Your Councillors

Appendix 1 2017-18 Strategic Assessment

Appendix 1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DRAFTSMP1 (Small)

 

 

 

 

 

Strategic Assessment

2017-18

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


CONTENTS                        

                                                                                                                                      Page

 

1.

Executive Summary

4

 

1.1 What is a Strategic Assessment?

4

 

1.2  Headline information aligned to key priorities 2016-2017

4

 

1.3  Safer Maidstone Partnership (SMP)

1.4  Priorities recommended to the SMP for 2017-2018

4

5

 

1.5  Methodology

1.6  Demographic and Economic Information

5

6

 

 

 

2.

Total Recorded Crime

7

 

2.1  Total recorded Crime in Maidstone November 2015 - October 2016

7

 

2.2  Total recorded crime per 1,000 population in Kent – year ending March 2016

7

 

2.3  Volume of crimes by type within Maidstone for November 2015 – October 2016 and the same time period in 2014 - 2015

2.4 Police Statistical Process Control (SPC) Charts                                              

9

 

10

 

 

 

3.

Violent Crime

11

 

3.1  Total Violent Crime

11

 

3.2  Levels of Violence in the Borough Wards April 2016 – October 2016

13

 

3.3  Violent crime – Night-Time economy

13

 

3.4  Domestic Abuse

3.5  Adolescent to Parent Violence (APV)

14

16

 

 

 

4.

Anti-Social Behaviour

16

 

4.1  Anti-Social Behaviour in Maidstone

16

 

 

 

 

5.

Substance Misuse                             

     17

 

 

5.1  Substance Misuse in Maidstone                                                               

5.2 NPS related hospital admissions   

5.3 Alcohol related hospital admissions

5.4 Clients in treatment  

5.5 Substance Misuse recommendations

 

 

     17

18

18

19

19

 

 

6.

Reducing Re-Offending

     19

 

6.1  Availability of ‘Proven adult reoffending’ Data

19

 

6.2  Integrated Offender Management (IOM)

20

 

6.3  Reducing Re-Offending recommendations

21

 

 

 

7.

Road Safety

21

 

7.1  Road Safety in Maidstone

21

 

7.2 Road Safety recommendations                                                                     

21

    8.

 

 

 

 

Community Resilience

 

8.1 Community Resilience topics

8.2 Local Profiles

8.3 Community Resilience recommendations

    

    

     22

 

     22

     22

     22

 

 

       9.

9.     Subsidiary priority relating to Safeguarding (self-neglect & hoarding)

  23

 

       

 

 

1110.     Mental Health                                                                                                              23         

 

             10.1 Mental Health recommendations                                                                          23

 

 

1111.    Unlawful Encampments (UE’s)                                                                                  23                                                                                           23

 

 

1212.    Recommendations to Safer Maidstone Partnership                                               24

 

 

1313.    How to get further information                                                                                  24

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

   

 

 

 

APPENDICES

 

 

 

Appendix 1 – Information services                                                                           

 25

 

 

Appendix 2 – Case studies                                                                              

 26

 

   Appendix 3 – Methodology notes                                                                                      28

    Appendix 4 – Acronym glossary                                                                                        30      

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1.     Executive Summary

 

1.1 What is a Strategic Assessment?

 

Locally, our Community Safety Partnership (CSP) is known as the ‘Safer Maidstone Partnership’ (SMP). This assessment will look at the SMP’s progress against the priorities set last year, and evaluate the effectiveness of the work undertaken. This document is reviewed annually and agreed by the SMP in March each year.  It is also independently assessed by the Kent Community Safety Unit.

 

1.2 Headline information aligned to key priorities from 2016-2017:

 

  • ASB – an increase of 3% in Maidstone in the past 12 months. Since 2010, recorded ASB incidents in the borough have fallen by 33%.    
  • Substance Misuse – offences increase of 22.3% in Maidstone.     
  • Violent Crime (Domestic Abuse) – an increase of 34.8%. One Stop Shop use is up 42%.
  • Violent Crime overall – an increase of 26.2%.
  • Road Safety (killed or serious injured) – a decrease of 20.6% (over three years 2013-2015) 2015 – 50, 2014 – 74, 2013 – 63.
  • Reduce Reoffending rate – Due to the division of the Probation services into the National Probation Service (NPS) and the Kent, Surrey & Sussex Crime Rehabilitation Company (KSS CRC) data around re-offending will not be released by the Ministry of Justice (MOJ) until 2017. However Integrated Offender Management (IOM) data shows an overall reduction of 45% in offending for the West division cohort of prolific offenders.  
  • Community Resilience – multi-agency subgroup created to discuss all themes for this new priority. Serious Organised Crime (SOC) presentations from the police delivered to partners, desktop exercise to develop case working and information sharing. Local Profiles published to highlight areas of risk for victims under the police Control strategy topics in the borough.

 

It should be noted that part of the reason for increases in certain offences is partly because of changes in the recording of incidents.  For example a victim of domestic abuse may report 6 further offences towards them but these will be individually crimed instead of being collated together.

 

Certain crimes have also been re classified into other thematic areas, also where a particular offence has been targeted for enforcement and individuals have been caught and charged; there will inevitably be a percentage increase in offences recorded.

 

The results of reclassifications and targeted enforcement will be known in future quarterly crime briefings and strategic assessments. The latest (2016) HMIC PEEL (police effectiveness, efficiency and legitimacy) assessment of Kent Police reported: The extent to which the force is efficient at keeping people safe and reducing crime is: good. The extent to which the force is legitimate at keeping people safe and reducing crime is: outstanding.

 

1.3 Safer Maidstone Partnership (SMP)

 

The SMP brings together people from local government, the NHS, the police, the fire service, probation, local businesses, housing providers and the voluntary and community sector to work as a team to tackle crime. 

 

Priorities identified from the last strategic assessment (2016-17) were:

 

  • Violent Crime (specifically Domestic Abuse and Night Time Economy)
  • Substance Misuse
  • Reduce Reoffending
  • Road Safety – Killed & Seriously Injured
  • Community Resilience (emerging issues around CSE, Prevent, Human Trafficking, Modern Slavery, SOC and Safeguarding)

                                                                                           

Emerging themes that occurred through the year:

 

  • Serious Organised Crime (SOC) covering all vulnerabilities with a safeguarding risk, have seen an increase.
  • Mental Health issues becoming more prevalent in all priorities.

 

These priorities were closely aligned with the Kent Police and Crime Commissioner’s crime plan and that of the Kent County Council community safety agreement to ensure a continuity of strategy locally. Consideration has also been given to the Kent Police Control strategy which has seen the emergence of the following themes: Their current 6 key priorities are:

 

  • Child abuse and exploitation
  • Gangs
  • Human trafficking and modern slavery
  • Organised acquisitive crime
  • Counter terrorism and domestic extremism
  • Domestic abuse, serious violence and sexual offences

 

1.4 Priorities recommended to the Safer Maidstone Partnership for 2017 – 2018.

 

Our priorities for this year have been extracted from a wide variety of information shared with our partners and represent the most important issues to focus on this (2017/18) year.  Based on the information in this Strategic Assessment, it is recommended that the Safer Maidstone Partnership confirm the following 2017/18 priorities:

  1. Organised Crime Groups (including modern slavery);
  2. Gangs & Child Sexual Exploitation (CSE);
  3. Substance Misuse;
  4. Domestic Abuse and other violent crime;
  5. Mental Health.

 

These priorities have also been borne out by the scoring matrix used in ‘MoRiLE’ which ranked these priorities based on threat risk and harm to the public and organisations.

 

Prevent and Reducing Reoffending will now be cross cutting themes rather than named priorities along with ASB. All the priorities will require a robust multi-agency response, but because they are important for residents and communities, achieving them will have a positive impact on people’s quality of life.

 

 

1.5 Methodology

 

Data for this year’s Strategic Assessment has been sourced by the Kent Community Safety Unit from a variety of statutory partners including Police, Kent Fire and Rescue Service (KFRS), Health, Probation and KCC Services. They are available in the Partnership data sets section on the Kent Safer Communities portal. A number of different data display tools have been included in this year’s assessment for the purpose of putting the context of crime data into more perspective, over a longer period of time.

 

The Kent Community Safety Unit has explored the use of the MoRiLE (Management of Risk in Law Enforcement) scoring matrix to look at ranking offences based on threat, risk and harm. Maidstone Borough Council and others in Kent have incorporated this methodology within this year’s Strategic Assessment. (Appendix 3).

 

Another variation to this year’s methodology is a greater use of Statistical Process Control Charts (SPCs). These give a clearer visual perspective of crime figures over a specified timescale and allow for natural variations within the control limits. (Appendix 3)

 

Serious Organised Crime Local Profiles have now been published by Kent Police for each Local Authority area.  They highlight the risk for each topic in the Police ‘CONTROL’ strategy and offer advice to partners around what to look out for. (Appendix 3).

 

It is important to note that most of the data relating to crime and disorder collated for this strategic assessment covers the period November 2015 – October 2016 unless otherwise stated. It should also be noted that changes to crime definitions in 2013 and changes to data collection practices has meant that comparisons before 2014 were not always possible. The data in this assessment will be used to identify trends in criminal activity in Maidstone and will be cross referenced with other districts in Kent and previous Maidstone data sets to highlight specific issues unique to Maidstone.   

 

 

1.6 Demographic and Economic Information

 

Population profile

 

The latest population figures from the 2015 Mid-year population estimates show that there are 164,500 people living in the Maidstone Borough. This population size makes Maidstone Borough the largest Kent local authority district area.

 

75% of the borough’s population live in the Maidstone urban area with the remaining 25% living in the surrounding rural area and settlements. 

 

In 2015 Maidstone Borough was ranked as the 9th most deprived district in Kent (out of 12 districts, with the most deprived being ranked 1).  Nationally, Maidstone ranks 198th out of 326 local authority districts in England.  This rank places it within England’s least deprived half of authorities.

 

 

 

Unemployment rates

 

Maidstone’s claimant rate is currently 1.2%.  This is lower than the county average of 1.6% and considerably less than the national average of 1.8%. The majority of those unemployed are aged 18-24, this age group accounts for 23.7% of all those unemployed Maidstone.

 

 

O

                                                         

 

 

 

2. Total Recorded Crime

 

 2.1 Total recorded Crime in Maidstone November 2015 - October 2016

 

This section looks at total crime data and is followed by a more detailed analysis of the crime categories that have formed Maidstone’s strategic assessment.

 

Countywide there were 300,528 emergency ‘999’ calls received to the Kent Force Control Room from November 15 – October 16.  This was an increase of 10.3% on the previous 12 months. ‘101’ non-emergency calls stood at 583,549, an increase of 3.1% on the previous 12 months. The average percentage of 999 calls answered was down 0.5% at 98.9%. Answered 101 calls were down from 88.8% to 82.4% in the same period.

 

All crime in the borough rose by 11.8% in the period November 2015 to October 2016 compared  with the same period the previous year, from a total of 9,189 crimes to 10,271 crimes, Using financial year data (April 15 to March 16), recorded crimes equated to  58 offences per 1,000 population in Maidstone. When compared to the county, Maidstone has a below average number of offences per 1,000 of the population and is ranked equal 5th out of all of the districts in Kent.

 

 

2.2 Total recorded crime per 1,000 population in Kent – year ending March 2016

 

 

Area

Number of offences

2016 rate per 1,000 pop.

2015 rate per 1,000 pop.

 

2014 rate per 1,000 pop.

 

County Ranking

 

 

Tunbridge Wells

5140

44

43.4

43.2

1

Tonbridge & Malling

5961

48

45.3

45.7

2

Sevenoaks

5894

50

47.5

48.2

3

Ashford

6551

53

51.6

57.5

4

Maidstone

9332

58

56.7

59

5=

Dover

6581

58

57.8

59.1

5=

Canterbury

9557

61

57.1

58.7

7=

Shepway

6671

61

56.6

59.6

7=

Swale

10059

71

67.7

73.9

9

Dartford & Gravesham

15650

75

68.8

74.2

10

Thanet

11980

87

82

91

11

KCC Total

89643

59

59.4

62.7

 

Medway

20285

74

70.3

67

 

Kent

113651

64

61

63.4

 

 

 

The Most Similar Group (MSG) chart below shows crimes per 1,000 residents for Maidstone compared to 14 other ‘similar groups’. MSG’s are grouped using over 20 different demographic parameters.  You will notice that Tonbridge & Malling and Canterbury CSP’s are both in this group.  When comparing other CSP’s crime data within Kent, these two CSP’s are therefore the best to compare with Maidstone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

iQuanta Bar Chart MSG (12 months) - Crimes per 1000 Residents

 

 

Kent - Maidstone

 

 

Crimes

 

 

01 Nov 2015 - 31 Oct 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CSP

 

 

 

 

 

Crimes / 1000 Pop

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Lancashire - South Ribble

 

 

 

 

44.459

 

 

Hertfordshire - North Hertfordshire

 

 

 

 

 

45.559

 

 

Bedfordshire - Central Bedfordshire

 

 

 

 

 

49.226

 

 

Lancashire - Chorley

 

 

 

 

 

49.775

 

 

Kent - Tonbridge and Malling

 

 

 

 

 

50.281

 

 

Cheshire - Cheshire West and Chester

 

 

 

 

 

55.679

 

 

Leicestershire - Charnwood

 

 

 

 

 

57.034

 

 

Avon & Somerset - South Gloucestershire

 

 

 

 

 

57.136

 

 

Sussex - Arun

 

 

 

 

 

57.291

 

 

Hertfordshire - Dacorum

 

 

 

 

 

60.106

 

 

Essex - Epping Forest

 

 

 

 

 

60.512

 

 

Essex - Chelmsford

 

 

 

 

 

61.163

 

 

Kent - Maidstone

 

 

 

 

 

62.450

 

 

Warwickshire - Rugby

 

 

 

 

 

63.252

 

 

Kent - Canterbury

 

 

 

 

 

65.339

 

 

MSG Average

 

 

 

 

55.951

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.3 Volume of crimes by type within Maidstone for November 2015 – October 2016 and the same time period in 2014-2015

 

The table below identifies the different categories of crime reported in Maidstone and highlights the main areas where crime has increased/decreased. 

 

 

Month

 

Rolling year

 

October 2016

 

RY ending October 2016

RY ending October 2015

Number change

% change

Victim based crime

791

 

9245

8488

+ 757

+8.9%

Violent Crime

312

 

3743

2964

+ 779

+26.3%

- Violence Against The Person

280

 

3390

2665

+ 725

+27.2%

- Sexual Offences

26

 

284

222

+ 62

+27.9%

- Robbery

6

 

69

79

-10

-12.6%

Burglary Dwelling

28

 

286

357

-71

-19.9%

Burglary Other than Dwelling

32

 

532

495

+ 37

+7.5%

Vehicle Crime

68

 

686

583

+ 103

+17.6%

- Theft Of Motor Vehicle

20

 

182

132

+ 50

+37.9%

- Theft From Motor Vehicle

48

 

504

451

+ 53

+11.7%

Vehicle Interference

9

 

110

82

+ 28

+34.1%

Theft and Handling

199

 

2422

2633

-211

-8.0%

- Shoplifting

61

 

804

1077

-273

-25.3%

- Theft of Pedal cycle

13

 

136

111

+ 25

+22.5%

- Other Theft

125

 

1482

1445

+ 37

+2.6%

Criminal Damage

143

 

1466

1372

+ 94

+6.8%

 

 

 

 

 

 

Crimes against society

69

 

1026

701

+ 325

+46.4%

Drug Offences

24

 

345

282

+ 63

+22.3%

Possession of weapons

4

 

50

45

+ 5

+11.1%

Public order offences

23

 

402

227

+ 175

+77.1%

Other crimes

18

 

229

147

+ 82

+55.8%

 

 

All crime

860

 

10271

9189

+ 1082

+11.8%

 

                                              

The data clearly illustrates an increase in crimes against society, violent crime and vehicle crime; (violent crime +26.3%, public order +77.1%, drug offences +22.3% & TOMV +37.9%); there has however been a decrease in robbery -12.6%, shoplifting -25.3% and burglary dwelling -19.9%.  Violent crime increases could partly be due to new police recording measures. Some crimes against

society figures have increased because of different classification of crimes and will be reflected better in subsequent quarterly crime figure briefings.

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.4 Police Statistical Process Control (SPC) Charts

 

The above Police Statistical Process Control (SPC) Charts for Kent cover the period June 13 – November 16.

They show the trends in crime figures of 8 offences:

 

  • Victim Based Crime
  • Violence Against The Person (VATP)
  • Burglary Dwelling
  • Burglary Other Than Dwelling (BOTD)
  • Vehicle Crime
  • Criminal Damage
  • Theft
  • Shoplifting

 

The methodology for the charts is attached but put simply; SPC charts are generated based on historical data to produce the following:

 

  • The Centre Line (CL) which is the average no. of recorded crimes / incidents
  • The Upper (UCL) and Lower Control Limits (LCL) which are the limits of natural variation

 

Any result above the UCL suggests that there may be a problem.  In addition, other indications that a category is out of statistical control includes when several results in a row are above the CL or when several results in a row show an increasing trend.

 

If the figures are consistently below the CL this indicates an improvement and will result in the centre line and the control limits being lowered, often referred to as a ‘step change’.

 

This shows over a three and a half year period, a better visual picture of how crime figures for different offences have fluctuated.  Rather than relying just on a table showing a percentage change from the previous year, it allows for naturally occurring rise and falls in offences year on year.

 

It can be seen that victim based crime and VATP have seen a steady increase in the period, and burglary dwelling, BOTD and Shoplifting have shown decreases.  The remaining 3 crime types have held steady over the period.

 

3.    Violent Crime

 

3.1 Total Violent Crime

 

‘Violent Crime’ covers a wide range of offences including murder, manslaughter, GBH, ABH and other assaults without injury, threats to kill, harassment, sexual offences and robbery. Maidstone has seen an increase of 26.3% in violent crime compared with the period of November 2014 – October 2015.  It’s important to mention that this may be attributed to a change in police recording.  This increase is below the division and county percentage and the 4th lowest increase out of 13 areas. 

 

Violent Crime

Month

Rolling year

 

October 2016

RY ending October 2016

RY ending October 2015

Number change

% change

Dartford

267

2956

2220

+ 736

+33.2%

Gravesham

308

3116

2284

+ 832

+36.4%

Medway

703

8252

6397

+ 1855

+29.0%

Swale

275

3701

2827

+ 874

+30.9%

North Division

1553

18025

13728

+ 4297

+31.3%

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maidstone

312

3743

2964

+ 779

+26.3%

Sevenoaks

158

1702

1301

+ 401

+30.8%

Tonbridge and Malling

180

2117

1623

+ 494

+30.4%

Tunbridge Wells

184

1962

1625

+ 337

+20.7%

West Division

834

9524

7513

+ 2011

+26.8%

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ashford

214

2378

1902

+ 476

+25.0%

Canterbury

361

3874

2938

+ 936

+31.9%

Dover

296

2799

2338

+ 461

+19.7%

Shepway

286

2960

2283

+ 677

+29.6%

Thanet

431

5262

4008

+ 1254

+31.3%

East Division

1588

17273

13469

+ 3804

+28.2%

 

 

 

 

 

 

Force

3976

44823

34712

+ 10111

+29.1%

 

 

Violent Crime November 2015 - October 2016                    

 

The majority of violent crime offences occurring in Maidstone within the 12 months ending 31st October came under the ‘Violence against the person’ (VATP) category. This category covers offences ranging in severity from assault without injury to murder, however does not include robberies or sexual offences.

 

There were 3390 VATP offences in Maidstone spanning the same period of time. This is up from 2665 in 2014-15, an increase of 27%.  It should be noted that many VATP offences will be minor assaults and on further investigation some of these will be found to be accidental contact with no malicious intent, rather than situations where force has been used intentionally.

 

This is demonstrated by the low number of charges in October 2016 where only 11% of perpetrators where charged or summonsed as a result of a VATP offence. 35% of VATP offences resulted where the victim did not support police action. 13% had no identified suspect.

 

 

 

3.2 Levels of Violence in the Borough Wards April 2016 – October 2016

 

High street ward had the highest number of recorded violent crimes in the borough with 607 incidents reported (up from 452 on same period in 2015) alongside Fant with 178 (up from 108), Shepway North 171 (up from 95) and Parkwood 164 (up from 100).  The Wards with the lowest levels of violent crime were Downswood & Otham with 10 incidents, Boughton Monchelsea & Chart Sutton 14, Barming 16 and Leeds 17.  

 

It should be noted that for this assessment there is no differential for offences in the High Street ward, to say if they were related to residential addresses or as is most probable for the majority, to businesses, shopping areas and the night time economy in general.  At this time it is not possible for future assessments to separate this data so as not to portray such a skewed view of the ward.

 

The table below illustrates hospital admissions for assaults covering 9 years. Kent has seen a steady decline overall which Maidstone has generally followed. Recently however, county figures have plateaued and Maidstone has seen a slight increase.

 

 

 

3.3 Violent Crime - Night Time Economy

 

Maidstone has a highly active night time economy (NTE) which generates around £60 million each year; this is considered to be a key contributing factor to the heightened levels of violence in the High street ward. Bearing in mind the size of the County town’s NTE though, it is still considered by agencies and the public as a relatively safe place to visit compared to similar large towns/cities.  This was enforced by an overall sense of feeling safe in the town via a public consultation into the town centre and NTE.

 

Violent crime has however seen a year on year increase in Maidstone and it is clear that greater focus needs to be provided to ensure violence is reduced. Current work undertaken to reduce the levels of violent crime in Maidstone is reported in the CSP rolling plan and Violent Crime will remain as a priority.    

 

3.4 Domestic Abuse

 

The cross-government definition of domestic violence and abuse is:

any incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive, threatening behaviour, violence or abuse between those aged 16 or over who are, or have been, intimate partners or family members regardless of gender or sexuality. The abuse can encompass, but is not limited to:

 

  • psychological
  • physical
  • sexual
  • financial
  • emotional

 

Domestic Abuse (DA) has and continues to account for a considerable proportion of violent crime; in Maidstone DA attributes to 39% of all violent crime, as well as being a fundamental feature of other offences such as criminal damage. Its prioritisation is not just in response to the serious nature of the behaviour involved but is also necessitated by the volume of incidents that are being recorded – made all the more significant as this is one crime category that has historically suffered from considerable under-reporting.

 

Domestic abuse sits as both a local, county and national priority which is supported through local mechanisms such as the Multi–Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC) which provides support and protection to families and individuals in high risk domestic abuse situations. There is also the commissioning of the Independent Domestic Violence Advisor service (IDVA) which provides support and guidance to victims of DA. Each district also delivers a ‘one-stop shop’ where all victims of domestic abuse can receive advice and support.

 

Recorded Incidents of Domestic Abuse and Repeat Victims

 

Between the periods September 2015 - August 2016, Maidstone had recorded 2683 incidents of Domestic abuse (26.4% average repeat victims) compared to 2258 incidents (26.2% repeat victims) in the same period in the previous year.  This translates to a 34% increase in cases, though percentages of repeat victim figures are virtually unchanged.   

 

Whilst our incidences are lower than the average in the county our rate for repeat victims is the second highest in Kent with a 26% rate of repeat victimisation. Domestic abuse is a complex crime which puts great pressure on victims to return to their relationships on the basis of fear, low self-esteem, family ties and a hope for change.    

 

It is widely recognised that increased recorded incidents of domestic abuse are not necessary indicators of a worsening situation.  Since domestic abuse has been an under-reported crime, increased reports indicate that DA victims feel more confident to come forward to report the abuse they are suffering. Many of our partners on the domestic abuse forum champion domestic abuse in their respective services encouraging clients and service users to be open about their circumstances and feel confident in the services that can support them to move out of domestically abusive relationships.

 

One-Stop Shops

 

Domestic Abuse One Stop Shops offer free advice, information and support from a range of agencies under one roof to help victims of domestic abuse. Maidstone’s one stop shop is currently hosted at the Salvation Army and provides advice on housing, legal matters, policing and specialist DA advice. Information regarding the take-up of One-Stop Shop services has been provided by the Kent and Medway Domestic Abuse Strategy Group for the 12 month period July 2015 - June 2016, and the previous 12 month periods.

 

 

 

Maidstone has seen a 42.3% increase in attendance at the one stop shop since last year which is the 2nd highest increase in the county. 93% of all visitors were from Maidstone with the remaining 7% coming from other districts, 11.7% of all visitors made a repeat visit compared with the previous year where 22% of attendees made a repeat visit.

 

80% of visitors described themselves as white British, 7.2% identified as white European and were the largest other single group.

 

According to the analysis undertaken by the Kent & Medway Domestic Abuse strategy group, 74% of all visitors were made aware of the service through local agencies, with 14% hearing about the service through family and friends. 

 

When visitors were asked who it is they would have liked to talk to that were not present at that time, the agencies that were mentioned the most for Maidstone were Solicitors, Housing & Mental health.

 

With a 42.3% increase in visitor numbers over the year it is clear that more people are continuing to seek domestic abuse advice and access to services via the one stop shop; therefore it is crucial to ensure that we can meet demand and provide the services they need to keep themselves and their families safe.

 

Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARACs)

 

MARACs are meetings where information about high-risk domestic abuse victims (those at risk of murder or serious harm) is shared between local agencies.  By bringing all agencies together at a MARAC, a risk-focused, co-ordinated safety plan can be drawn together to support the victim.  MARACs now cover all persons aged 16 years and over.

 

Maidstone has had 179 MARAC cases between the periods of November 2015 - October 2016.  This compares to 147 cases the previous 12 months, an increase locally of 22% and countywide 6.5%. 35 of those cases were repeat cases, this equates to 20% of all cases which is virtually unchanged from last year.  This is the lowest repeat cases figure in the county whose average is 31.5%. Last year the county repeat case figure was 26.4%.

 

 

3.5 Adolescent to Parent Violence (APV)

 

APV is a form of domestic abuse inflicted by a child onto their parent. APV is usually perpetrated by a male child who victimises the mother.   

 

APV is widely recognised by practitioners who work with families across a range of support services. However, it is only very recently that policy has begun to be developed to specifically address the problem. As a result, it is not usually officially documented and therefore does not currently appear in any public records or figures. Evidence of the extent of the problem is therefore piecemeal and developing incrementally.

 

Reports through the local early help teams, social services and troubled families have all identified APV to be an issue in Maidstone.  

 

Whilst there is no current evidence to suggest perpetrators of APV grow into adult offenders it is highly likely that the learnt behaviour is carried on into adult relationships. It is recommended that APV is integrated into the SMP’s DA priorities as a way of reducing future and current unreported offending.  

 

Violent Crime - domestic abuse

 

The Safer Maidstone Partnership has put considerable effort into raising the awareness of domestic abuse in the borough and has provided expert knowledge to local agencies. The SMP has also put in practical measures at the home of victims to keep them safe from there abuser. A number of initiatives have been supported this year and are outlined in the CSP plan. Due to the high levels of domestic abuse and repeat incidents, recommendation is made that Violent Crime (domestic abuse) remains as a priority for the partnership.

 

4.    Anti-Social behaviour

 

4.1 Anti-Social Behaviour in Maidstone

 

Section 17 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998, requires responsible authorities to consider crime and disorder (including antisocial behaviour and other behaviour adversely affecting the local environment). ASB was removed as a priority in name last year as it was seen as ‘business as usual’ with strong partnership working and information sharing continuing to resolve issues.

 

Figures have shown this year that there has been a slight increase of ASB of 3% in Maidstone from November 2015 – October 2016 with 3697 cases compared to 3588 in the previous year. District wide saw an increase of 0.5% in cases over the same period.  Since 2010, recorded ASB incidents in the borough have fallen though by 33.1%.

 

 

November 15 – October 16

November 14 – October 15

Number difference

% difference

County ranking

Canterbury

3852

4231

-379

-8.9%

1

Dover

3380

3701

-321

-8.7%

2

Tonbridge& Malling

2326

2469

-143

-5.8%

3

Medway

8747

8983

-236

-2.6%

4

Swale

3904

3991

-87

-2.2%

5

Gravesham

3274

3337

-63

-1.9%

6

Thanet

5368

5337

+31

+0.6%

7

Shepway

2948

2890

+58

+2.0%

8

Sevenoaks

2012

1970

+42

+2.1%

9

Maidstone

3697

3588

+109

+3.0%

10

Tunbridge Wells

2287

2200

+87

+3.9%

11

Dartford

2990

2620

+370

+14.1%

12

Ashford

1856

1582

+274

+17.3%

13

Kent district

46641

46897

-256

-0.5%

 

 

 

Reports of ASB direct to the MBC CSU for the 12 months from December 15 - November 16 amounted to 113 cases. The majority of these were neither investigated fully or the direct responsibility of MBC CSU staff.  They were however appropriately signposted to other departments and organisations, sharing necessary information and keeping an audit trail of data.

 

Despite the slight rise, this supports our decision to remove ASB as a priority in name last year which allowed us to explore more emerging issues.  The weekly CSU partnership meeting has recently evolved into a vulnerabilities group focusing on repeat locations as well as individuals.  It was found that many of those on the case list had a degree of mental health issue which would benefit from wider partnership involvement.

 

The wards most affected by ASB in order of number of offences recorded are High street ward (although no differential between residential reports and public), Fant, East, Parkwood and Shepway South.

 

In 2016 there were no applications for the Community Trigger in the Maidstone borough.

 

5.    Substance Misuse 

 

5.1 Substance Misuse in Maidstone

 

Substance misuse relates to the use of drugs, alcohol and includes New Psychoactive Substances (NPS) previously known as ‘legal highs’. Neither alcohol nor NPS were included in the recorded drug offences as they were both legal. Since the Psychoactive Substances Act 2016 became law in May 2016, NPS supply would be included in drug offence figures but not possession.  It is however important to mention alcohol and NPS as there is a clear connection between criminal activity and the excessive use of these substances.

 

Kent police recorded drug offences includes both offences of drug supply and possession. Under this category of crime Maidstone has seen a 22.3% increase in drug offences from Nov 15 – Oct 16 when compared to last year’s data. This is an increase from 282 offences to 345 offences; this equates 63 more crimes this year. 

 

Data from the Kent and Medway Public Health Observatory suggests a lower number of admissions to hospital for mental and behavioural disorders relating to psychoactive substances than in the past.  637 admissions from Jul 15 – Jun 16, compared to 734 from Sep 14 – Aug 15.  This is a reduction of 13%.  Next year’s comparable data will provide a clearer picture of what impact the Psychoactive Substances Act has had in related hospital admissions. 

 

5.2 NPS related hospital admissions.

 

The table below illustrates hospital admissions over 9 years for mental and behavioural disorders (due to psychoactive substance misuse) for Maidstone. It shows a steep rise in Maidstone’s figures from 2010/11.  This was when NPS use and ‘head shops’ became more prevalent and publicised in the media.  In the last 12 - 24 months, targeted enforcement by the Police and Trading Standards has removed various products from general sale. This, along with the impending PS Act in May 16 and targeted education and support by substance misuse charities has seen admissions start to drop.  Again, this will hopefully be more prevalent in another 12 months.

 

 

5.3 Alcohol related hospital admissions.

 

This table explores hospital admissions in Maidstone for evidence of alcohol involvement or toxic effects of alcohol covering 9 years to 2015/16.  Maidstone generally mirrors Kent’s figures and both have seen an upward trend over the period.

 

 

5.4 Clients in treatment.

 

The substance misuse charity Change, Grow, Live (CGL) has seen a drop in the use of the 3 needle exchange schemes in Maidstone over the past 12 months:

 

 

January 2016 – December 2016

January 2015 – December 2015

Number difference

% difference

Clients on exchange programme

422

538

116

-21.5%

Clients in treatment

313

316

3

-0.95%

 

 

This represents a 21.5% reduction in needle exchanges despite no relative change in those in treatment.  CGL explained that this is due to their recovery programme being very successful with a number of clients completing treatment successfully and/or their injecting status changing.

 

From April 2016 – December 2016, CGL had 93 positive discharges in Maidstone (31 drug & 62 alcohol). Positive discharge for Opiates is drug free and completion of opiate substitute medication.  Alcohol is either abstinence via a detox or reduction regime or controlled drinking – within government guidelines, if that was their goal.  Other drugs such as cocaine, cannabis etc can be occasional users but will have made significant reduction/changes to substance misuse. 

 

As at 31st December 2016, CGL had 208 clients in structured treatment – 152 Opiate, 41 Alcohol and 15 other drugs.

 

5.5 Substance misuse recommendations.

 

Substance Misuse actions and examples of partnership working are covered in the CSP plan.

Due to the high level of drug offences in certain wards, and the link between drug offences and other crimes; it is recommended that Substance Misuse remains as a priority.

 

6.    Reducing Reoffending

 

6.1 Availability of ‘Proven adult reoffending’ data

 

The 'Proven adult reoffending' data in this Strategic assessment is historic data that does not relate specifically to service users subject to probation involvement.  As of June 2014, the former Kent Probation divided into two organisations; National Probation Service (NPS) and Kent, Surrey & Sussex Community Rehabilitation Company (KSS CRC) that manage two separate cohorts of service users.  Reoffending data related to the KSS CRC is currently unavailable, with the first publication due for release by the MOJ in October 2017.

 

As a result of this no information can be used in this strategic assessment that is up to date and is reflective of the current re-offending rate in Kent or Maidstone.

 

Youth Justice first time entrant’s figures for Maidstone have reduced year on year from 1903 new offenders in 2012/13 to 1205 in 2015/16.  This represents a 36.6% decrease over 3 years. This is particularly encouraging as this will help reduce the prevalence of future ‘prolific offenders’ and the stigmatisation of young people with a criminal record.

 

 

 

 

 

6.2  Integrated Offender Management (IOM)

 

Integrated Offender Management (IOM) brings a cross-agency response to the crime and reoffending threats faced by local communities. The most persistent and problematic offenders are identified and managed jointly by partner agencies working together.

IOM helps to improve the quality of life in communities by:

 

  • reducing the negative impact of crime and reoffending
  • reducing the number of people who become victims of crime
  • helping to improve the public’s confidence in the criminal justice system

 

 

Division

Cost of Crime

Difference

Number @ Nil Cost 6 Months After

 Months before joining IOM

6 Months After joining IOM

East Division

£350,435

£146,735

-£203,700

22

North Division

£304,899

£159,630

-£145,269

10

West Division

£451,812

£503,263

+£51,451

20

Total

£1,107,146

£809,628

-£297,518

52

In August 2016 there were 178 adult offenders on the IOM cohort in Kent, 96 of which were in prison, this equates to 54% of the overall cohort. From the period of January 15 to December 2015 the members of this cohort were arrested for 238 offences throughout the year compared with 474 offences before they joined the cohort, this is a reduction of 236 cases which equates to 49%. The main reductions were in burglary of a dwelling which saw a reduction of 91 offences.

The individuals in the IOM cohort are prolific offenders and although 31 (38%) of them committed offences, it is a positive outcome that 51 (62%) either committed no offences or had a reduction in offending whilst they have been on IOM compared to the same time period before they joined IOM.

IOM is predominantly populated by male offenders with only 4 women subjected to the process this year.

 

West division

                                               

West division has the highest IOM cohort with 75 offenders open to the process, this equates to 42% of the overall cohort in Kent and Medway. This is a rise from 63 offenders in August 2015 and has also seen the cost of crime for the West division rise by over £50,000.  This rise in the cost of crime for those on IOM this year was because of a change in the period and calculation over which the cohort were monitored before and during their time on IOM. Also if an offender started to reoffend, the values of the crime or associated costs incurred were higher on some occasions and the cohort was larger.  Indeed, in Maidstone we experienced a 71% overall reduction in offences committed by the IOM cohort than before they were on IOM.  This is slightly under the county average of 81%.   For those IOM in the community, 45% in the West division had a reduction in offending.

 

It was stated that the predominate causes of offender behaviour across Kent related to thinking and behavioural needs which accounts 89% of the attributable needs amongst the cohort, the lowest criminogenic needs mentioned were accommodation (40%), and emotional wellbeing and alcohol abuse which both accounted for 44% of offenders each. 

 

It is clear from the information provided that IOM is a successful way of supporting the most prolific ex-offenders to change their lives.

 

 

6.3 Reducing Re-offending recommendations.

 

Actions to assist in reducing reoffending are in the CSP plan, reducing reoffending rates are key to the reduction of crime and thus fewer victims. In the borough it is considered a theme that spans across all of the other priorities. Therefore the recommendation is made that it is now moved to become a cross cutting theme rather than a specifically named priority.

 

7.    Road Safety

 

7.1 Road Safety in Maidstone

 

Road traffic is still the biggest cause of unnatural death, injury and harm to the people of Kent, especially young people aged between 5 and 25.  Kent County Council is the Highway Authority for Kent and has a Statutory Duty under the Road Traffic Act for road safety with the aim to reduce casualties. The Safer Maidstone Partnership has maintained road safety as priority for the partnership in the past as it recognised the importance of making Maidstone’s roads safe.

 

KSI figures (killed or serious injured) for Maidstone have seen a decrease of 20.6% over the three years 2013-2015,  2015 – 50, 2014 – 74, 2013 – 63. This has been achieved despite limited actions or interventions from MBC. However, the number of 17-24 year-olds killed or seriously injured (KSI) as car occupants in Kent rose by 16 per cent from 51 in 2014 to 59 in 2015.

 

KFRS have opened a ‘Road Safety Experience’ at Rochester and is the first purpose built, interactive centre of its kind in the UK. It uses powerful stories, exciting interactive experiences and information from experienced road safety experts. The aim is to encourage young people to look at the potential consequences of a road accident from all perspectives – for themselves, their passengers, other drivers and their families. 

 

The Road Safety Experience aims to help young people learn from the experience of others, improve their safety and give them the skills they need to make better informed decisions in all driver and passenger situations.

 

The Road Safety Experience is set to provide essential road safety skills for young people across the county. The centre is built on the same site as the new Rochester Fire Station on the former Park and Ride site on Marconi Way, Rochester ME1 2XQ.  

 

  • It provides supervised education visits for up to 90 young people a day. It is free to all schools, colleges and groups in Kent and Medway.
  • The centre is predominantly aimed at 14 to 25 year olds.
  • The experience has been designed for schools to spend a total of four hours on their visit.
  • There is additional educational content that can be used before or after the students come for their experience.
  • The centre will also be available to youth groups.

 

KCC Road Safety Team and Kent Police have responsibilities and powers in relation to road safety that Maidstone Borough Council and others do not. There are 2 major motorways that run through the borough which contribute to a high number of casualties.  Maidstone Borough Council has little or no influence or resources to affect casualty figures on these major routes through the borough.

 

7.2 Road Safety recommendations

 

MBC continue to support major organisations with campaigns and initiatives around road safety but have no specific resources to implement anything further themselves.  Road safety is therefore recommended for removal as a priority for the SMP due to many organisations having no direct resources, powers or influence in reducing the RTC or KSI figures in the borough compared to the statutory agencies.   

 

8. Community Resilience

 

8.1 Community Resilience topics.

 

Over the year emerging trends in child sexual exploitation (CSE) extremism and radicalisation, human trafficking, modern slavery and serious organised crime (SOC) have presented as significant issues across the country. To tackle these issues the police have implemented these areas into their Control Strategy

 

Given the prominence of Kent in regards to its links with Europe through Dover, the Safer Maidstone Partnership supports the control strategy through making a priority orientated around CSE, Prevent, human trafficking, modern slavery and SOC. By including these areas in the strategy it is hoped that the partnership can make our communities more resilient and pre-emptive to those issues. 

 

An SMP Community Resilience subgroup was set up to explore these emerging issues further and discuss how partner agencies could assist with information sharing.  This can help build evidence to support police investigations into organised crime groups. 

 

Various presentations from the police Serious Crime Directorate to the subgroup have given a valuable insight into the police control strategy.  They have shown partners what types of details to look out for and what to ask when conducting a site visit and showed that some agencies have more powers of entry to businesses than the police.  This means that entry to a location can be gained earlier in an investigation.

 

 

8.2 Local Profiles.

 

The police Local Profiles have been published for each CSP and for Maidstone highlight the following redacted points for Community Resilience topics:

                                                               

  • Child Sexual Exploitation (CSE) - No CSE crimes or incidents have been recorded but 21 children at risk of CSE have been identified.
  • Gangs – A number of London street gangs are associated with the area and drug networks, vulnerable people being exploited. 
  • Organise Crime Groups - There are 8 OCGs with a recorded impact in the Maidstone area. The crime types associated with these groups is commonly drugs related which mirrors the local and national trend.
  • Human Trafficking & Modern Slavery - There are two car washes in the District linked to human trafficking via intelligence.  There are links between a brothel in Maidstone and an OCG.  The women being prostituted from these premises are believed to have been trafficked from abroad.
  • Counter Terrorism & Domestic Extremism – Threat posed by individuals travelling through Kent ports raising funds for terrorism.  Combating the threat from unlawful protest from extreme left and right wing groups.

 

 

8.3 Community Resilience recommendations.

 

Due to the relatively new nature of partnership working around these topics, it is recommended that Community Resilience topics are retained but because of their complexity, are separated into two priorities – i) Organised Crime Groups (including Modern Slavery) and ii) Gangs & CSE.  This will continue to help build on these newly formed relationships and working practices.

 

 

9. Subsidiary priority relating to Safeguarding (self-neglect & hoarding)

 

As part of this priority, an emergence of ASB cases relating to hoarding and self-neglect became apparent in Maidstone. ASB was caused by the lack of care residents took over their properties which increased the levels of vermin in the areas they lived in. The SMP had coordinated many multi-agency case conferences to address the issues highlighted by self-neglect and hoarding.  Partners involved in this process include adult social services, voluntary and community sector (VCS) organisations with specialism relating to mental health, housing and health, environmental health/enforcement and the CSU.   

 

The coordination of self-neglect cases has proved affective by enabling multiple agencies to support people in the community. This has reduced the environmental health issues and ensured that an ongoing plan is in place to support local residents. It has also lead to this process being embedded into agencies case management and is now business as usual.

 

Following a review of the Maidstone self-neglect & hoarding protocol, the CSU have now stepped back from the tasking & co-ordinating of these cases.  There isn’t sufficient capacity for an officer to co-ordinate and carry a caseload of complex cases this large. They will however remain as a source of advice & guidance when needed.  A case study can be found in Appendix 2.  

 

 

10. Mental Health

 

Approximately 75% of all cases discussed in the weekly community safety & vulnerabilities group meeting have a degree of mental health associated with them.  This is also true of previous self-neglect & hoarding cases.  Figures for Section 136 use in the borough (where an individual is sectioned for their own or others safety) have increased year on year for Maidstone and last year it was used 66 times. This is an increase of 46% over the previous 3 years.

 

There is a concerted effort taking place to avoid where possible those with mental health issues from being kept in police custody as a ‘safe place’ when their behaviour is causing concern.  Pilots have commenced elsewhere in Kent for designated places for this use and more access to mental health professionals.  A future evaluation will determine what provision suits best and can be rolled out across the rest of the county.

 

Referrals for young adults and older people had seen a slight increase in most boroughs over the past 3 years (with 1358 and 701 referrals last year respectively).  However figures for 2016/17 show Maidstone could be on target for a slight decrease but this won’t be known fully until after April 2017.

 

 

10.1 Mental Health recommendations.

 

Because of Mental Health issues being prevalent in so many topics, it is recommended that it be introduced as an SMP priority in its own right. One aim for example could be for all agencies to identify vulnerabilities early, and signpost clients to appropriate support.

 

11. Unlawful Encampments (UE’s)

 

The last 12 months have seen a total of 9 unlawful encampments set up on Council owned land.  Approximately 5 others have been reported that were on private land.  The associated officers time, legal & environmental costs are estimated to be put at thousands of pounds.  An area wide working group was set up to review the Unlawful Encampment protocol.  The aim of which was to explore more expedient ways of managing UE’s, thus reducing time, costs and the escalation of potential environmental damage. A revised protocol and documents will be published by the end of the financial year 2016/17 and will see a wider range of enforcement options at our disposal, dependent on the threat and risk the UE’s present to predominantly publically accessible land.

 

 

12. Recommendations to Safer Maidstone Partnership

 

Our priorities for this year have been extracted from a wide variety of information shared with our partners and represent the most important issues to focus on this (2017/18) year.  Based on the information in this Strategic Assessment, it is recommended that the Safer Maidstone Partnership confirm the following 2017/18 priorities:

6.    Organised Crime Groups (including modern slavery);

7.    Gangs & Child Sexual Exploitation (CSE);

8.    Substance Misuse;

9.    Domestic Abuse and other violent crime;

10.  Mental Health.

 

These priorities have also been borne out by the scoring matrix used in ‘MoRiLE’ which ranked these priorities based on threat risk and harm to the public and organisations.

 

Prevent and Reducing Reoffending are now cross cutting themes rather than named priorities along with ASB. All the priorities will require a robust multi-agency response, but because they are important for residents and communities, achieving them will have a positive impact on people’s quality of life.

 

13. How to get further information

 

If you would like further information about the Safer Maidstone Partnership, please contact: Community Partnerships & Resilience Team, 6th Floor, Maidstone House, King Street, Maidstone, Kent ME15 6JQ. Tel: 01622 602000. www.maidstone.org.uk

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 1

 

Information sources

 

The list below includes the details of those data sources used to inform this strategic assessment, including the agency supplying the data.  All information was correct at time of document production.

 

Kent Community Safety Unit crime data – Safer Communities Web Portal

 

All data provided by the County CSU is using recorded crime data provided by the Business Information Unit at Kent Police.  This data places the incidents at the time at which they were recorded by the Police.

 

Kent Police Intelligence Analysis data

 

Data provided by Kent Police is ‘committed’ data.  The ‘date’ used is the midpoint between the earliest and latest dates that the offence could have been committed.

 

Other data sources

 

Data and information used in producing this Assessment has been provided, directly or otherwise, from the following organisations:

 

Association of Chief Police Officers

Association of Police Authorities

Association of Public Health Observatories (PHO’s)

Choices DA Services (formerly North Kent Women’s Aid)

Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary

Home Office

iQuanta

Kent Community Wardens

Kent County Council

Kent Fire & Rescue Service

Kent Highways

Kent Police

Nomis

ONS Labour Market Statistics

National crime agency

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 2

 

Community Wardens:

 

Case 1: 

 

KCC Warden was first made aware of LC when they took over ‘Area’ on a temporary basis from a previous Community Warden approximately 2 years ago. LC was living on approximately £72 a month. She was not receiving benefits. She often went to the local supermarket and bakers to get food to tide her by, free of charge.  They referred her to AgeUK to obtain a benefit check and help with probate/debts accrued. LC’s husband had passed away a couple of years ago and the mortgage and other debts were not being paid. She was at risk of having her property repossessed. Details were provided of Step Change Debt Charity and also obtained food parcels from the Salvation Army.

 

Accompanied LC to the Bank, raised a concern that she held an account that charged her a monthly fee even though she was not using it. She was struggling to get by. The bank agreed to refund approximately £1600 in monthly fees and interest and charges on another account. 

 

Her dog was being fed by the RSPCA. However LC contacted the Warden stating that the RSPCA had scheduled to remove the dog from the property due to the conditions. The dog was never walked & they offered to rehome her at a local farm. This was LC’s preferred option.

LC’s property was in a filthy condition with dog faeces and urine throughout. She was hoarding large amounts of items. They arranged for a home visit from MBC Environmental Enforcement to visit the property – an order was made to ensure that the property was deep cleaned and decluttered. KCC helped her to declutter a large amount of items.  There was a water leak in the property and so MBC Private Sector Housing were contacted, who agreed to repair the leak.

 

Spoke to the GP and raised concerns about LC’s mental health. They organised a mental health assessment where she was deemed to have capacity. LC mentioned that her Sister-in-Law had been taking LC’s medication and so they notified the GP in order to limit the amount of prescribed medication.

Encouraged LC to go to the AgeUK Day Centre each Friday as she wanted her to mix with other people. Concerns had been raised that her sister-in-law was constantly harassing her all the time. The aim was for LC to have something to do, without her sister-in-law. LC obtains 2 more dogs and 2 cats. The RSPCA were notified and they agreed to do six monthly checks.

 

Another Warden took over ‘Area’ approximately 14 months ago, they continued to do joint visits.  Working with AgeUK to continue to sort out her finances and mortgage and probate.  LC stated that she no longer wanted her cats and so we rehomed them at Cat Protection.  During Multi-Agency meetings we discussed the possibility of moving LC to Housing Association property as she was due to be evicted in the near future.  KCC Warden and Community Safety (MBC) agreed to bid for properties on LC’s behalf with her consent.

 

Wardens both accompanied LC to view a property and take her to Golding Homes to sign the tenancy agreement for a property elsewhere in the borough.  Organised a local church group to assist in moving large items of furniture etc. to LC’s new property. Social Services helped us to clean the furniture as it was brought in.  AgeUK arranged for some offcuts of carpet to be fitted and installed LC’s washing machine and a lady at the local library service donated a bed. Obtained a free electric oven and managed to get a fully qualified electrician to install it free of charge.

 

Social Services have put Kent Enablement in place before care was organised in order to encourage her to keep the property clean and tidy, look after her personal care and take care of her two dogs.

She exceeded her overdraft when the first payment for rent was due. Wardens accompanied her to speak to the Bank Manager in order to prevent a daily charge until her finances had been sorted out and they were concerned that LC would go in to rent arrears with a few weeks.

Warden has taken LC in to ‘Area’ on a few occasions in order to ensure that she has had sufficient food until she has got confidence to use the local buses. LC is reluctant to travel because she is afraid of getting lost. They printed out the local bus timetables to get LC used to the bus routes.

Whilst at the new property it was discovered that LC had a defective timer control for her gas central heating. The electrical wiring was exposed. Arranged for Golding Homes to repair it as a matter of urgency and this was done. KCC Wardens continue to do weekly visits where possible.

 

Priority Target Achieved:  Safety and wellbeing.

 

Case 2:

 

Following calls from a neighbour and a relative I visited an elderly resident in ‘Area’. She had a severe stroke several years ago which has limited her mobility and her ability to communicate clearly. She lives alone in a cottage which, although in the centre of ‘Area’, is isolated. Quite often it is easier for her to sleep in her armchair which is located next to a ground floor window.

 

For some months she has occasionally seen torchlight in her garden during the night, usually around 0300 hours. She states that her door handle has been tested too. At first she was not concerned because she assumed a neighbour was checking on her welfare. She has now spoken to the neighbour who states that it was not them.

 

Due to her communication difficulties she is unable to effectively communicate on the telephone so the incidents have not been reported to the police.

 

The resident, her granddaughter and I discussed additional security measures including lighting, door locks and window locks. I subsequently provided details of various products listed on the internet and a list of security companies from CheckaTrade.

 

The resident has a lifeline installed. While there I spoke to the call centre and explained the situation. The operator has updated the residents file accordingly. If there is another incident they will contact the police on the resident’s behalf.

 

I will continue to call in on the resident from time to time. I have also asked the granddaughter and the neighbour to report any future incidents to the police as soon as possible and to also keep me updated.

 

Case 3:

 

Overview:  Lady with Dementia

 

Spoke with residents who were concerned of an older lady walking looking lost and asking about the fences in ‘Area’.  Couldn’t find her but a resident managed to find out where she lived as she saw her the next day.  Luckily before I went to visit  the lady’s cousin phoned me to say that he was very stressed with the amount of care  she needed to keep her safe and they had sought help with her dementia through the doctors surgery where she was confirmed as having dementia. I met with the family and referred her to the social care Coordinator and asked them to give the family more support and options. 

 

I then went to meet this lady, she was a lovely lady who was charming, we got speaking and I mentioned that ‘Area’ has a café that is very friendly and that I like going.  She was very pleased to hear there was a cafe and said she had never been there before, which the cousin confirmed.  One of the worries of the family was that she was not eating. Since that visit I have confirmed with the café that she goes regularly and it’s in her daily routine now.   She stills needs regular visits and assessment from social care team giving the next of kin more options but it’s made me think about getting the staff officially trained as dementia friends at ‘Area’ Café.

 

 

Appendix 3

 

Methodology Notes:

 

SPC Charts Explained

 

Statistical Process Control (SPC) Charts are a tool used by Kent Police to help identify whether there has been any significant improvements or deteriorations in a particular crime type. 

 

When a category is stable and in control, the data will appear within a set of predicted limits based on past knowledge and experience.  Although there will be some natural variation around the average (also known as common cause variation) as long as the figures remain within the control limits there has been no significant changes to what was anticipated.

 

If the category was unstable and displayed uncontrolled variation (also known as special cause variation), the data would not follow a predicted pattern and would indicate that something had changed and action might be required.

 

Natural variation indicates that any change from month-to-month is expected, e.g. the time you come to work every day varies by a few minutes around an average, however if there was an accident on the road then the time taken to come to work would be significantly longer, this would be unnatural variation indicating that something has gone awry.

 

SPC charts are generated based on historical data to produce the following:

  • The Centre Line (CL) which is the average no. of recorded crimes / incidents
  • The Upper (UCL) and Lower Control Limits (LCL) which are the limits of natural variation

 

Any result above the UCL suggests that there may be a problem.  In addition, other indications that a category is out of statistical control includes when several results in a row are above the CL or when several results in a row show an increasing trend.

 

If the figures are consistently below the CL this indicates an improvement and will result in the centre line and the control limits being lowered, often referred to as a ‘step change’.  Similarly if the figures for a specific category rise due possibly to an increase in activity; a revision to the data (i.e. back-record conversion); or possibly a change in what is recorded within each category then the CL and control limits may need to be raised.

 

NB. If the control limits are closer together this indicates a low level of variation around the average and shows that the category is in control, a wider gap between the limits indicates greater variation and less control.

 

Example of a Kent Police SPC Chart:

 

 

 

Appendix 3

 

MoRiLE:

 

The Kent Community Safety Unit has explored the use of the MoRiLE (Management of Risk in Law Enforcement) scoring matrix to look at ranking offences based on threat, risk and harm. Maidstone Borough Council and others in Kent have incorporated this methodology within this year’s Strategic Assessment.

 

The ideology behind MoRiLE is that it targets resources at offences that would have the biggest impact on individuals and organisations/areas.  This is in contrast to concentrating solely on crime figure tables which can sometimes provide a skewed view on threats and risk based only on the frequency/volume of crimes.

 

Each thematic crime area is scored individually against various criteria.  There is then a formula that calculates a final score.  These are then ranked high to low, listing priorities based on threat, risk & harm which can then contribute to the SMP’s final recommendation of priorities.

 

Serious Organised Crime Local Profiles:

 

Aims:

  • To develop a common understanding among local partners of the threats, vulnerabilities and risks relating to serious and organised crime.
  • To provide information on which to base local programmes and action plans.
  • To support the mainstreaming of serious and organised crime activity into day-to-day policing, local government and partnership work.
  • To allow a targeted and proportionate use of resources. 

 

Purpose:

  • Local Profiles should inform local multi-agency partnerships, in particular police and crime commissioners, policing teams, local authorities and other relevant partners (such as education, health and social care and Immigration Enforcement); of the threat from serious and organised crime and the impact it is having on local communities.

 

What do we do with the Local Profile?

  • The profile outlines key serious and organised crime issues within your district and provides information on what the offences are, what to look for and recognised serious and organised crime within your community and what to do if you see or suspect anything.  This allows us all to PREVENT young people and vulnerable adults from becoming involved in crime and helping to protect and safeguard those that may already be involved through identifying and working together.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Appendix 4

 

Acronym Glossary:

 

ASB = Anti-Social Behaviour

BOTD = Burglary Other Than Dwelling

CCG = Clinical Commissioning Group

CDAP = Community Domestic Abuse Programme

CDRP = Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnership

CGL = Change, Grow, Live

CSA = Community Safety Agreement

CSE = Child Sexual Exploitation

CSP = Community Safety Partnership

CSU = Community Safety Unit

DA = Domestic Abuse

HMIC = Her Majesties Inspectorate of Constabulary

IDVA = Independent Domestic Violence Advisor

IOM = Integrated Offender Management

JSNA = Joint Strategic Needs Assessment

KCC = Kent County Council

KFRS = Kent Fire & Rescue Service

KSI = Killed or Seriously Injured

KSSCRC = Kent Surrey & Sussex Community Rehabilitation Company

MARAC = Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conference

MBC = Maidstone Borough Council

MOJ = Ministry Of Justice

MoRiLE = Management of Risk in Law Enforcement

MSG = Most Similar Groups

NPS = National Probation Service or New Psychoactive Substances depending on context

NTE = Night Time Economy

OCG = Organised Crime Group

PCC = Police & Crime Commissioner

PS = Psychoactive Substances

SMP = Safer Maidstone Partnership

SOC = Serious Organised Crime

SPC = Statistical Process Charts

UE = Unlawful Encampments

VATP = Violence Against The Person

VCS = Voluntary & Community Services