adequate amount and considered to be prudent. Earmarked reserves, which were close to £15.6m in 2023, are expected to fall to around £7.8m by the end of 2027/28. This shows the constabulary is financially resilient and has enough resources to meet its priorities.
The constabulary plans to use the reserves to make investments to improve its performance and the standard of service provided to the community.
Data in this report comes from a range of sources, including:
For any charts and tables included in this report, we have listed the data source underneath.
We collect data from police forces twice a year. We agreed the design and schedule of this data collection with forces and other interested parties, including the Home Office.
Our analysts check and evaluate the collected data. We contact the force if we have any initial queries. Following this, we carry out an in-depth data review and make further contact with the force if needed. This process gives forces several opportunities to quality assure and validate the information they shared to make sure it is accurate.
We then share our analysis with the force by uploading the data to online dashboards. As they can review own and other forces’ data in context, forces can identify any notable differences or other inconsistencies.
This report presents the results from a PEEL inspection of one of the 43 territorial police forces in England and Wales. British Transport Police is outside the scope of this report.
Any aggregated totals for England and Wales exclude data from the British Transport Police, which means that the totals will differ from those published by the Home Office. If any other police forces didn’t supply data and aren’t included in the total figures, we will mention this.
We use data that has been collected outside our PEEL inspection to support our fieldwork.
This report contains the latest data available before the start of our inspection and the data that the force gave us during our inspection. If more recent data becomes available after our inspection fieldwork and shows that the force’s performance has changed, we will comment on this.
In this report, we sometimes present information as rates per 1,000 population in each police force area. This allows our data to be comparable across all forces. Where population data is used in our calculations, we use the latest mid-year population estimates from the Office for National Statistics.
In this report, we have included bar charts with dotted red lines to show where a force is significantly different from the average for forces in England and Wales.
The dotted lines on the bar charts show one standard deviation above and below the unweighted average of all forces. Standard deviation summarises the difference between each individual value and the average and can be used to identify extreme or rare values.
Forces that are more than one standard deviation above or below the average are considered significantly different. These forces are outside the red dotted lines on our bar charts and we have highlighted them in either a dark blue (forces above average) or light blue (forces below average) colour. Typically, 32 percent of forces will be above or below these lines for any given measure.
We survey the police workforce throughout England and Wales to understand their experiences at work. The survey is an opportunity for the whole workforce to share their views with us. It is a valuable source of information as it isn’t possible to speak to everyone in a force during our inspection.
However, the responses we receive come from a non-statistical, voluntary sample within the workforce. The number of responses also varies between forces. This means that the results may be not representative of the workforce population.
We treat the results with caution and don’t use them to assess police forces. Instead, we use the results to establish themes that should be explored further during our inspection fieldwork. The results can also be used to give more evidence and validate information from other sources.
We carry out a victim service assessment for all forces as part of our inspection programme.
We assess the service that a force provides to victims. This is from the point of reporting a crime and throughout an investigation.
We also evaluate how forces record crimes. We assess every force on its crime recording practices at least once every three years.
You can find details of the technical methodology for the victim service assessment on our website.
We carry out a stop and search audit for all forces as part of our inspection programme.
Our stop and search audits allow us to evaluate how well forces use their stop and search powers. We review how many stop and searches a force carried out under section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 or section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. We analyse:
Norfolk PEEL assessment 2023–2025
You can find more about Norfolk Constabulary on our dedicated force page.
Norfolk is the fifth largest county in England, with a population of approximately 916,200 The police force area covers 2,074 square miles, with a coastline of 93 miles, no motorways, and limited dual carriageways. It is a popular tourist destination.
Paul Sanford was appointed Chief Constable in 2021, establishing the ‘Core Policing’ concept, prioritising the services the public value most – answering calls swiftly, attending incidents quickly, investigating crime well, targeting criminals and providing exceptional services for victims.
Read more from Norfolk Constabulary
Find out more about HMICFRS’s work and other inspection areas.
Find out how well other forces have performed during their PEEL assessment.
You can view the recommendations for all forces made by HMICFRS on our Progress against recommendations page. This shows how much progress has been made on these recommendations.
