Minutes of the Dorset Community Safety Partnership - 15 July 2020

Attendance 

Core membership

Apologies

• Becks Kirk (Dorset Council)
• Tina Ridge (NPS)

No 1

Item Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs)

1.1 Andy Frost gave a presentation outlining why we have CSPs, including the legal requirement to have a partnership and for ‘responsible authorities’ to work together to tackle community safety issues. He explained the duties placed on CSPs through legislation including needs assessments, Community Safety Plans and Domestic Homicide Reviews (DHRs). 

1.2 Andy highlighted why it was important to work together to address community safety, emphasising the impact crime has on people’s physical and mental health, as well as the financial costs.

1.3 It was noted that individual agencies cannot tackle community safety issues on their own and that it was necessary to work together to address problems. 

No 2

Item Election of Vice Chair

2.1 Members of the group appointed A/Supt. Rob Chalkley vice chair for the current financial year.

No 3

Item Terms of Reference
 

3.1 Andy Frost presented the group’s terms of reference for agreement. The terms of reference were based on the decisions taken at the last CSP meeting and had been approved by the Council’s Legal Services Team.
 

3.2 Following discussion, it was agreed to add something to the terms of reference to reflect the relationship between the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) and the CSP, as laid out legislation. Andy Frost to update in consultation with Legal Services.

• Action Andy Frost

Resolved

• The group’s terms of reference were agreed subject to the above addition.

No 4 

Item Minutes of Meeting Held on 9 March 2020 and Matters Arising

4.1 The minutes of the meeting held on 9 March were agreed.

4.2 All matters arising had been completed and work was underway to rejuvenate partnership work on Melcombe Regis. It was agreed an update on that work would be brought to a future meeting.

• Action Andy Frost

4.3 Members of the group thanked the former members of the Dorset CSP for their work.

No 5

Item Covid 19 and the Community Safety Response

5.1 Andy Frost explained the approach taken by partners during the Covid 19 pandemic, highlighting the weekly community safety tele-conference which had been useful.

5. 2 Partners had been able to take decisions quickly and proactively in response to local and county wide issues. Their approach incorporated a greater focus on local intelligence.

5.3 During the pandemic, partners had responded to local community tensions, domestic abuse and anti-social behaviour (ASB) issues.

5.4 Although partners did not report an increase in domestic abuse at the start of lockdown, issues began to emerge as time progressed. There had been a significant increase in demand for general advice and information, and providers locally, regionally and nationally were under pressure due to the challenges of trying to deliver services with government restrictions in place.

5.5 Members of the CSP noted that partners were taking a flexible, risk-based approach to service provision with the aim of ensuring that those who needed a service got one.

5.6 Although a great deal was being done to support and work with providers (including increased funding and resources), the group recognised domestic abuse was a high-risk area for partners with the potential for problems to escalate as lockdown measures eased.

5.7 Cllr Quayle thanked partners for their joint work during the Covid crisis and offered the Dorset & Wiltshire Fire & Rescue Service (DWFRS) to continue to be involved in any activity.

5.8 Members of the group discussed prevention options including schemes that could help divert young people away from domestic abuse. It was recognised that the Fire & Rescue Service ran diversionary schemes that could help. There was also a consultation currently running on community safety education in schools which it was agreed the CSP should respond to.

• Action Ian Grant

5.9 It was agreed to explore prevention and diversionary schemes. Cllr Carr Jones stressed the importance of education on healthy relationships from a young age and it was agreed partners would look at how that could be provided, building on the requirement in the Domestic Abuse Bill which should be enacted shortly. 

• Action Ian Grant

Resolved

• The CSP supported partners’ response to community safety issues during the Covid 19 situation. 

No 6

Item Performance Update

6.1 Jenni Boddy provided an update on performance for quarter 4 2019/20 and quarter 1 2020/2021.

6.2 Crime had reduced in almost all categories except in quarter 1 for ASB and domestic abuse.

6.3 The increase in ASB had been significant, 76% compared to the same time last year. The same picture was being seen in the Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole area. A/Supt. Chalkley explained there was a clear link between the increase in ASB and the enforcement of lockdown measures locally, where breaches had been recorded as ASB.

6.4 The increase in domestic abuse was marginal compared to the same quarter last year but partners were monitoring issues closely.

6.5 It was explained partners had run several public communications campaigns throughout lockdown which may have contributed to increased reporting on certain issues.

6.6 Cllr Carr Jones asked if we ought to do some pro-active communications regarding the increase in ASB so that the public understood the reasons for the increase. There was a lag in the publication of crime statistics so it seemed sensible to consider this closer to the time when figures would go into the public domain. 

• Action Andy Frost

6.7 It was explained that during lockdown partners had used a mix of core data sets and intelligence to develop actions. Testing statistical information with intelligence from local providers had created a much better picture of what was happening allowing partners to tailor their response. It was agreed to continue to build on that approach.

6.8 Partners discussed how the performance dashboard might be used to assist future work. John Newcombe was keen for PCGs to have access to the dashboard and Liz Plastow asked for access to help understand demand for services. Liz also offered to provide health data (Ambulance, Emergency Depts. etc.) that could be added to the dashboard. Cllr Quayle mentioned the work being undertaken by the Fire & Rescue Service to develop a dashboard and asked that we made links to it.

• Action Jenni Boddy

6.9 A/Supt. Chalkley explained a piece of work Dorset Police were leading to identify and better understand how to support the most vulnerable people in specific locations. Neighbouring forces were looking at data warehousing options and partners were keen to find out more about that work and how it might be replicated in Dorset.

Resolved 

• The group noted the performance update for quarter 4 2019/2020 and quarter 1 2020/21.

No 7

Item Locality Update

7.1 John Newcombe introduced a report on the work of Partnership Coordinating Groups (PCGs). PCGs had been in operation across the area during lockdown and partner engagement had been good.

7.2 At times there had been increases in ASB and community tension issues e.g. neighbour disputes and noise complaints. The PCGs were using legal interventions where necessary to deal with ASB. There had been several Community Triggers activated, these had been independently led by a neighbouring local authority area.

7.3 The group noted that some of the outstanding cases open to PCGs were complex and included a mix of mental health issues, drug and alcohol misuse and in some cases domestic abuse. 

7.4 Cllr Carr Jones asked how we can improve our response to complex cases. The group agreed the provision of services for those with complex needs should be a priority for the CSP going forward.

• Strategic Priority Delivery Group

7.5 Liz Plastow mentioned there had been an increase in the complexity and volume of mental health cases during lockdown. There were also some issues with young people and substance misuse which partners were working on.

7.6 Cllr Carr Jones referred to the positive work delivered in various areas by youth outreach and the Family Partnership Zones. John Newcombe agreed and highlighted joint visits between youth outreach and Community Safety Accreditation Scheme (CSAS) officers as a good example of joint working at a local level.

7.7 John Newcombe confirmed that the Community Trigger process and ASB policies had been updated and standardised across the council area. Repeat ‘missing people’ had been added as standing item to each PCG agenda to highlight when partners were absent from meetings and ensure good engagement.

7.8 Liz Plastow confirmed that safeguarding nurses were involved in PCGs and members of the group felt there were opportunities to work closely with the Fire & Rescue Service at a local level.

7.9 It was important to understand how success was being measured at a local level. John Newcombe agreed to work on this and report back to the next meeting.

• John Newcombe

7.10 The group agreed that PCGs were positive local partnership meetings and were keen to ensure their good work was communicated to members of the public and local communities.

• John Newcombe

Resolved

• The CSP noted the progress regarding the work of Partnership Coordinating Groups across the area.

No 8

Item Community Safety Structures and Delivery Planning

8.1 Andy Frost introduced an item on completing our new partnership structures by establishing two priority delivery groups, one for strategic priorities and one for locality issues. The paper set out terms of reference for the two groups.

8.2 The two groups would build on the proactive and flexible approach taken by partners during the COVID-19 situation and move away from having single issue theme groups. This would allow better working on common themes and cross cutting issues.

8.3 The CSP remained the accountable body and the delivery groups would focus on delivery, coordination, action planning, problem solving and linking initiatives. Both delivery groups were expected to report back to the CSP regarding progress and any challenges

Resolved

• The CSP agreed the terms of reference for the Strategic and Local Priority Delivery Groups.

No 9

Item Domestic Abuse Bill

9.1 Ian Grant presented a report on the Domestic Abuse Bill. He confirmed the Bill would be subject to changes before being enacted though these were likely to be minimal.

9.2 The group noted the Bill aimed to promote awareness of domestic abuse, improve support to victims, transform the justice response and improve performance.

9.3 Ian drew the group’s attention to the importance of Local Domestic Abuse Partnership Boards to oversee commissioning and meet the support needs of victims and their children. Further guidance is expected regarding the Boards and it was agreed the Strategic Priority Delivery Group should consider this and develop proposals for a local response. The preference of members of the group was for the CSP to act as the Local Domestic Abuse Partnership Board rather than create a separate arrangement.

• Action Andy Frost

9.4 Cllr Carr-Jones felt the CSP should advocate a zero-tolerance position to domestic abuse, making it clear that it was not acceptable and should not be tolerated. The group agreed to use the introduction of the new domestic abuse legislation to further this approach. A/Supt. Rob Chalkley confirmed that Dorset Police already took a zero-tolerance approach to the issue.

9.5 It was recognised that prevention was vital in order to stop people from becoming victims and perpetrators and that we needed to ensure the right balance between preventative and reactive services.

9.6 It was agreed the Strategic Priority Delivery Group should take this forward and develop a programme of work. The Strategic Priority Delivery Group would bring a report on progress to the next CSP meeting and link with the local Safeguarding Boards and other relevant groups on this work.

• Action Andy Frost

Resolved

• The Strategic Priority Delivery Group to progress the work associated with the Domestic Abuse Bill including proposals for a local Domestic Abuse Partnership Board.
• The Strategic Priority Delivery Group to develop a programme of work based on a zero-tolerance approach to domestic abuse.

No 10

Item Domestic Homicide Review (DHR) Update

10.1 Kay Wilson White introduced a report that detailed progress in relation to Dorset DHRs.

10.2 The group noted that the overview report for DHR D7 had been completed and was appended to the paper. The overview report had been compiled by the Independent Author and signed off by the agencies involved in the review.

10.3 Statutory guidance states that DHR overview reports, executive summaries and action plans need to be agreed and signed off by CSPs. Although this would normally happen at a meeting, it was agreed the reports for DHR D7 would be signed off by members of the CSP via email once they were completed, to avoid having to delay things until the CSP meeting in October.

10.4 Members of the group were invited to comment on the recommendations in the overview report for DHR D7. It was recognised that many DHRs involve complex needs and that in many cases local systems and processes were not designed to meet those with complex needs. It was welcomed that this issue would be picked up by the Strategic Priority Delivery Group.

10.5 It was highlighted that DHRs had led to many improvements in practice. For example, the development of the High-Risk Domestic Abuse (HRDA) service which takes a whole family approach.

10.6 The group supported the Chair’s decision to undertake a DHR following a recent notification from the Police and agreed to pend the review whilst there was further work continuing.

Resolved

• The CSP agreed the recommendations listed in the report.

No 11

Item Forward Plan

11.1 Andy Frost explained the need for a forward plan to guide the work of the partnership including in relation to its statutory duties.

11.2 Following the discussions at the meeting, members of the group agreed to add the following items to the forward plan: programme for tackling domestic abuse, approach to meeting complex needs and how we assess our impact at both a strategic and local level.

No 12

Item Any Other Business

12.1 There was no other business.