Agenda item

1.    The Commissioner began his Victim Satisfaction Update by highlighting his role within the sphere of victim satisfaction; the key areas covered by previous surveys and the consistent themes addressed across all three previous surveys. He added that there had been an improvement in victim satisfaction in the last year.

2.    The introduction of new Domestic Abuse support teams was identified by the Commissioner as an expected area for future victim satisfaction improvements. He cited the Witness Care Unit and the Chief Constable’s Crime Squad as services which would continue to improve victim confidence in Kent Police. 

3.    The Commissioner reminded the Panel that his previous Annual Policing Survey had contained a question on satisfaction and that he had been concerned with several responses.

4.    Engagement was raised by the Commissioner as an area for future improvement. He confirmed that he had planned to increase satisfaction through engagement with victims in the following months and that efforts to increase cooperation with victim support charities would be built upon.

5.    Members asked a range of questions in relation to the Victim Satisfaction Update. Key issues raised by the Panel and responded to by the Commissioner included the following:

·         Whether the Commissioner had been satisfied with Kent Police’s response to low victim satisfaction rates. The Commissioner noted that figures had improved when compared to the previous year. He stated that improving the first point of contact with victims was key in achieving high rates of satisfaction. It was added that the impact of a failure to prosecute individuals could impact levels of satisfaction.

·         For the Commissioner to outline the actions he had taken to improve victim satisfaction. He confirmed that a new Victim’s Code and Witness Charter had been introduced. The Commissioner added that the 2020 Annual Policing Survey satisfaction rate was greatly anticipated and that he would consider a separate survey for victim satisfaction if necessary.

·         How the views of young and vulnerable residents had been accounted for when considering the use of contextual qualitative data. The Commissioner noted that commissioned services were an important resource for relaying the views of vulnerable individuals and disclosing their satisfaction with services, Independent sexual violence advisors (ISVAs) were cited as a service specific example. With regard to engagement with young people, the Commissioner highlighted the Young People’s Advisory Group (YPAG), school PCSOs and the Ministry of Justice’s Victim’s Panel as key engagement channels. The Panel was reminded that the Annual Policing Survey gave residents the chance to provide qualitative data, though it was noted that further work could be done to give individuals a greater opportunity to submit qualitative responses.

·         Whether PCSO community newsletters could be shared with communities using other means, including social media platforms. The Commissioner advised the Panel that Parish Councils published PCSO reports and newsletters. He noted that it was difficult to share community newsletters on social media platforms as members of the public had used previous posts as a means for reporting crime. The Commissioner confirmed that trials had taken place to test Next Door as a community information sharing platform.

RESOLVED that the Kent and Medway Police and Crime Panel note the report.