Agenda item

1.    This report was requested by the Panel in light of the 10% increase in recorded crime in Kent.  The Commissioner explained that in early 2013 she had asked HMIC to undertake an audit of crime recording in Kent.  This demonstrated a 90% accuracy rate however this was not considered satisfactory by both HMIC and the Commissioner, therefore the Force put in place an action plan to tackle. Following regular audits the accuracy rate is now 96-97%.  Crime recording figures were improved by process improvement, cultural reform and training  in order to move away from a target driven culture.  Following Kent’s inspection HMIC are inspecting every force in the country.  13 have been completed with an overall accuracy rate of 80%. Of note, some were significantly lower.  On a rolling programme there was a 10% increase in recorded crime-6% was due to better recording, 2% was ‘back record conversions’, re-categorising closed crimes previously recorded as no crime, 0.5% was an increase in pro-activity; with the actual increase in recorded crime  being estimated at 1.5%. The Chief Constable has predicted that next year the 10% increase will be wiped out.  HMIC is due to return to Kent but they will be looking at the old figures to get a national picture, this gives a mixed message and was unfair, however they will then return to inspect  Kent a third time to provide an accurate picture of the current practice.

2.    A Member questioned the clear up rates and the arrangements around the deployment of police vehicles.  The Commissioner explained that clear up rates were determine through the crime being committed and solved.  Page 38 (4) of the report set out the classification of crimes, there were 18 possible outcomes.  The Commissioner would send the Councillor (and the Panel) some further detail.

3.    A Member questioned the 6% error in recording, was this consistent across all areas of crime?  The Commissioner explained that HMIC and the Home Office had analysed the crime figures and accepted the figures.  Next year it was predicted that other forces’ crime recording figures would increase although there is a sense that actual crime levels would remain the same, they are just  more fully recorded.

4.    In response to a question about monitoring the performance of the Chief Constable without the use of targets the Commissioner explained that activity is skewed by targets, the only target now is to give a quality service.  The Chief Constable’s Culture Board is also looking at behaviours and victim satisfaction levels with the force were 86.8%.  The Commissioner offered to report back to the Panel when the work was complete.

5.    A Member asked for real figures within the report rather than percentages, this would be provided in future.

6.    With regard to victim satisfaction around racist incidents, the Commissioner explained that this would be taken back to the satisfaction survey team, there was an opportunity to ensure that the right information was being provided and the Commissioner agreed to report back on this issue to Members. 

7.    The Commissioner and the Force were applauded by Members for their efforts in dealing with crime recording, however it was necessary to focus on the performance of the Police, the Panel looked forward to seeing the accurate crime figures after the new regime had been in use for one year in September 2014 – this would be kept under review by the Panel. 

RESOLVED that the Panel note the Commissioner’s report on Crime Figures in Kent and welcome a report back on the work being undertaken around crime figures and recording in Kent.