Minutes of the Dorset Community Safety Partnership - 12 October 2020

Attendance

Core membership 

Apologies 

• Kay Wilson-White (Dorset Council)

• Tina Ridge (NPS)

No 1

Item Minutes Held on 12 October and Matters Arising

1.1 The minutes of the meeting held on 15 July were agreed.

2 - Election of Vice Chair

1.2  Members of the group noted that A/Supt Rob Chalkley who had been appointed Vice Chair for the 2020/21 financial year, had moved post and agreed that Supt. Richard Bell should take up the position.

3.2 - Terms of Reference

1.3 The terms of reference for the group had been updated to include information on the relationship between the CSP and Police and Crime Commissioner. The updated terms of reference had been sent out with the agenda for the meeting.

6.6 – Increase in ASB

1.4 The increase in ASB noted at the last meeting which was associated with Police recording breaches of Covid restrictions as ASB, did not attract any attention so partners decided not to do any proactive communications on the subject.

6.8 – Performance Dashboard

1.5 Jenni Boddy confirmed that David Bonner at Dorset Council was leading on work to share information and databases across partner organisations.

No 2

Performance Snapshot

2.1 Jenni Boddy used the performance dashboard to outline performance trends for the past six months.

2.2 Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) had reduced over the summer, with some increases to public place violence, reflecting people returning to going out following earlier lockdown measures. Total crime was lower than compared to the same time last year and there were no noticeable changes to trends in domestic abuse.

2.3 Supt Richard Bell reported that lockdown had a significant impact on reduced reports of ASB, with reports moderating and returning back to normal levels as restrictions eased.

2.4 Liz Plastow asked whether child sexual exploitation had risen. There was a consensus that it was difficult to understand what might be happening based on the data provided. The CSP’s Strategic Priority Delivery Group (CSSPDG) was leading on serious sexual offences and would respond to issues. Supt Bell said he would look to see if the Police had any information that helped to understand what was happening around sexual offences and young people.

• Action - Supt. Bell

2.5 Andrew Billany asked about performance in localities and whether it was possible to identify local trends. Following discussion, it was agreed to look at any geographical trends at future meetings.

• Action - Jenni Boddy

2.6 It was further agreed to look to provide more context and narrative to the performance information provided at the CSP.

• Action - Jenny Boddy

No 3

Dorset Approach to Domestic Abuse

3.1 Andy Frost introduced a report on Dorset’s approach to tackling domestic abuse. The report followed the discussion at the last CSP meeting where members of the group stressed the importance of taking a zero-tolerance approach and achieving the right balance between preventative and reactive services.

3.2 The position statement was complemented by a detailed delivery plan that set out actions to tackle domestic abuse. The delivery plan would be coordinated by the Strategic Priority Delivery Group.

3.3 The position statement was widely supported by the group. Supt Bell stressed just how important preventative work was and welcomed its inclusion within the position statement and plans.

3.4 Members of the group recognised the importance of getting buy in to the Dorset position from senior members of their organisations.

3.5 Cllr Graham Carr-Jones sought assurances that the position statement aligned to the Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs) ambitions and Jason Mumford confirmed it did.

3.6 Members of the group noted that there was a range of good activity taking place across the partnership and that the new structures would help improve governance, ensuring operational work had strategic oversight.

3.7 Ian Grant briefed members of the CSP on a recent funding application submitted by partners to deliver the DRIVE perpetrator programme in Dorset. Ian stressed this would be a good opportunity to bring together partners’ multi-agency high risk domestic abuse model and perpetrator response. Ian agreed to brief partners on DRIVE outside of the meeting should the application be successful.  

• Action - Ian Grant

Resolved

• The group agreed the position statement on Dorset’s approach to tackling domestic abuse and the associated activity in the Strategic Priority Group’s delivery plan.

No 4 

Strategic Priority Delivery Group Update

4.1 Andy Frost gave an update on the work of the CSP’s Strategic Priority Delivery Group (SPDG).

4.2 At their first meeting members of the group began developing their delivery plan, focusing on partners’ approach to tackling domestic abuse and associated activity.

4.3 The focus was to provide a clear understanding of issues and the specific actions being taken to address them. This would allow partners to measure whether the actions taken were resulting in success.

4.4 One of the key lessons emerging from the current pandemic was the need for partners to be flexible in how they tackle issues and ensure work was informed by intelligence from those working on the ground. Given that, the group’s delivery plan would evolve over time as partners developed their understanding of issues and assessed the effectiveness of actions.

4.5 The delivery plan also captured actions from Domestic Homicide Reviews (DHRs) and the group was co-ordinating work to prepare for the introduction of the Domestic Abuse Act in April 2020.

4.6 The CSSPDG would continue to manage and coordinate any immediate response to relevant priority issues emerging from the Covid pandemic.

4.7 To avoid duplication, colleagues from the safeguarding boards were represented on the SPDG. Andy stressed the importance of building on these links so partners avoided doing work in isolation.

4.8 Members of the CSP were supportive of the group’s work and requested that updates against the delivery plan were brought back to CSP meetings.

• Action - Andy Frost

No 5 

Dorset’s Response to the Domestic Abuse Bill 

5.1 Ian Grant provided an update on work to assess the impact of the Domestic Abuse Bill and Dorset’s response to ensuring it is prepared for any new duties. An action plan was being implemented to help prepare for the new duties which was being coordinated by the SPDG.

5.2 It was noted that partners need to continue to familiarise themselves with updates to the Bill as it passes through parliament.

5.3 The group welcomed the action plan and work and asked to be kept updated as things progressed. Andrew Billany stressed the importance of making sure any housing needs identified were understood and raised with housing colleagues, especially as they were in the process of developing their Housing Strategy.

• Action - Ian Grant

5.4 The new duties will require the preparation of a needs assessment and strategy. Central government is looking at providing top tier local authorities with some funding to help them prepare for the new responsibilities.

5.5 It was stressed that although the CSP can take an overview of work on the Domestic Abuse Bill, some of the requirements related to specific organisations and it was the responsibility of those organisations to ensure they complied with any duties placed upon them. The group acknowledged this and individual members agreed to progress specific work through their individual organisations.

5.6 The group reinforced its view that the CSP would be well placed to take on the role and statutory function of the Local Partnership Board described in the Bill but acknowledged this would need to be considered once guidance had been issued

Resolved

• Members of the group noted the action plan and the need for it to be updated in light of statutory guidance.

• It was agreed that the CSP should oversee partners’ work to respond to the Domestic Abuse Bill.

No 6

Local Priority Delivery Group Update

6.1 John Newcombe provided an update on progress being made by the Local Priority Delivery Group (LPDG).

6.2 The LPDG had recently met for first time and partners had set out a range of local issues and discussed how they would work together to tackle them.

6.3 It was acknowledged that the new arrangements would allow the Partnership Coordinating Groups (PCGs) to elevate issues through to the LPDG and on to the CSP if they could not be resolved. 

6.4 John highlighted the need for greater analytical support for the group and was exploring options for this.

6.5 Generally, PCGs were working well, and whilst there are some issues around engagement from agencies, this is being managed via the groups.

6.6 Supt Bell explained the intention to embed a problem solving approach in PCGs which would ensure they make an assessment of situations and put targeted responses in place. The approach would help inform the development of operational plans and clarify who can and should do what.

6.7 John explained work undertaken over the summer. Localities had seen an increase in unauthorised camping which was largely attributed to the COVID situation; reports of increased lower level anti-social behaviour; and there had been a few incidents of drug dealing and criminal damage.

6.8 There continued to be some ongoing issues with youth people across various locations, however, partners are working well with youth services and this was bearing good results. This included a youth outreach project in East Dorset and the 100 days of summer which was an initiative led by the Police. The use of ‘orders’ had also been a success.

6.9 Operation Luscombe, which was a national initiative aimed at reducing issues associated with begging and street drinking, was being piloted in Weymouth. The approach involved using a number of positive interventions as well as enforcement measures.

6.10 John explained that work was underway to align anti-social behaviour processes, policies and procedures across the Pan-Dorset Area with representatives from Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council (BCP) and Dorset Council working in partnership with Dorset Police to standardise policy and practice.

Resolved

• It was agreed the Local Priority Delivery Group would produce an Operational Plan the outcomes from which would be reported to the CSP. Action John Newcombe

No7 

Measuring Impact at the Local Level

7.1 John Newcombe introduced the report, stressing the importance of strengthening how they measure success at the PCG level.

7.2 John explained that the new structures created a good opportunity for partners to consider how they can improve performance to help them locate problem areas to direct resources and to measure success.

7.3 John was looking to increase the analytical resource to support his team and local areas with performance. Important to this work would be how partners communicate good news and successes to the community. John explained that the LPDG would continue to explore this through the development of its operational plan.

7.4 Members of the group requested John bring an update to the next meeting on progress.

• Action John Newcombe

7.5 There was a general discussion amongst the group about what constitutes success e.g. does issuing more Criminal Behaviour Orders (CBOs) mean success or failure? Supt Richard Bell advised that CI Jim Beashel was carrying out a thesis on this area of work and would ask whether he would be willing to circulate this to members of the LPDG and the CSP when complete.

• Action Supt. Bell

No 8 

Domestic Homicide Reviews Update

8.1 Andy Frost introduced a report that set out progress in relation to Domestic Homicide Reviews (DHRs).

8.2 Andy explained how DHR work had become a key area of focus for the partnership with six reviews currently active and being worked on. Members of the group noted the good work taking place to address learning points from reviews.

8.3 A summary of progress with current reviews was provided:

• DHR D7 – reports had been signed off by the CSP and submitted to the Home Office Quality Assurance Panel for consideration.
• DHR D8 - was a joint review with Somerset CSP. It was noted that the draft report attached with the papers might change as the independent author completes their work. It was agreed that the final reports would be signed off by members of the CSP by email outside the meeting.
• DHR D12 – the CSP was asked to agree an extension to the review timescale.
• DHR D13 (potential DHR) – the CSP had received notification of another potential case which was currently being scoped by the DHR Panel who would recommend whether to conduct a review. It was noted the CSP Chair had a connection to someone involved in the case. As such, following advice from the Council’s Monitoring Officer, it was agreed all other core CSP members would be asked to consider the recommendation from the DHR Panel on behalf of the Chair who would then act on their decision.

Resolved

• All recommendations in the report were agreed.

No 9 

Forward Plan

9.1 It was agreed to include an update on progress with the Domestic Abuse Bill at a future meeting.

• Action Ian Grant

9.2 Toni Shepherd agreed to provide an update on changes taking place to probation services at the next meeting.

• Action Toni Shepherd 

No 10 

Any other business 

There was no other business.