Tayside Police and 
Tayside Joint Police Board
Best Value Audit and Inspection
Prepared for the Accounts Commission and Scottish ministers
December 2009
The Accounts Commission
The Accounts Commission is a statutory, independent body which, through the audit process, assists local authorities in Scotland to achieve the highest standards of financial stewardship and the economic, efficient and effective use of their resources. The Commission has four main responsibilities:
•	securing the external audit, including the audit of Best Value and Community Planning
•	following up issues of concern identified through the audit, to ensure satisfactory resolutions
•	carrying out national performance studies to improve economy, efficiency and effectiveness in local government
•	issuing an annual direction to local authorities which sets out the range of performance information they are required to publish.
The Commission secures the audit of 32 councils and 44 joint boards and committees (including police and fire and rescue services).
Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary for Scotland
HMICS operates independently of police forces, police authorities and the Scottish Government and exists to monitor and improve the police service in Scotland. HMICS does this on behalf of the Scottish public by:
•	monitoring, through self-assessment and inspection, how effectively the police service in Scotland is fulfilling its purpose and managing risk
•	supporting improvement by identifying good practice, making recommendations and sharing our findings in order to achieve better outcomes for Scotland’s communities
•	providing advice to Scottish ministers, police authority and joint board members and police forces and services.
Even though HMICS is independent of the Scottish Government, ministers can call upon the Inspectorate to undertake particular pieces of work.
Audit Scotland is a statutory body set up in April 2000 under the Public Finance and Accountability (Scotland) Act 2000. It provides services to the Auditor General for Scotland and the Accounts Commission. Together they ensure that the Scottish Government and public sector bodies in Scotland are held to account for the proper, efficient and effective use of public funds.
Commission findings
1. The Commission notes that this is the first joint Best Value audit and inspection report to be produced by the Controller of Audit and Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary. We welcome this joint approach and its significant contribution to more effective and streamlined scrutiny. We accept this report and acknowledge the co-operation and assistance provided to the joint audit and inspection team by the Convener and other elected members of Tayside Joint Police Board, the clerk to the board, and the chief constable and officers of Tayside Police.
2. The report is wide ranging and assesses the extent to which Tayside Police Joint Board and the Police Force are meeting their best value duties. In accordance with the Commission’s statutory responsibilities, these findings relate only to the best value audit of the joint board. 
3. We find that while the joint board is strongly committed to supporting the chief constable and that working relationships between the board and the police force are good, the board is not meeting the objective of best value, namely continuous improvement in its duties and responsibilities which include effectively contributing to setting priorities for the police service
and holding the chief constable to account.
4. Board members have an important and distinct role in the governance of police services and until there is clearer understanding and application of that role the board will not achieve the necessary shift in focus required to attain best value.
5. Elected members appointed by the constituent councils to the joint board need more support to improve their knowledge and understanding of their role as board members and to support them in core activities, including setting direction and priorities and scrutinising performance. However, the primary responsibility for obtaining the necessary support rests with the joint board. Accordingly, as a matter of urgency, the joint board needs to discuss this position with the constituent councils and secure resources which are independent of the councils and the police force to support it in its role. 
6. We look forward to receiving an improvement plan from the joint board which addresses the improvement agenda set out in the joint audit and inspection report and the weaknesses identified. The plan should focus on the board’s role in working with the chief constable to drive continuous improvement in police services. It should set out how the board will improve members’ understanding and engagement in best value and community planning, support its members through training and development and strengthen links with the constituent councils.
7. It is clear to the Commission that part of the reason for the board not fully exercising its role arises from a lack of clarity about the respective responsibilities and expectations of the joint board and the chief constable. The Commission believes this issue may not be unique to Tayside Police Joint Board and if this is the case will recommend that the Scottish Government, in consultation with COSLA (Convention of Scottish Local Authorities) and ACPOS (Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland), should consider the existing guidance and its interpretation to ensure the specific duties and responsibilities of boards and board members are expressed clearly. We believe further clarification of the guidance, as may be required, would assist police authorities to self-assess their progress in achieving their statutory responsibilities for best value and community planning. 
Introduction
This joint report is made by the Controller of Audit to the Accounts Commission under section 102(1) of the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973, and by Her Majesty’s Inspector of Constabulary (HMIC) under section 33 of the Police (Scotland) Act 1967.
The Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 introduced new statutory duties relating to Best Value and Community Planning. Its provisions apply to local authorities, including police authorities, and require specifically that: 
•	councils and police authorities secure best value (defined as achieving continuous improvement in the performance of functions)
•	police authorities and chief constables participate in the community planning process.
The 2003 Act also amended the audit arrangements set out in the Local Government (Scotland) Act 1973 to cover Best Value and gave powers to the Accounts Commission to examine Best Value in police authorities. Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary for Scotland (HMICS) has a statutory duty under section 33 of the Police (Scotland) Act 1967 to inspect police forces and common police services, and to report to Scottish ministers on their state and efficiency. The 2003 Act extends this to include provision for HMICS to inquire into and report to Scottish ministers on whether a local authority is carrying out its functions, both as a police authority and in relation to a number of matters including Best Value.
The 2003 Act is supported by more detailed statutory guidance on Best Value and Community Planning,1 and a series of advisory notes on specific topics such as elected member leadership. This guidance is designed to be descriptive rather than prescriptive, defining the goals that organisations should aim for but allowing them local discretion on the methods and routes they use. The Scottish Government has issued further guidance for police authorities and forces. This guidance includes Justice Department Circular 11/2003 Best Value Guidance and the Guidance for Members of Police Authorities and Joint Boards, June 2007.
The scope of Best Value and Community Planning is broad and the guidance and statute indicate that a successful police authority will:
•	work in tandem with the chief constable to develop a clear set of priorities that respond to the needs of the community in both the short and longer term
•	be organised to support the delivery of these priorities
•	meet, and clearly demonstrate that it is meeting, the community’s needs
•	operate in a way that drives continuous improvement in all its activities.
Similarly, a successful police force will:
•	work with its partners and the police authority/joint board to develop a clear set of priorities that respond to the needs of the community in both the short and longer term
•	be organised to deliver these priorities
•	meet, and clearly demonstrate that it is meeting, the community’s needs
•	operate in a way that drives continuous improvement in all its activities.
The key objectives of this joint audit and inspection were to:
•	assess the extent to which the Tayside Joint Police Board and Tayside Police are meeting their duties under the Local Government in Scotland Act 2003, and complying with Scottish Government guidance
•	agree planned improvements with the local authorities, force and the board, to be reviewed by external auditors and HMICS on an ongoing basis.
As Best Value and Community Planning encompass a wide variety of activities, it is not realistic to audit or inspect everything in depth. For this reason we plan our detailed work in two ways:
•	Where possible we draw on the findings of other scrutiny processes, such as the work carried out by other inspectorates. 
•	We select certain aspects of the performance of the force and the board for detailed investigation. We use a wide range of sources, including the force and board’s own assessments of their performance, reports issued following external audit and inspections, and the Scottish Policing Performance Framework (SPPF) to assess risks and scope our work to inform this selection. 
Our joint report reflects this proportionate approach, with detailed commentary in some areas and limited coverage in others. It also presents the picture we found at the time our main audit and inspection work was conducted, in May and June 2009. The report includes a corporate assessment of the joint board and the force, while the performance assessment covers
only the force.
We gratefully acknowledge the co-operation and assistance provided to the team by the Convenor of Tayside Joint Police Board Councillor Iain Mackintosh; at the time of the audit and inspection Chief Constable Kevin Mathieson, Tayside Police; Tayside Police Force Executive; Change Coordinator Donna Adam, Tayside Police; Clerk to the Board Sheona Hunter; Committee Officer Elaine Whittet; and all other elected members and staff involved. We are also grateful to the representatives of the three councils and the force’s community partners who agreed to participate in the audit and inspection process.
The tripartite arrangements and police authorities’ leadership role
The force is governed through a tripartite arrangement between the chief constable, the joint police board (‘the board’) and Scottish ministers. As the force covers more than one police authority area, a joint police board comprising members from the three constituent authorities has been formed as the police authority. Scottish ministers retain overall responsibility for policing policy at national level. Tayside Joint Police Board is responsible for setting the police budget, ensuring that best value is attained and holding the chief constable to account. The chief constable is responsible for the operational aspects of policing within the force area.
The effect of these arrangements is that the board and the chief constable, although they have different roles, must work in tandem to achieve best value. In this report, we only make judgements on the board and force, but all parties to the arrangement, including the Scottish ministers, have responsibility for the overall performance of the police service.
Constituent authorities are responsible for appointing the members of a joint board and for allocating funding. The board is a separate legal entity and, although councils have no separate residual responsibilities (beyond appointing members and funding), the effectiveness of the board is supported in practice by the constituent councils through the provision of clerking services and training and support for members. 
The existing guidance for policing (Circular 11/2003 and Guidance for Members of Police Authorities and Joint Police Boards, Scottish Government, June 2007), sets out expectations of the board. These are summarised at Appendix 1 of this report. The Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 Best Value: Statutory Guidance also applies to joint police boards.

1	The Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 Best Value: Statutory Guidance 2004 and The Local Government in Scotland Act 2003 Community Planning: Statutory Guidance 2004.

Summary
Tayside Joint Police Board (‘the board’) is supportive of the police force and there is a constructive relationship with senior officers. However, scrutiny of force activity is inadequate and does not effectively hold the chief constable to account or work in tandem with the chief constable to secure best value. At formal meetings of the board, the force provides limited opportunities for the board to fulfil its role through active involvement in decision-making, particularly in respect of improvement activity and community planning. The board is not yet fulfilling its duties of best value and, without a shift in emphasis, its capacity for future improvement is limited.
The role of the councils (comprising the police authorities) in supporting the performance and effectiveness of the board is not clear. Among board members there is limited understanding and engagement about best value and community planning. 
The force is making good progress with some important aspects of best value. It can demonstrate examples of good practice in many areas, but it lacks corporate consolidation and management of force-wide issues such as community engagement, community planning and improvement activity. The force has a strong record of engaging with partners and has made progress in delivering outcomes for communities that reflect local need. It has been successful in reducing crime although public perceptions of the level of certain types of crime continue to rise. The force is improving well with positive pace and direction of travel and it is well placed in terms of capacity for future improvement.
Tayside Joint Police Board
National guidance for board members does not clearly set out the expectations of the constituent councils. The links between the board and the three local councils are ambiguous and may lead to the board becoming isolated and the constituent councils not assured of its effectiveness.
There is limited awareness and inconsistent understanding among board members of their wider responsibilities and duties. The board is not involved in determining improvement priorities, developing the force’s vision or driving best value through strong and open challenge and scrutiny. It is not involved in ensuring the effectiveness of the force’s community planning work and it is not fulfilling its duties in relation to equalities and sustainability. The board is, however, fully engaged in the monitoring of financial and staffing issues. 
1. The links between the board and the three local councils are ambiguous. The three councils hold differing opinions about where responsibility lies for ensuring the effectiveness of, and providing support to, the board. Advice is provided to the board by the clerking council, in this case Angus Council, but there is no dedicated support for board members or specific police board training. Links from the board to individual councils are inconsistent and could be stronger. There are also no explicit links between board members and the community safety partnerships in the three council areas.
2. The board endorses the vision and direction of Tayside Police, but it is not involved in setting that direction or determining the priorities for the force. 
3. There is inconsistent understanding among board members of their responsibilities and duties as set out in the Guidance for Members of Police Authorities and Joint Police Boards issued by the Scottish Government in June 2007. There is little evidence of the board fulfilling its duty to ensure the effectiveness of the force’s community planning and community engagement activity, working in tandem with the chief constable to secure best value or holding the chief constable to account.
4. The board is not involved in scrutinising the force’s partnership work. The board has no direct links to the community safety partnerships, despite the responsibility to promote joint responsibility for crime and disorder being specified in the guidance.
5. The board is strongly committed to supporting the chief constable. Working relationships between the force and the board are good. However, the board’s scrutiny and challenge of the force’s performance is weak and not transparent. The board receives the force’s improvement plans for approval and notes progress on the resulting monitoring reports, but members are not involved in ensuring best value and driving improvement by determining and prioritising improvement areas and challenging existing ways of doing things.
6. Board members are kept well informed of finance matters and are active in monitoring financial and staffing issues, but have limited opportunities to scrutinise how well the force makes strategic use of its resources. The board has equalities schemes in place for race, gender and disabilities, although the level of review and scrutiny of these plans is limited. The board receives comprehensive updates from the force on its equalities activities but little in relation to sustainability. Members show little awareness of their role in equalities and sustainability. There is no evidence that members consider the equality and sustainability implications of reports submitted to the board.
Tayside Police Force
Tayside Police has good working relationships with the board but provides limited opportunities at formal board meetings for the board to fulfil its duties, particularly in relation to working in tandem with the chief constable around community planning, performance scrutiny and leading improvement.
The force is making good progress with some important aspects of Best Value, including improving services, equalities and working with partners to deliver joint solutions to local issues. However, it lacks corporate approaches to some force-wide issues and recognises it needs to strengthen its corporate leadership and overview. The force’s performance management approach is not based on a range of performance information, trends and comparisons linked to key force priorities and objectives. Hence, performance reports to the board are not comprehensive. However, performance is generally good and improving, particularly in respect of local crime priorities, but there is an increasing gap between this and the public perception of certain types of crime. 
7. Tayside Police has developed a clear strategic direction, informed by consultation with key stakeholders. Its strategic priorities, though defined, are not clearly linked to divisional plans. Better integration of the force’s operational planning processes would help to improve prioritisation and overview.
8. The force provides limited opportunities through the reports it submits to the board for board members to be proactive in considering options and making decisions.
9. The force executive shows clear tactical leadership and awareness of where the force needs to improve, but recognises it has more to do to further develop corporate leadership. There is a lack of emphasis on central oversight and challenge, which limits opportunities for sharing learning, and inhibits the force’s ability to demonstrate what it has achieved.
10. The force works well with its partners, displaying strong commitment to community planning and community engagement, and is delivering outcomes locally. However, there is no corporate overview of divisional community planning activity or progress against the Single Outcome Agreements (SOA). The force has no corporate approach to coordinate, plan and maximise the impact of community engagement.
11. Tayside Police is undertaking a great deal of improvement activity across the force. However, this activity is not consolidated and managed at a corporate level.This reduces the potential impact of the work through opportunities for force-wide approaches and efficiencies.
12. The force’s approach to performance management is not sufficiently focused on performance information linked to key force priorities and objectives. Performance reports to the board are not comprehensive.
13. The force does not provide performance reports to the board that are balanced, cover all service areas and divisions, contain trend information, comparisons with other forces and Scottish averages, and the impact of community planning activity.
14. The force has robust processes in place for setting and monitoring budgets. The force’s financial management and control is strong and it has a good record of exceeding efficiency savings targets. However, the force would benefit from a strategic approach to the use of resources, particularly in relation to managing its assets and people resources, so that it can plan its requirements in light of strategic priorities and future needs.
15. Tayside Police has a well-developed approach to equalities. Conversely, its approach to sustainability is underdeveloped. Although some work has begun, the force needs to consider an approach that covers all aspects of sustainability.
16. Tayside Police objectives have changed annually and relevant measures to identify achievements and impact are not fully developed. The force has been successful in reducing recorded crime and increasing detection rates in several key groups. There is a gap between this improving performance and the public perception of the levels of certain types of crime.2 

2	Based on Scottish Policing Performance Framework data for 2007/08 and 2008/09.

Part 1. Corporate assessment 
Vision and strategic direction
Tayside Joint Police Board
The board endorses the force’s vision and direction but has not been involved in its development.
17. The board approves the Strategic and Annual Performance Plan but is not involved in its development. It does not work with the force to identify an appropriate vision, objectives or priorities for action. Board members represent the Tayside area and bring a wealth of understanding of community needs and aspirations; there is potential for them to be more involved in determining the strategic direction and directing improvement priorities for the force based on that local knowledge.
Tayside Police Force
Tayside Police has developed a clear strategic direction informed by an understanding of the needs of local communities. This is in line with the community plans of the three council areas, and is endorsed by the board. The force has defined strategic priorities but they are not clearly linked to divisional and departmental plans and performance reports. The force’s planning processes are not well integrated, which does not allow for prioritisation and overview.
18. The force has identified three clear strategic priorities and supporting objectives for the period 2009–11. These are set out in the force’s Strategic and Annual Performance Plan 2009–11 (Exhibit 1). These priorities were identified through an understanding of the needs of local communities and in accordance with the three SOAs.
19. There are no clear links between these strategic priorities and the development of the divisional control strategies or departmental plans. By making such links the force would be better able to demonstrate progress in delivering these priorities.
20. Operational planning processes throughout the force operate as parallel but separate processes. Outputs and action plans from best value reviews, national thematic reviews, self-assessment, community planning, National Intelligence Model (NIM) processes (Appendix 2), performance analysis and divisional (or partnership) strategic assessments are not integrated into single, comprehensive divisional or force plans. This fragmentation makes it difficult to identify a coherent and linked set of priorities and to establish an overview of divisional or force progress.
21. The force communicates its vision and priorities well through the rank structure to police sergeant/supervisor level. However, for police constables and police staff there are no formal discussion forums. The main method for communicating is through one-way notification and briefing; as a result, officers and staff at this level do not have a firm grasp of the force’s vision and priorities.
Governance and accountability
Tayside Joint Police Board
There is some ambiguity about responsibility for ensuring the effectiveness of, and providing support to, the board. Links from the board back to the three individual councils are not consistent and could be stronger. Specific training or support for the board is limited. There is inconsistent understanding among board members of their responsibilities and duties. The board tends to take a passive role, reacting to the reports the force submits rather than influencing the agenda. Board members are not involved in developing the force’s public performance report.
22. Guidance for Members of Police Authorities and Joint Police Boards issued by the Scottish Government in June 2007 (hereon in referred to as ‘national guidance’ or ‘the guidance’) sets out the role of the board. Its main functions are: setting the annual budget, appointing officers of the rank of assistant chief constable and above, making arrangements to secure best value, participating in community planning, keeping informed as to how the force deals with complaints and holding the chief constable to account.
23. The board has 18 members, made up of seven councillors from Dundee City Council, six from Perth & Kinross Council, and five from Angus Council. The board generally meets four times a year, with meetings rotating annually between Dundee, Forfar and Perth. The board is supported by five subcommittees. Personnel, audit and complaints subcommittees meet on a quarterly basis. The finance subcommittee meets twice per year. The subcommittee for appointments meets when requested by the board.
24. The board is supported by the clerk, assistant clerk and the treasurer to the board, provided by Angus Council. The clerk’s role is incorporated within the duties of the head of legal and administrative services at the council. Approximately five per cent of the clerk’s time, 25 per cent of the assistant clerk’s time and six per cent of the treasurer’s time is devoted
to supporting the board.
25. There is a lack of clarity among the three councils comprising the Tayside area regarding their role and responsibilities in ensuring that the board carries out its duties effectively. Generally, the councils view the board as effective but feel that they themselves have a very limited role once the board is constituted. The governance arrangements between the board and the three constituent councils are inconsistent, and views on how strong these links should be differ. Some councils receive board minutes at full council meetings; others receive briefings from board members only on an exceptions basis, where that member considers a particular matter has sufficient local implications. The board’s status as a ‘separate legal entity’ leads to some ambiguity around the extent constituent councils engage with the board. 
26. There is no systematic process for the induction of new members to the joint board, and no job description to help them understand or carry out their duties. The three constituent councils provide in-house training to board members through their own general member training and support function. Sometimes board members receive briefings prior to a board meeting. Tayside Police provides training and awareness sessions on operational aspects of policing, although attendance at these events is variable. There is no dedicated support for board members, or specific police board training beyond advice to members serving on external bodies provided by the constituent councils. This lack of dedicated support makes it difficult for members to understand, fulfil and develop their role.
27. National guidance in this area does not clearly set out the expectations of the individual councils, nor the specific role of the council providing the clerking function to the board. Ambiguity about the status of the board and the accountability of the constituent authorities may lead to the board becoming isolated and unable to assure others of its effectiveness. 
28. Board members have a good relationship with Tayside Police and there is a strong sense among them that their role is to support the chief constable. This affects the degree to which they feel they can publicly challenge the chief constable. Some members are unaware of the specific duties of the board, as detailed in national guidance, while others misunderstand them. This is particularly apparent in relation to the duties to pursue best value in tandem with the chief constable and to
ensure the force’s participation in community planning. 
29. The force reports regularly to the board, with operational policing updates, accounts and other financial and staffing issues (Exhibit 2). The board also receives reports on performance, such as the chief constable’s annual report, which is the force’s public performance report, and on developments within specific projects such as their ‘Advance Programme’, part of the force’s action plan to improve services. 
30. The board is not active in shaping its own agendas. The board makes few requests for specific agenda items or reports, and the majority of reports submitted to the board (85 per cent in the period September 2008 to September 2009) are for noting or agreement rather than presenting options or recommendations for the board to decide. Debate at board meetings is cordial, but questioning and challenge are limited. In order to fulfil its duties, the board needs to be more active in determining its agendas, influencing strategic priorities, challenging performance more proactively and prioritising areas for improvement.
31. The board’s own meeting agendas and minutes are easily accessible on the website. Full board meetings are advertised and open but public attendance is minimal. The force’s public performance report is not a joint report with the board. The board endorses but is not involved in developing the force’s public performance report. The national guidance requires the board to have a public performance report.
Tayside Police Force
The force provides limited opportunities within their reports for the board to consider options and make decisions. The force executive shows clear tactical leadership and awareness of where the force needs to improve, but recognises it has more to do to further develop corporate strategic leadership. The level of empowerment that the force affords its three divisions is positive and allows each to reflect and focus on local need in their council area. However, there is a lack of central oversight and challenge, and corporate approaches to force-wide issues which limits effectiveness and efficiency. 
32. The force is divided into three geographical policing divisions which are co-terminous with the local council areas; Central (Dundee City Council), Eastern (Angus Council) and Western (Perth & Kinross Council) as set out in Exhibit 3 (overleaf). There are a further three non-geographical divisions that provide force-wide services: Operational Support Division; Force Information and Intelligence Division; and the Business Support Department.
33. At a strategic level, the force is led by the force executive, which meets on a weekly basis to discuss force business. The executive is made up of the chief constable, deputy chief constable, assistant chief constable, director of corporate services and director of personnel and development. The leadership team is an extension of the force executive including divisional commanders and departmental heads. A number of key groups support the leadership team in strategic and operational delivery. 
34. Tayside Police provides limited opportunities for the board to fulfil its role through active involvement in decision-making, particularly in respect of improvement activity and community planning. The force is responsive to requests for further detailed performance information from the board and proactive in providing information evenings for members to learn more about specific operational policing themes. However, as previously noted, 85 per cent of reports submitted to the board in the last 12 months were for noting or approval. Reports offered to the board do not provide the basis for the board to consider options and make decisions and therefore do not help the board to fulfil its best value duties.
35. Tayside Police’s force executive is a new team but has made good progress in developing its responsibilities and defining its operational and strategic roles. It has shown clear tactical leadership and awareness of where it needs to improve.
36. The force has insufficient oversight of divisional activity and lacks corporate approaches to some force-wide issues. The three geographical police divisions have strong autonomy in the way they provide local services. While this is essential to effective operational policing, it must be balanced with corporate approaches to force-wide issues and clear central oversight and monitoring of divisional activity and performance. Although the divisions monitor their own performance and improvement action plans, the force has no overview of community planning or community engagement activity across the three of them. There is also limited coordination of approach to managing operational risk areas. This has resulted in a focus of response to local issues rather than prioritisation based on an identified local or national risk. This adversely impacts on some of the force high-priority risk areas, and the extent that the force executive can hold these divisions to account and challenge their progress is limited.
37. The force executive recognises the need for more corporate working and is rationalising its force-wide governance structures in order to strengthen its corporate functions. The executive is working with divisional commanders through the leadership team, to define and build their corporate role and develop a longer-term approach.
38. A significant amount of improvement activity takes place across the three divisions but this is fragmented. This risks the loss of opportunities to make economies of scale or seek corporate solutions to force-wide issues such as measuring impact and improving public perceptions of crime. With no central overview there is also a risk that not all improvement activity will be recorded, limiting the force’s ability to identify all its continuous improvement achievements and demonstrate best value.
39. The force website is easily accessible by the public and allows access to the Strategic and Annual Performance Plan. Performance information is available and easy to read and understand. However, the force could do more to improve its accountability to the public by including trend information, targets, comparisons with Scottish average figures and other forces, and by explaining the reasons for underperformance and how it plans to improve.
Partnership working and community engagement
Tayside Joint Police Board
The board does not fulfil its duty to ensure the effectiveness of the force’s community planning and community engagement activity. The board is not involved in scrutinising the force’s partnership work. The board recently approved the SOAs but had no involvement in their development. The board has no explicit links to the community safety partnerships despite the specific national guidance to promote joint responsibility for crime and disorder.
40. The board does not fulfil its duty to ensure the effectiveness of the force’s community planning and community engagement activity. Its involvement in, and oversight of, community planning is not evident. The board did not consider any community planning reports (eg, annual performance reports or specific reports in relation to the community safety partnership) in 2007/08 and 2008/09 (Exhibit 2, page 13). The board agreed the SOAs for the three constituent councils in 2009/10 but had no involvement in their development. The national guidance clearly defines the role of boards in community planning and in ensuring that partnership working is effective and coordinated. The board does not have the opportunity to scrutinise
the force’s partnership activity because it does not request or receive regular reports.
41. The guidance also states that boards should play an active role in promoting their joint responsibility with community safety partnerships to reduce crime and disorder, and should encourage the constituent councils to play their part. There are no explicit links between board members and the community safety partnerships in the three constituent councils of the board. 
42. The board does not receive sufficient information to develop and maintain an overview of community planning work and community engagement activity, so that it can add value to that work through scrutiny, challenge and directing activity.
Tayside Police Force
The force works well with its partners, displaying strong commitment to community planning, integrating local community planning activity within the three divisions and delivering local outcomes. There is insufficient capture of divisional work into a force-wide overview of community planning and SOA activity, and their impact. The force demonstrates local commitment to community engagement, but there is no corporate framework for coordinating and planning community engagement activity.
43. SOAs are the current vehicle for aligning local activity with the Scottish Government’s national priorities, and for Community Planning Partnerships (CPPs) to agree joint priorities at the local level. As such, SOAs represent a key strategic statement of what a CPP will be doing over the coming years, with their delivery being a major feature of the priorities and risks councils and their community planning partners face. The SOA development process also provides evidence of the effectiveness of partnership working at divisional level.
44. Tayside Police has engaged well with each of its three CPPs in developing SOAs but does not yet maintain an overview of SOA processes or report on their overall progress to the board. The three SOAs have been developed separately, reflecting the differing priorities of each of the areas. 
45. The force’s community planning partners across all three partnerships are confident that Tayside Police is fully committed to community planning. There are strong governance and accountability links between the divisional commanders and their local CPPs, and strong police representation not just on the community safety groups but throughout the community planning themed partnerships. Partners report that the force is also innovative in developing joint solutions to resolve identified community problems. Divisional commanders are described as providing effective leadership, and other police representatives as having sufficient authority to make decisions and commit staff resources. The force and its partners can point to many examples of joint working and the outcome of these activities (Exhibit 4).
46. The force does not have an overall strategic approach to partnership working. There is potential for the force to be more systematic about capturing information in order to develop a force-wide picture of achievement. Without a clear overview of community planning and SOA activity the force risks missing opportunities to minimise the duplication of activity, provide force-wide responses to common problems, introduce economies of scale, share good practice, allocate resources more effectively, and demonstrate fully what it has achieved.
47. A significant amount of good community engagement takes place locally. The Scottish Parliament’s Justice Committee visited several towns and cities in 2008 while researching community policing. Their visit to Dundee resulted in positive feedback. Members of the committee viewed the policing practices they saw as very good examples of local policing in touch with the community providing solutions for local problems.
48. Local community engagement work is not informed by any corporate coordination, planning or guidance. Nor is it clear how public views feed into force-wide service planning. There is also no systematic method for feeding back to the public what the force is doing to respond to their views, or more importantly, to explain where and why it cannot fully take on board the public’s aspirations. Although the force is developing a communications and marketing strategy, this is focused on branding and information provision, rather than defining a corporate approach to consultation and engagement with the public. The recently published HMICS thematic report,3 which focuses on a strategic approach to public consultation, provides recommendations on making more efficient and effective use of community engagement activity.
Performance management and improvement
Tayside Joint Police Board
Scrutiny and challenge by the board of force performance is inadequate and not transparent. The board receives the force’s improvement plans for approval but it is not involved in ensuring best value and continuous improvement by determining and prioritising improvement areas and challenging existing ways of doing things. 
49. The board’s scrutiny of the force is weak. The board has a high degree of trust in Tayside Police and is confident in the force’s performance. Working relationships are cordial and supportive but there is little challenge of performance levels. In 2008/09, the board considered three performance reports and three improvement or review reports (Exhibit 2, page 13). Only one performance report and one review report were considered in 2007/08. There was minimal challenge of the content of these reports. The national guidance sets out the role of the board in holding the chief constable to account. The board exercises its formal role in holding the chief constable to account through its appraisal of the chief constable’s performance. However, there is some ambiguity and inconsistency in understanding among board members about how far they can take their wider challenge role, how proactive they can be about defining the agenda for board meetings, and whether they can ask for further work or reports.
50. There is evidence of more detailed scrutiny of financial and staffing matters at the subcommittee level. The board’s power to request reports from the force is the key method by which it can assert its independence and it is important that the board uses this power to strengthen its role.
51. Scrutiny of the force is not transparent. Members report that the scrutiny and challenge function is more fully discharged at the private pre-agenda meetings between the chief constable, deputy chief constable, convenor and vice convenors; no record of pre-agenda meetings is made. Scrutiny of the force therefore takes place mainly in private. The guidance, though, is quite clear that although decision-making can be delegated to subcommittees which meet in public, decisions must be owned by the board in its entirety. The current approach does not reflect this.
52. The board recognises it must improve its scrutiny role and has plans to re-designate the existing audit subcommittee as an audit and scrutiny subcommittee, with a wider remit and membership in order to strengthen and open out its scrutiny function. The board has yet to discuss and agree how its scrutiny role must change in order to ensure ownership of the approach by all board members. 
53. Board members are engaged in monitoring the progress made in the force’s improvement plans but they are not involved in determining where improvements are needed, prioritising the resulting improvement activity, identifying areas for best value review or appraising the options and making decisions. In order to fulfil their duty to work ‘in tandem’ with the chief constable to secure best value, members should be engaged in driving improvement and in identifying and prioritising activity. 
Tayside Police Force
Tayside Police has demonstrated commitment to improving services and is undertaking a great deal of improvement activity across the force. However, that improvement activity is not consolidated, prioritised or managed within an overarching corporate improvement plan, reducing the potential impact of the work. Performance management is not currently focused on a range of performance information linked to key force priorities and objectives. Performance reports to the board are not comprehensive.
54. Tayside Police has a clear focus on improvement and has developed a number of force-wide plans alongside more specific thematic and service review improvement plans. They have completed key strategic best value reviews, developed improvement plans arising from national thematic study recommendations and self-assessment work, and made good progress in implementing subsequent recommendations. These have resulted in significant efficiency savings and enabled critical organisational development to take place. 
55. The divisions have been proactive in implementing a significant number of improvement plans in response to best value reviews, thematic studies, etc, but there is potential for the wider management team, including divisional commanders, to take a more proactive role in integrating and managing improvement work. There is currently no consolidation or integration of divisional improvement work into a single, prioritised, corporate improvement plan. The effect of this is that all actions in all plans have equal status. By not focusing activity where it is most needed, can have most impact, or supports organisational priorities, the force risks being swamped by improvement activity. Running the improvement plans in parallel also increases the likelihood that activity is duplicated across the divisions. Opportunities to share good practice and learning may also be missed. Furthermore, it makes the process of capturing performance information to assess the impact of activity burdensome, and makes it difficult to establish an overall view of the force’s progress in continuous improvement.
56. The process used by the force executive and leadership team in determining what best value reviews to conduct and how they manage the review activity/process is not clear. Although there is guidance for review teams, there is no transparent or systematic process for identifying review topics and no process of project board/project sponsor to ensure that the findings reflect the original intentions of the review. Historically, this has resulted in a number of reviews that have not delivered the expected level of recommendations, focusing on many minor issues rather than a few strategic changes.
57. The monthly divisional performance profiles produced by the force contain limited information and it is not clear how they are used to hold divisional commanders to account or facilitate improvement. They do not provide comparisons with other forces or national averages, narrative to explain underperformance, or improvement actions. The particular indicators contained in the profiles are historical and the force needs to review them. The links between the force’s performance indicators and national and force priorities are unclear.
58. The force does not use the performance profiles to capture other existing performance information, such as that relating to the SOA, divisional strategic assessment or comparative information to indicate relative performance, and organisational measures such as financial management and organisational development. As such, the profiles do not provide a rounded assessment of performance and the force does not use them to help identify divisional-level improvement priorities and foster an improvement culture. 
59. The force does not provide performance reports to the board that are balanced, cover all service areas and divisions, contain trend information, comparisons with other forces and Scottish averages, and the impact of community planning activity. Reports on the force’s best value improvement activity should allow the board to determine areas for improvement and prioritise improvement work.  
Use of resources
Tayside Joint Police Board
Board members are kept well informed of finance matters and are active in financial monitoring.  The personnel subcommittee is effective in monitoring staffing issues. The board has limited opportunities to scrutinise how
well the force makes strategic use of its resources.
60. The board is actively involved in financial management. The board and its subcommittees approve all significant financial decisions, including budgets, use of reserves and contracts over £200,000. It also approves the force’s financial plans, major contracts, the annual capital expenditure programme and monitoring reports, and annual savings reports.
61. The personnel subcommittee is active in monitoring absence management, best value reviews on people and job evaluation. A report on attendance management and employee wellbeing initiatives is considered at every meeting. Other matters considered by the committee relate to human resource management activities, grievance and dismissal matters and equality and diversity updates.
62. The board has limited opportunity to scrutinise how well the force makes strategic use of its resources. The board receives reports about staffing and financial issues on a regular basis and less frequently on assets, but it does not receive reports that make the links between overall financial and workforce planning, and asset management.
Tayside Police Force
There are robust processes in place for setting and monitoring budgets. The force’s financial control is sound and it has a good record of exceeding efficiency savings targets. The force has limited focus on establishing and analysing the costs of its specific activities. It would benefit from a strategic approach to managing its resources, linked to performance and outcomes, in light of force priorities and future needs. 
63. The police board agreed a net revenue budget for 2008/094 of £85 million. The contributions from constituent councils were £41.27 million, The police grant was £43.37 million and £0.4 million came from other sources, including reserves (Exhibit 5).
64. The budget for 2008/09 was under-spent by £1.797 million. The main reasons for this were lower than expected staff costs, mainly savings on overtime of £377,000, additional interest on revenue balances of £120,000 and additional specific grant for pensions costs, £1.372 million of which has been earmarked to fund pension lump sum payments due
but unpaid at 31 March for those officers eligible to retire but continuing in service. 
65. This under-spend was added to the reserve. Within this, pension lump sums amounting to £5.577 million were earmarked within the general reserve balance of £9.427 million at 31 March 2009. The board has approved the use of some of the reserve in 2009/10 to fund job evaluation costs, pension pressures and the advance programme. 
66. Tayside Police spend slightly less than the Scottish average per capita. A comparison of gross expenditure figures as reflected in the 2008/09 accounts shows that gross spend per capita across Scotland on policing is £259 and has been around this level for the last three years (Exhibit 6).
67. Tayside Police has strong financial control. It has in place good processes for budget setting and monitoring, and provides comprehensive reports to the board. The force has a good record of achieving efficiency savings. All departments and divisions are tasked with finding efficiencies, and efficiency targets are included in budgets. The force monitors the business benefits accrued from best value reviews and other improvement activity on a quarterly basis and reports these annually to the board’s audit subcommittee. Efficiency savings reported for 2008/09 include £1.484 million cashable savings5 and £415,000 non-cashable savings,6 exceeding the two per cent budget target. Improvements in procurement account for cashable efficiency savings of £396,000 to date.
68. The force has no medium or long-term financial plan. Current capital plans are for three years (2008/09 to 2010/11) with current revenue plans only covering a single year, 2009/10. The force has tended to accept that the amount of funding it receives from the constituent authorities will match the share of funding for police that it gets from the government. The force realises that this may not be sustainable in the current financial climate and has been examining how it can generate time-releasing and cash efficiencies, modelling its budget on different levels of efficiency savings to mitigate the impact.
69. The force has good awareness of its total costs in relation to its divisions and functions, but finds it difficult to identify the cost of specific activities, eg the cost of targeting drug dealing. This means the force has little awareness and hence lacks transparency in the relationship between resources invested, performance levels and overall outcomes. 
70. Tayside Police has asset management plans for both its fleet and property but these are not linked to or aligned with the force’s strategic priorities and objectives. There is no overarching asset management strategy, although there are some good examples of shared accommodation with the three councils, eg public protection units and the shared access offices. 
71. Tayside Police has focused on how to make the best use of its people over the last few years through review of structures and civilianisation of posts. This work has led to the transfer of some policing tasks and roles to support staff, with efficiency savings of £700,000. These savings have been used to supplement resources in a number of operational areas as well as setting up of the new functions of Force Information and Intelligence Division, and Operational Support Division. 
72. There is good communication through the rank structure to police sergeant/supervisor level, but internal staff communication systems remain weak at police constable/staff level. There are no formal discussion forums for police constables or police staff and the main method for communicating at police constable/staff level is through one-way notification and briefing. The force is in the process of undertaking a staff survey so that it can fill the gap in its awareness of staff views, issues that are important for staff and their morale. 
73. The force’s human resource policies, covering issues such as skills development and training, are out of date on the force’s intranet. The force was involved in developing the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland (ACPOS) people strategy and has adopted it in the force. The force has some workforce planning processes in place. However, there is no specific workforce planning strategy to ensure that its future workforce requirements are planned around strategic priorities, skills and training needs and service demand trends. 
74. The force has made progress with job evaluation. New terms and conditions were issued to all support staff in June 2009. The new terms will be in place from 1 October 2009 and to date there have been no equal pay claims.
Equalities
Tayside Joint Police Board
The board receives comprehensive updates from the force on its equalities activities but members show little awareness of their role in this area.
75. The board has equalities schemes in place for race, gender and disabilities. These indicate a clear understanding of the responsibilities placed upon the board under the relevant equalities legislation. These schemes are supplemented by action plans which are reviewed annually. However, the level of scrutiny of these plans is limited. There is no evidence that members consider the equality and sustainability implications of reports submitted to the board.
76. The board is not proactive in ensuring that it and the force fulfil their duties in relation to equality and diversity. The board receives an update on equality and diversity as a standing item at each ordinary board meeting. These reports provide a comprehensive summary of the force’s activity with respect to its equalities duties. However, specific items relating to equalities are generally only noted by the board, eliciting few questions and little discussion.
Tayside Police Force
Tayside Police has a well-developed approach to equalities supported by effective consultation forums. 
77. Tayside Police has a well-developed approach to equality matters. The force has equality schemes and supporting action plans for gender, race and disability. It has a comprehensive and well-presented equal opportunities policy. The force undertakes and publishes comprehensive equality impact assessments of its policies. It has also assigned responsibility for equality and diversity matters to key personnel, and provides equality and diversity training to all staff in compliance with ACPOS agreed standards.
78. The force collects equalities information relating to staff, officers and job applicants in order to monitor its progress in this area. It uses available statistical information to tailor its equal opportunities actions and initiatives to the needs of staff and service users. It has established confidential arrangements for collecting and monitoring equal opportunities data and in 2008 expanded this data collection to include all diversity strands. This online survey saw an excellent return rate and provided the force with a comprehensive workforce profile. Following analysis of information collected it took positive action to address the age imbalance within its police officer recruits. This information enables the force to review existing practices thus ensuring it is alive to potential discriminatory processes, and promoting a positive working environment.
79. The force uses Community Advisory Groups (CAGs) to engage with a wide spectrum of the community. These are particularly effective and are positively received in Central Division (Exhibit 7) with participants reporting increased levels of community confidence in the police.
80. Local disability organisations have a generally positive view of the force’s work to promote disability equality. This places Tayside Police in a strong position to be alive to the concerns of, and assess their operational impact within, communities. 
Sustainability
Tayside Joint Police Board
The board receives little information in relation to sustainability and shows limited awareness of its role in this area.
81. Sustainability is not considered at board meetings. There is a lack of reporting to the board on sustainability reflecting the force’s underdeveloped approach to this matter. Individual councillors show little awareness of their role in relation to pursuing sustainable development, which inhibits the board in fulfilling its duties and responsibilities. 
Tayside Police Force
The force’s approach to sustainability is underdeveloped. Although some work has begun, the force does not have an approach that covers all aspects of sustainability.
82. The force acknowledges that its approach to sustainability is underdeveloped, and has set up an environmental working group to develop a force environmental strategy. The force is not currently considering the implications of the other aspects of sustainability, ie economic and social sustainability, and not capturing the activities it undertakes in this regard with relevant community planning groups.

Exhibit 1
Strategic priorities and objectives 2009/11

Working with partners towards safer communities:
•	To reduce crime and the fear of crime, with an emphasis on violent crime and alcohol-related crime and disorder.
•	To target drug dealing and the abuse of drugs and, by focusing on prevention, detection and harm reduction, to reduce associated crime including serious and organised crime.
•	To improve road safety by educating road users, especially young drivers, and enforcing the law with an emphasis on dangerous driving.
Increased trust and confidence:
•	To meet and exceed public expectation in the quality of service provided.
•	To increase the number of uniformed officers patrolling in public places.
•	To reach out to diverse communities, listen to their needs and respond accordingly.
Effective performance:
•	To improve the management, use and sharing of information and intelligence to better protect the public.
•	To improve efficiency and productivity, ensuring best use of resources, increasing capacity.
•	To improve the way the force communicates with the public, partners and staff.
Source: Tayside Police

Exhibit 2
Reports submitted to the board
Source: Audit Scotland

2007/08	No.	2008/09	No.	2009/10 to date	No.	
Financial/contract reports	8	Financial/contract reports	9	Assets	2	
Staffing issues	6	National issues	8	Performance reports	2	
Operational policing updates	4	Staffing issues	6	Financial/contract reports	2	
External audit/inspection	3	Operational policing updates	4	National issues	1	
National issues	2	Other	4	SOA/community planning	1	
Training, events	2	Reviews and improvement plans	3	Operational policing updates	1	
Assets	1	Performance reports	3	Equalities	1	
Equalities	1	External audit/inspection	1	Staffing issues	0	
Reviews and improvement plans	1	Training, events	1	External audit/inspection	0	
Performance reports	1	Equalities	1	Training, events	0	
Policy	1	Policy	1	Reviews and improvement plans	0	
Other	1	Assets	0	Policy	0	
SOA/community planning	0	SOA/community planning	0	Other	0	

Exhibit 3
This is a map of the force area in Scotland and is incompatible with this document type. To view it, please download a PDF version from http://www.audit-scotland.gov.uk/

Exhibit 4
Information-sharing in Western Division
An antisocial behaviour partners’ group meets in Western Division on a fortnightly basis. Chaired by a police inspector, it has representation from a large number of partners including Youth Justice, Youth Services, Action for Children, Antisocial Investigation team, Education and Children services, Antisocial Noise teams, Environmental Health, the Housing Manager, Drugs and Alcohol workers and Community Mediation. Despite the main purpose of the group being to tackle and resolve problems of antisocial behaviour, there is also a clear focus on child protection. Any child or child of a household coming to the attention of any of the partners in the group can be discussed in this forum. This allows partners to share information
and quickly identify children and families where there is cause for concern. The group pulls together a considerable range of child protection bodies and provides a forum where very early identification of a developing
problem is possible.
Source: HMICS and Audit Scotland

3	HM Inspectorate of Constabulary for Scotland – Thematic Inspection: Strategic priority setting in Scottish forces: consulting the public, March 2009.

Exhibit 5
Revenue and capital budgets 2009/10 and 2008/09

	2009/10
£ million	2008/09 budget
£ million	
Revenue budget	86.80	85.04	
Funded by:			
Police grant	42.94	43.37	
Government pensions funding 	1.90	0.00	
Angus 	10.10	10.10	
Dundee 	18.71	18.72	
Perth & Kinross	12.45	12.45	
Other	0.70	0.40	
Capital budget	2.17	2.42	
Funded by:			
Capital grant	2.00	2.00	
Capital receipts	0.15	0.15	
Other	0.02	0.27	

4	Based on draft accounts 2008/09.
5	Cash savings are where the overall cost of an activity is reduced without reducing service quality.
6	Non-cash savings are where there is no change in the level of resources used but service quality is improved or there is a greater volume of service.

Exhibit 6
Gross expenditure per capita on Scottish policing 2006/07 to 2008/09

Notes:

1. All expenditure figures used for the above are taken from published annual accounts. For Fife, and Dumfries and Galloway this is the council’s accounts and figures may include an allocation of the council’s ‘corporate overheads’.
2. On 1 April 2008, police ICT functions transferred to the SPSA (Scottish Police Services Authority). This will affect comparative expenditure information between 2007/08 and 2008/09.

Source: Audit Scotland

Gross expenditure per capita	2006/07
£	2007/08
£	2008/09
£	
Scotland	259	258	259	
Tayside	249	234	242	
Lothian and Borders	289	287	294	
Strathclyde	266	267	265	
Northern 	228	230	229	
Grampian	215	222	235	
Central	232	229	223	
Fife	248	239	235	
Dumfries and Galloway	287	272	277	

Exhibit 7
Central Division Community Advisory Group
Central Division has the most developed community advisory group (CAG) in Tayside Police. The CAG brings together a broad spectrum of the community, including the elderly and students, representatives of faith, and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender groups, the disabled and the Bulgarian and Polish communities. The force provides interpreters at the meeting where necessary. The group, which has taken on the functions of previous lay advisers, meets quarterly and provides a significant level of scrutiny and support to the division. During its first 12 months of operation, the group has given a voice to sections of the population who may find it hard to speak to the police, and has provided advice to the police on their communities. It has also produced a tangible product in the form of a Scots Law information booklet translated into Polish and Bulgarian for the large migrant communities in the area. 
Source: HMICS and Audit Scotland
Part 2. Tayside Police Force performance assessment
Delivering policing plan outcomes
The force’s policing plan is outcome focused and acknowledges the importance of working in partnership. Its objectives have changed annually and relevant measures to identify achievements and impact are not fully developed. The force has been successful in reducing recorded crime and increasing detection rates in several key groups. There is a gap between this improving performance and public perceptions of crime. 
83. Tayside Police has a strong record of engaging with partners in order to achieve outcomes that reflect local needs. The most fundamental measure of success for any police force is the delivery of tangible outcomes for the communities it serves. It is anticipated that SOAs will become one of the key sources of evidence of force performance but these are still at a relatively early stage of implementation and our ability to assess the extent to which outcomes have been achieved is limited. We have therefore considered how Tayside Police is making a difference by examining service performance
in relation to its strategic objectives for 2008/09. 
84. The SPPF was launched in April 2007. The framework monitors and reports on the policing performance of all eight forces in Scotland and is designed to fully reflect the breadth and variety of policing activity. In order to ensure that forces measure performance in the same way, there are agreed counting conventions for each of the performance indicators and context measures contained within the framework. However, due to local recording practices and processes, it is clear that the differences in information captured by the SPPF cannot always be considered as differences in performance between forces. A service-wide review of SPPF counting conventions has therefore been instigated by ACPOS to identify these recording and process issues and it is important that Tayside Police continue to engage with this. The SPPF assists scrutiny bodies to hold forces to account and therefore compliance with counting conventions is essential to ensure accurate comparisons are made. 
85. When making SPPF force comparisons, this acknowledged lack of maturity in data recording has to be considered along with local context. This includes differences between forces in demography, geography and areas of deprivation. Tayside Police is the fourth largest police force in Scotland in terms of officer/staff resources, population and geography. The force as a whole has a higher than average percentage of population of pensionable age and is just below the Scottish average for the percentage of population who are income deprived. Dundee City local authority area has a large share of the most deprived areas in Scotland.7 
86. The force strategic objectives have been subject to change over the past three years. In 2006/07, Tayside Police outlined three objectives and a set of service standards. It reported on these objectives in 2006/07 and 2007/08. A new set of strategic priorities were reported on in 2008/09 and these have since been further refined in the 2009–11 Strategic Plan. Force service standards were removed from this plan and are currently being reviewed. While it is acknowledged that there has been understandable reasons for change, consistency in stating what the force is striving to achieve is essential for its staff, partners and communities. Such consistency would make measuring progress more achievable.
Objective 1 – Make our communities safer by working more closely with our partners
87. The force aims to make communities safer with an emphasis on reducing alcohol and drug-related crime and disorder, and protecting children and other vulnerable people. Much of this work has been undertaken at a local level with partners. Measures that relate to these activities are a focus for all officers and include crimes of violence, indecency, dishonesty, fire-raising, malicious and reckless conduct (known as groups 1 to 4 crime types). The force has achieved a consistent reduction in recorded crime within these groups over ten years and in 2008/09, the force performance was generally positive compared to other forces.
88. The detection rates that the force records for crime groups 1 to 4 are consistently higher than the average rates for Scotland as a whole (Exhibit 8). As can be seen, detection rates vary widely across Scotland and there is still a lack of ability within forces to explain and understand why. They are impacted by factors such as recorded crime levels, adherence to the Scottish Crime Recording Standard,8 geography and demography. This inability is being addressed at a national level by ACPOS.
89. One of the force’s highest priorities is to target drug dealing and the abuse of drugs. A measure of police activity in this area is the number of drug supply offences recorded. The force has seen an overall increase in the level of drug supply crimes recorded in 2008/09. To put this in context, force activity in relation to detecting class A drugs offences has fluctuated over the past three years. In 2007/08, Tayside Police reported the biggest decrease in the number of offences for class A drugs out of the eight Scottish forces. This was reversed in 2008/09, with the force recording its highest ever number of class A offences. This reflects the increased activity and focus on the abuse of drugs which is visible within daily force business and partnership working. 
90. There is a differential between actual performance by the force and the public perception of drug issues. Over the same reporting period, the force public perception survey revealed that the perception of drug-related problems had increased by seven per cent. The force has recognised the multitude of problems posed by drugs and is currently developing a partnership approach to tackle these issues. 
91. This degree of difference between actual performance and public perception is also evident in relation to antisocial behaviour. The force’s aim to reduce antisocial behaviour has been driven by targeting alcohol-related crime and disorder. It has worked in partnership to deliver initiatives linked to SOA priorities. Recorded crimes of vandalism, which are often used as a measure of antisocial behaviour, have decreased in 2008/09 by ten per cent. The force has focused on providing a high-profile police presence and their service satisfaction survey shows recognition of this with a nine per cent increase in relation to officer visibility. In spite of these efforts, their public perception survey reveals that in relation to antisocial behaviour, four per cent more respondents believe antisocial behaviour is taking place in their neighbourhood and there are decreases in confidence levels relating to perceptions of individual safety.
92. Tayside Police are successfully reducing crime levels and working with partners to prevent drug and alcohol abuse but has been less successful in improving public perception. A strong emphasis on community engagement in all of these activities is essential to reduce this perception gap and achieve the desired outcome.
Objective 2 – Increase public trust and confidence
93. Tayside Police has improved its call-handling service. Within the force Service Standards 2008/09 it aims to ‘answer emergency calls within ten seconds’. This is in keeping with the national target of answering 90 per cent of 999 calls within this time. In 2007/08, Tayside Police was one of only two Scottish forces that did not meet this target. In 2008, concern over this performance and the publication of a review of call management in police forces in Scotland,9 led the force to begin an evaluation of its communication centre. Numerous recommendations were made including significant changes in staff and structures. These recommendations were progressed by the force and by the end of March 2009, 92.8 per cent of all 999 calls to the force were answered within target, compared with 87.7 per cent in 2008. 
94. Improvements have also been made in the force’s ability to answer non-emergency calls. Since March 2009, it has been able to compare itself against the national target and benchmark performance in this regard. The force now needs to ensure that it is achieving and sustaining performance in relation to national targets for non-emergency calls.
95. The force has improved their overall capacity to answer calls from the public. The percentage of calls abandoned is a significant measure and the force has improved from 15 per cent in 2007/08 to 10.5 per cent for 2008/09. Call handling is one of the most critical areas of interaction between the police and the public. It is accepted that for a variety of reasons calls will always be abandoned, however, further improvement is required to meet the industry standard of less than eight per cent. 
96. Public satisfaction levels in relation to initial contact with the force have marginally improved in 2008/09. This increase in public satisfaction includes initial contact with police officers where service satisfaction has improved across the breadth of measures. The overall enhancement in public satisfaction is positive but should be set in a national context. In 2007/08, the force reported levels of user satisfaction below the Scottish average for three out of the four questions asked. The force has demonstrated a desire to continue to improve public satisfaction and recently launched its ‘Quality of Service’ agenda. 
Objective 3 – Improve the efficiency of our organisation
97. Sickness absence performance in Tayside Police shows a positive trend with the percentage of working time lost decreasing for both police officers and staff but at a slower pace than being reported throughout Scotland. In 2008/09, the force had the second highest percentage of working days lost, for both police officers and staff, of forces in Scotland. This is at odds with the performance we would expect given the force size. HMICS is currently undertaking a thematic inspection on attendance management and expects to publish findings in late 2009. These may assist the force to continue to lessen the impact of absence on colleagues and service delivery.
98. Tayside Police has improved the time of submission of reports to both the procurator fiscal and the Children’s Reporter, but is still not meeting the agreed national standard for either. During 2008/09, the force recorded the third highest proportion of police reports submitted to the procurator fiscal within 28 calendar days, with only two Scottish forces performing better. During the same period, it was the poorest performing Scottish force in relation to police reports submitted to the Children’s Reporter within the agreed standard. These standards have been agreed to improve the efficiency of the criminal justice process.
99. The force does not currently have adequate measures of its policing plan objectives to enable full understanding of its performance. This is most apparent in relation to organisational efficiency and public trust and confidence. The force is developing new service standards and integrating the means to measure the improvement and impact of each will benefit them greatly. Without comprehensive relevant measures it is difficult to completely understand the performance of Tayside Police in achieving outcomes.
Force operational priorities
100. The force control strategy (see Appendix 2) is not directly linked to the force strategic priorities and objectives. The force control strategy priorities are: serious and organised crime groups, class A drugs, alcohol-related antisocial behaviour, public protection and safety, and terrorism. The force objectives do not explicitly include some force control strategy priorities. Force performance reports do not include the scope of force prevention, intelligence and enforcement activity undertaken to protect its communities from this potential harm. This assessment of policing plan outcomes has therefore not covered the full range of force activity. HMICS has recently inspected the force management and performance in relation to control strategy priorities and this is subject to a separate report.
7	Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation 2006, Scottish Government.
8	ACPOS Scottish Crime Recording Standard, April 2007.

Exhibit 8
This is a graph showing Group 1 to 4 comparative performance, but it is incompatible with this document type. To view it, please download a PDF version from http://www.audit-scotland.gov.uk/
Part 3. Improvement recommendations 
The improvement programme
101. Continuous improvement in public services and local governance are central to the Best Value and Community Planning policy framework. In striving to achieve the highest possible standards of service, members of the board must focus on key policy objectives and the needs of service users and communities. This requires a culture where areas in need of improvement are identified and openly discussed and in which service performance is constructively challenged.
102. Tayside Police has a good awareness of where it needs to improve and already has some plans in place to address these areas. Indeed the force has become increasingly engaged in improvement activity, the benefits of which are already becoming apparent in the services it provides. 
103. Tayside Joint Police Board, Tayside Police Force and the chief constable must work together and take shared responsibility to deliver a best value police service to the communities of Tayside. The table below sets out the key areas where the force and the board need to improve. 

Improvement agenda

Tayside Joint Police Board

1. Ensure that all members of the board have a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities as laid out in the Scottish Government’s guidance.
2. Ensure that all members participate in training opportunities specific to board duties and identify areas of training need through self-assessment.
3. Ensure that the duties of the board in relation to Best Value and Community Planning are discharged by:
•		proactively driving improvements by being more involved in identifying areas for best value review and areas for improvement, and prioritising identified improvement activity in conjunction with the force
•		seeking assurance that the force engages with community planning partners
•		scrutinising the impact and outcomes of community planning work
•		developing links to the community safety partnerships
•		taking joint ownership of the force’s public performance report
•		improving engagement in equalities and sustainability.
4. Ensure that the duties of the board in relation to holding the chief constable to account are discharged by:
•		considering regular, comprehensive reports from the chief constable on performance of the service 
•		exercising stronger, transparent scrutiny and challenge of the strategic use of resources, performance, improvement activity, community planning activity and outcomes for the public
•		proactively requesting exceptions reports.
Tayside Police Force

1. Strengthen corporate strategic leadership and challenge through:
•		integrating operational and improvement planning processes into divisional/departmental plans linked to strategic priorities and incorporating high-level costing
•		developing an improvement programme management approach through a consolidated and prioritised force-wide corporate improvement plan
•		developing corporate approaches to force-wide matters such as community planning, community engagement, strategic asset management, workforce planning and sustainability, linking these to strategic priorities, the SOAs and partners’ strategies.
2. Foster an improvement culture by strengthening the performance management approach using performance monitoring that is comprehensive, balanced and linked to strategic priorities. Ensure clear lines of accountability and ownership of performance including agreed and monitored improvement actions.
3. Provide opportunities for the board members to appraise options and make decisions, particularly in relation to determining strategic priorities and prioritising improvement activity. Better inform board members by providing reports on community planning, community engagement and sustainability, along with comprehensive, comparative performance information.
4. Enhance service performance by:
•		focusing on public perception of crime to raise confidence levels
•		sustaining the improving trend in call handling
•		sustaining the force’s planned activity to improve services.
Tayside Joint Police Board, police authorities (constituent councils) and Tayside Police Force

1. Review governance and accountability arrangements for
the board. 
2. Strengthen the role of the councils in supporting the board and its members.
3. Jointly agree a plan to assist theboard to discharge its Best Valueand Community Planning responsibilities, identifying actions required by the board, councils and the chief constable.

Appendix 1.
Expectations of police authorities
Having examined existing guidance for policing (Circular 11/2003 and Guidance for Members, June 2007), we are able to make a number of statements on expectations:
•	Police authorities need to pursue best value in tandem with chief constables who are responsible for police operations in their force. Members of the police authorities should take joint responsibility for the overarching plan to achieve best value and other duties in the force, and work with the chief constable to ensure that it is carried out effectively.
•	Best value requires elected members and senior managers to develop a vision of how best value will contribute to the corporate goals of the authorities, inform the direction of services and be communicated to staff.
•	Police authorities are expected to demonstrate responsiveness to the needs of the public and other stakeholders. Plans, priorities and actions should be informed by an understanding of those needs. Police authorities may make clear publicly how they engage and work with chief constables delivering and reporting on best value. They have a particular role to play in ensuring effective public consultation on aspects of policing.  
•	It is a matter for each authority to determine how it fulfils these roles. However, one option might be for the police authorities to contribute to and endorse the chief constable’s annual plan.  
•	Members of the police authorities should be able to demonstrate that they are making the best use of public resources and demonstrate an approach to review that is rigorous, robust and covers all aspects of their work.  
•	Police authorities need to make sure that the force collects and reports good-quality performance data to them. Police authorities should analyse the data and any accompanying commentary. They may then want to investigate further by asking questions of the chief constable as part of a continuous discussion and review of force performance.
Appendix 2.
The National Intelligence Model
The National Intelligence Model (NIM) is an intelligence-led business model used by the police to manage risk, identify operational priorities and allocate resources. 
The strategic assessment is a key component of NIM and provides an overview of long-term issues which involve criminality or have community safety implications. Strategic assessments are produced at national, force and divisional levels. 
The control strategy is derived from the strategic assessment and sets out the long-term priorities to be tackled. 
Those priorities which are deemed to be of greatest risk are known as very high priority risk areas (VHPs). The national VHPs are currently antisocial behaviour, terrorism, public protection, serious organised crime groups, drugs and violence. 
The control strategy also identifies prevention, intelligence and enforcement recommendations (PIEs), which outline activity to tackle the VHPs.