PEEL Assessment 2023-25: Cleveland Police

Cleveland Police should improve the way it flags vulnerable people on its incident logs Cleveland Police’s command and control system has a facility to highlight vulnerable people involved in incidents. This makes sure that when officers and staff attend an incident, they understand if the caller or victim is vulnerable and that additional support may be needed. In our victim service assessment, we found that in 83 of 92 relevant cases, call handlers checked to establish if the victim was vulnerable. However, vulnerability was flagged on the system in just 29 of the 50 relevant cases. When vulnerability isn’t flagged, the officers and staff attending the incident don’t know about it. This could result in them missing opportunities to support the victim. The force also has a system to view incidents in which people are waiting for a police visit. Incidents involving vulnerable people are highlighted on this system. When the incident isn’t correctly flagged, the victim doesn’t benefit from this additional scrutiny. Cleveland Police

Cleveland Police needs to attend calls for service in line with its published attendance times For emergency incidents, Cleveland Police’s published target attendance time is 15 minutes. The force told us that in the year ending 3 November 2024, it attended 80.3 percent of emergency incidents within that target time, with an average time of 13 minutes. For priority one calls, the force’s published target attendance time is one hour. The force told us it attends 54.1 percent of these calls within one hour, with an average attendance time of 135.2 minutes. The force has changed its approach to attending lower-priority incidents, and it has adopted a priority 24 grading, which has a published target attendance time of 24 hours. The force told us it attends 90 percent of these calls within 24 hours. Adopting this new approach has helped the force improve its attendance times for priority one calls, but it still has more to do to meet its published attendance times. Cleveland Police

Cleveland Police doesn’t consistently achieve appropriate outcomes for victims Cleveland Police doesn’t always achieve acceptable outcomes for victims of crime. The number of crimes it solves following an investigation is low. It needs to understand the reasons for this, and to work to achieve better outcomes for victims. In the year ending 30 June 2024, the force recorded 63,037 victim-based crimes. Of these recorded offences, . percent were assigned an ‘offences brought to justice’ outcome. This is within the normal range compared to other forces in England and Wales. In the same period, the force assigned 8.3 percent of victim-based crimes a ‘charged/summonsed’ outcome. This was higher than e pected compared to other forces in England and Wales. In the same period, the force assigned a ‘community resolutions’ outcome to 0.2 percent of victim-based crimes. This is lower than expected compared to the England and Wales average of 2.0 percent. The force told us that it is working to address this through Operation U Turn, which is improving the way it records these outcomes. been revised since. British Transport Police and City of London data are excluded from the England and Wales rate. Total police-recorded crime includes all crime (except fraud). For a full commentary and explanation of crime and outcome types please see the Home Office statistics. been revised since. Victim-based crimes are defined as all police-recorded crimes where there is a direct victim, such as an individual, an organisation or corporate body. Cleveland Police should make sure that when investigating crime it takes all opportunities and that there is supervisory oversight of investigations. In our victim service assessment, we found that in 23 of 92 investigations Cleveland Police had failed to complete relevant and proportionate lines of inquiry. We judged 77 out of 100 investigations to be effective. Since our 2021–22 PEEL inspection, the force has improved the way it supervises investigations. In this inspection, we found effective supervision and oversight in 69 of 84 investigations. The force needs to continue to improve the way it supervises investigations and updates victims. Cleveland Police

Cleveland Police needs to make sure it completes a victim needs assessment when appropriate Under the Code of Practice for Victims of Crime, forces should carry out an initial victim needs assessment to: • determine if the victim needs support; • establish the type of support the victim needs; • assess whether the victim is vulnerable or intimidated; and • assess if they are entitled to enhanced rights, such as those who are victims of domestic abuse or hate crime. In Cleveland Police, investigators carried out initial victim needs assessments in only 52 of the 69 relevant cases we reviewed. Cleveland Police

Cleveland Police should continue to improve the strategic and tactical oversight of its safeguarding strategy and tactical plans Cleveland Police has invested in its performance oversight through its IMPACT (Improving and Managing Performance Across Cleveland Together) board, which the deputy chief constable chairs. This helps the force gain insight about performance and hold people to account for making improvements to services. However, the safeguarding governance group, chaired by an assistant chief constable, is less well developed. At the time of our inspection, the strategy was under review and some tactical plans were missing; some others weren’t up to date. There were no meaningful checks to make sure important work to improve services was progressing. The force told us it was creating a tactical group to co-ordinate the way it carries out its strategy and find ways to make improvements. At the time of our inspection, it was developing performance dashboards for safeguarding to inform this approach. Once complete, the force will have a better understanding of the service it provides and opportunities to make improvements. Cleveland Police

Cleveland Police should improve its initial response to reports of domestic abuse We found that when Cleveland Police receives a report of domestic abuse and the suspect isn’t with the victim at the time, it carries out a risk assessment and makes an appointment for an officer to attend. The force has created 24 opportunities a day for these appointments. Officers and staff schedule appointments within the following seven days, usually within two days. The force should review this approach because it delays safeguarding referrals in relation to high-priority crimes. The force carries out surveys with victims of domestic abuse to understand how satisfied they are with the service they have received from the police. In August 2024, the force’s own performance summary said that satisfaction for victims of domestic abuse was “e ceptionally low”, at percent. This was 8 percentage points lower than it had been for the previous 12 months. In the year ending 31 March 2023, 65.5 percent of victims of crimes related to domestic abuse in the Cleveland Police area didn’t support the police taking further action against a suspect. This is higher than the England and Wales average of 56.8 percent. Cleveland Police

Cleveland Police’s operating model should allow it to respond effectively and consistently to priorities, and to assess current and future demand Cleveland Police should make sure it is effective at managing demand. It should be able to show that it has allocated resources to the right areas, and that efficient processes and well-considered plans are in place to meet demand. In our inspection, we found that the force had improved its understanding of its performance, and of how it performs in the context of competing demands. It uses demand modelling software to help it understand how best to use its resources. However, we also found that the force understood some parts of its operating model better than others. This has led to it managing demand in an uneven way, and inconsistently managing capacity and capability. We found that the force used inexperienced staff to investigate some high-risk and complex crimes. It uses its crime assessment and allocation framework to allocate investigations to the most appropriate team, depending on how serious the crime is or how complex the investigation is expected to be. It also holds daily management discussions to make sure it allocates crimes to the right teams. However, inexperienced officers and staff in some teams investigate crimes for which they may not have had enough training. In some cases, high levels of risk or complexity only become clear during the investigation. These cases should then be allocated to experienced investigators. However, they often stay with response teams, or with criminal investigation department and child abuse investigations team officers who are only trained to professionalising investigations programme level 1. The force should review some areas of its operating model, as well as the skills of its officers and staff, to make sure the right number of people with the right skills are dealing with the right work. At the time of our inspection, it had already started that review process by introducing Operation Unified. As part of our continuous assessment of the force, we will continue to monitor the way it develops the operating model. Cleveland Police

Cleveland Police has invested in some new digital processes to help reduce sources of internal demand, but several processes are still inefficient Cleveland Police recognises that it isn’t making the most of available technology to help it increase productivity, and that this is restricting progress. We were encouraged to see the force using some digital solutions, such as Power BI. This can replace time-consuming manual processes with a fully automated way of presenting data and management information. The force uses a cloud-based platform, which means it can be more agile in the way it uses and develops Power BI applications. However, at the time of our inspection, the force lacked the capacity it needed to fully develop this technology and benefit from the efficiencies it can offer. This was because of legacy systems and those that need manual entry, such as Oracle. The force is working with two other police forces as part of a Home Office-funded pilot to make the most of opportunities from robotic process automation. Using robotics can efficiently replace some repetitive manual tasks. This will help the force increase productivity and workforce capacity, and meet the demand challenges it faces. At the time of our inspection, the force had already used this technology to improve 2 of its processes, and it was developing it for 16 other processes. The force should continue to identify opportunities to further automate existing manual processes and move away from using manually prepared spreadsheets. Cleveland Police