Agenda and minutes

The Board was advised that one matter had arisen which required immediate attention by the Board (minute SAF 50 refers).  Therefore, pursuant to Section 100 B (4) and 100 E, and due to meet the required deadlines, the Chairman ruled that the item be considered as a matter of urgency.

          The Minutes of the meeting held on 13 November 2012 were taken as read and signed as a correct record.

The Board was advised that no public questions had been received.

There are no approved Safer Halton Partnership Minutes available.

The Board was advised that there were no available Safer Halton Partnership minutes at this time.

The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Communities which  presentation which informed the Members of the advice, support and counselling services offered through RASASC for the benefit of men, women and young people affected by any form of sexual violence.

The Board was advised that The Safe Place Project had successfully set up a Sexual Assault Referral Centre (SARC) for Cheshire, Halton and Warrington.  SARC’s were a national initiative and care for people who had suffered rape or serious sexual assault.  The crisis service went live on 1 April 2011 and was located at St Mary's Hospital in Manchester and was provided by Central Manchester University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust.  

The Board was also advised that the aftercare service was provided by the Rape and Sexual Abuse Support Centre. The Pan-Cheshire aftercare service was also funded 50% by the local authorities and went live on 1 October 2010 covering Cheshire, Halton and Warrington.   

It was reported that the SARC was a dedicated facility staffed by specialist medical personnel and experienced support staff who provided crisis and aftercare services to anyone who had been raped or experienced serious sexual abuse now or in the past. 

The SARC provided a comprehensive and co-ordinated forensic and counselling service to men, women and children.

          The service included the following:-

·       Immediate crisis support;

·       A forensic medical examination;

·       Emergency contraception and pregnancy testing;

·       Information relating to infection and sexually transmitted diseases;

·       Support through the criminal Justice system;

·       One to one counselling; and

·       A 24 hour advice and information line.

RASASC was the aftercare service offered to those aged 13 plus in Halton who had experienced sexual violence. RASASC also accepted self-referrals and referrals from other agencies.

It was also reported that during the period 1^st April 2012 – 28^th September 2012 Halton RASASC had received 95 new referrals, with 15 of those under the age of 17.

All SARC clients had been contacted within 24 hours of referral and all other clients had been contacted within 72 hours of the referral.  Where phone contact could not be made, a letter had been sent to the client therefore the longest wait time for contact had been between 3-5 days. 

In addition, it was reported that 74 initial meetings had been arranged.  Fourteen of these meetings had been cancelled by clients and rebooked with a DNA figure of 15. It was also reported that ISVA hours for this quarter had 390; counselling hours were 353.

The Board also received a presentation from Helen Wardman and Julie Evans, Rape and Sexual Assault Support Centre (RASASC) on the services they provide.  A summary of the services that were provided was circulated at the meeting.

The Board noted that the staff information line was only open Monday – Friday 9.00 am – 4.30 pm. The Board also noted that the information given ensured that prosecution cases were not compromised.  It was also reported that there was a 24 hour line available for people who had been recently  ...  view the full minutes text for item 42.

The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Policy and Resources which detailed progress against service objectives/ milestones and performance targets, and described factors affecting the service for the following service areas within the remit of the Safer Policy & Performance Board:

·       Communities Directorate – Community Safety, Drug & Alcohol Action Teams, Domestic Violence and Environmental Health; and

·       Area Partner indicators from the Police, Fire and Probation Services are stated where available.

The Board was advised that In line with the revised Council’s Performance Framework for 2012/13 (approved by Executive Board in 2012/13), the Policy and Performance Board had been provided with a Safer Priority Based report; which identified the key issues arising from the performance in Quarter 2. This had been structured using the following priorities and key areas of focus, as stated in the Directorate Plan for 2012-15:

·       Community Safety;

·       Safeguarding & Dignity  (including Consumer Protection and Substance Misuse); and

·       Domestic  Violence.

It was reported that the full Departmental quarterly reports were available on the Members’ Information Bulletin and via the link in the report.

The following comments arose from the discussion:-

·       Page 16 – PA 5 – Percentage of VAA Assessments completed within 28 days – The Board noted that the target would be achieved by the year end and that the VAA assessments had been completed  but due to a data issue they had not been recorded;

·       Page 19, CCC1 – Introduce specialist support provision for victims of a serious sexual offence - The Board disagreed with the supporting commentary in respect of future refuge provision; and

·       Page 17, PA25 – The percentage of scheduled Local Air Pollution Control audits carried out and their compliance – It was reported that Members had been informed at a different meeting that Local Air Pollution Control audits were not carried out.  It was agreed that a full explanation be provided, stating what local air pollution audits were carried out, their location and frequency and that it be circulated to all Members of the Board.

RESOLVED: That the report and comments raised be noted.

To access the Appendices to this report, please use the following link:

http://hbcweb.halton-borough.gov.uk/membersarea/

A paper copy is available for Members on Request

The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Policy and Resources which provided an update on Business Planning for the period 2013-16 and the Directorate priorities, objectives and targets for services for this period that fell within the remit of the Board.

The Board was advised that each Directorate was required to develop a medium term business plan, in parallel with the budget, that was subject to annual review and refresh.  Draft Service Objectives and Performance Indicators and targets had been developed by each department and the information had been included in the Appendices to the report.  These objectives and measures would form the basis of the quarterly performance monitoring received by the Board during the future year.

The Board was further advised key priorities for development or improvement in 2013-16 had been agreed by Members at a briefing meeting on 13 November 2012 as follows:-

·       To reduce alcohol abuse and domestic violence;

·       Safeguarding including Consumer Protection; and

·       Community Safety.

It was reported that comments could also be made to the relevant Operational Director by no later than 18 January 2013 to allow inclusion in the Draft Business Plan. 

It addition, the draft Directorate Business Plan would be revised given proposed reconfiguration of Directorates during January and would be presented to the Executive Board for approval on 7 February 2013, at the same time as the draft budget.  This would ensure that decisions on Business Planning were linked to resource allocation.  All Directorate plans would be considered by full Council at its 6 March 2013 meeting.

RESOLVED: That

(1)                 The report be noted; and

(2)                 Members of the Board pass any detailed comments that they may have on the information in the report to the relevant Operational Director by 18 January 2013.

The Board received a report of the Strategic Director, Resources which provided information on the progress in achieving targets contained within the 2011 - 2016 Sustainable Community Strategy for Halton, and highlighted the annual “light touch” review of targets and measures.

The Board was advised that a new SCS (2011 – 26) had been approved by the Council on 20 April 2011.  The new Sustainable Community Strategy and its associated “living” 5 year delivery plan (2011-16), identified five community priorities that would form the basis of collective partnership intervention and action over the coming five years. The strategy was informed by and brought together national and local priorities and was aligned to other local delivery plans such as that of the Halton Children’s Trust. By being a “living” document it would provide sufficient flexibility to evolve as continuing changes within the public sector continued to emerge.

The Board was further advised that in response to legislative changes, Placeholder measures had also been included where new services were to be developed or new performance information was to be captured. Baselines for this would also be established in 2011/12 or 2012/13, against which future services would be monitored. The availability of information was currently being reviewed with partners.

It was reported that progress for the six month period April - September 2012, which included a summary of all indicators for the Safer Priority within the SCS was set out in Appendix 1 of the report.

Furthermore, an annual ‘light touch review‘ of targets contained within the SCS, had also been conducted to ensure that targets remained realistic over the 5 year plan to ‘close the gaps’ in performance against  regional and statistical neighbours. This review had been conducted through the Safer Halton Partnership with all Lead Officers being requested to review targets for 2013/14, 2014/15 and 2015/16. Targets, were appropriate had been updated. All SCS measures had been included in the medium term draft Communities Directorate Business Plan 2013-16.

The Board were also asked to consider the inclusion of any additional measures to the above set to “narrow gaps” in performance where appropriate or respond to legislative/ policy changes; thereby ensuring that all measures remain “fit for purpose”.

The Board noted that SH2 – to reduce the number of deliberate fire incidents had improved and commented that in the economic climate and the reduction in the fire service this target could be more difficult to achieve.

The Board also congratulated the Officer on the improvements that had been made to the report and the quality of the data.

RESOLVED: That the report and comment raised be noted.

The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Communities which gave Members information on the current review of the Safer Halton Hate Crime and Harassment Reduction Strategy.

The Board was advised that Hate crime was the targeting of individuals, groups and communities because of their identify and it could have a devastating and psychological effect on its victims. While it was often perceived that hate crime affected a small number of individual victims, the nature of hate crime was that it was based on prejudice, hostility or hatred towards a particular group in society, and therefore it had a wider impact on the confidence and cohesion of the wider community.

The Board was further advised that hate crime was widely accepted amongst public authorities to be under reported, where many perpetrators target victims at a level that would not be reported. Some victims did not even realise that they had been a victim of a hate crime, and would not report the incident as they either did not know how to or feel they would not be taken seriously. Hate crimes were unfortunately often tolerated by victims, even when they suffered repeated attacks.

It was reported that a hate crime was targeted victimisation which could include a range of offences such as:-

·       Physical attacks - such as physical assault, damage to property or pets, offensive graffiti and arson;

·       Harassment;

·       Criminal damage to property or a place of residence;

·       Threats – including offensive letters, abusive or obscene telephone calls, groups hanging around to intimidate and unfounded, malicious complaints;

·       Arson;

·       Verbal abuse, insults and other offensive behaviour­- offensive leaflets and posters, abusive gestures, dumping of rubbish outside homes or through letterboxes, and bullying at school or in the workplace; and

·       Bullying.

It was also reported that as well as resulting in physical injury, hate crime could also affect people’s mental health and quality of life, and increase their fear of crime. It could lead to anger, insecurity, stress and depression, and could leave some people afraid to leave their home.

Furthermore, it was reported that it was important to recognise the difference between a hate crime and a hate incident.  All hate crimes were incidents, but not all hate incidents were crimes.

The Board noted the plan the Government had for addressing hate crime set out in section four of the report

The Board requested that the information contained in the links in the report be circulated to all Members of the Board.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Communities which provided Members with an awareness of the increasing acknowledgement that initiatives aimed at ending domestic abuse and violence also needed to target and engage with men as the primary perpetrators of abusive behaviour.

The Board was advised that the widespread nature of domestic abuse and violence necessitated preventative approaches that aimed to change attitudes, values and behavior of the individual, the community and at a professional level.

The Board was further advised that Domestic Violence Prevention Programmes were well placed to assist agencies to fulfill their statutory duties by working with men who were applying for child contact as well as those who may be a danger to their children or to the child’s mother.

It was reported that there were two types of Domestic Violence Prevention Programmes available, criminal justice programmes and community based programmes. Criminal justice based programmes were operated locally by probation; who took mandated referrals from the criminal courts as part of a sentence for conviction for a violent or abusive incident.

Community based programmes were usually operated by a voluntary sector organisation or part of a voluntary/statutory sector partnership, were they undertook self-referrals as well as referrals from Children’s Services, from the family courts and a range of other services.

It was also reported that During the first three quarters of 2011-12 (Quarter four data was not available), Cheshire Probation had received 25 requirements for domestic abuse offenders to attend the criminal justice mandatory Domestic Violence Prevention Programme; of which 27 offenders had completed the programme with an average wait of two months.

Furthermore, it was reported that activities of a Domestic Violence Prevention Programmes included a range of services which were necessary in order to make sure that the programme was operated as safely as possible and with the maximum possible chance of supporting change. These included: assessment; risk assessment and management; multi-agency working; group work with perpetrators; individual and group support for victims and advocacy for victims.  In addition, it was reported that Domestic Violence Prevention Programmes were usually 26 weeks courses and could vary in size; the number of clients and the model of work and organisational setting. However, all programmes which were members of Respect were committed to delivering services in accordance with the Respect Accreditation Standard.

It was highlighted that preliminary costings had been sought and a voluntary perpetrator programme operated with the same rigorous standards as the statutory programme, authenticated by Respect, the National Association for Domestic Violence Perpetrator Programme, if delivered in a local context for Halton residents would be in the region of £80,000. Relate had suggested that they could offer a service for 40 referrals per year, which was the minimum contract that Relate would consider offering.

In conclusion, it was reported that the lack of Domestic Violence Prevention Programmes provision in Halton was well documented locally, as a significant gap in service provision. If Halton was to have a measurable reduction in  ...  view the full minutes text for item 47.

The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Communities which gave Members an update on the current home care provision across the Borough.

The Board was advised that there were different options of purchasing domiciliary care in Halton. People could buy care through a direct payment or a commissioned care route. When people opted for the commissioned route, they could be reassured that all the care providers were monitored by the Quality Assurance Team (QAT) and were registered by Care Quality Commission (CQC).

The Board was further advised that there were currently eleven domiciliary care providers who had contracts in Halton. The QAT monitored the quality by assessing a number of areas including consultation feedback, safer recruitment, medication records, training, and recording etc.

It was reported that to deliver commissioned domiciliary care in Halton, the providers must be registered with the care regulators CQC who were responsible for monitoring and ensuring the minimum care standards were met.

Furthermore, it was reported that the annual consultation carried out by the QAT & Research & Intelligence Unit in October/November 2012 concluded the following:-

·       232 respondents sent back their forms in November;

·       99% of the respondents felt safe and secure with their care worker;

·       96% of the respondents felt their care worker does things in a way which they want things to be done;

·       Almost every respondent felt their care worker is polite and respectful with them; and

·       9 out of 10 respondents felt comfortable to raise a concern or complaint about the service they receive.

Out of the services monitored, two had been rated as adequate (amber) and the remaining was green (good). Adequate rated services would receive additional monitoring and spot checks to improve standards. None of the existing services were rated as red (poor).

In conclusion, it was reported that there had been three safeguarding referrals received across domiciliary care services between April – December 2012. Only one of these referrals had been substantiated as a safeguarding matter.

The Board requested that random unannounced inspections be undertaken in the community on people who are receiving he home care service and their responses be collated and presented to the Board on an annual basis.

RESOLVED: That the report and comment raised be noted.

Note:  Councillor Osborne declared a Disclosable Other Interest in the following two items of business as a Member of the PCC Cheshire Panel.

The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Communities which gave Members an update on the newly elected Police and Crime Commissioner.

The Board was advised that the first elections of Police and Crime Commissioners had taken place on the 15 November 2012. The new PCC Mr John Dwyer, the conservative candidate had officially took office on the 22nd November 2012.

  The Board was further advised that the PCC would commission policing services from the Chief Constable (or other providers - in consultation with the Chief Constable). These services would be set out in the plan where their objectives and funding would be publicly disclosed. The plan must be published and remain a public document including any updates or amendments made during the five year period.

It was reported that at the end of the financial year the PCC would publish an annual report, which would set out progress made by the PCC against the objectives set out in the plan. Alongside the annual report the PCC would also publish annual financial accounts, including showing how resources had been consumed in respect of priorities and how value for money had been secured.

Furthermore, it was reported that in 2012/13 there would be a new and un-ring fenced Community Safety Fund (CSF) which would be paid to PCCs. However, it was reported that it had recently been agreed that the funds transferred to the PPC (circa £100k) would be pass-ported directly back to the Community Safety Team under a twelve month Service Level Agreement (SLA).  The SLA would be drawn up by the end of January 2013

It was also reported that from 2014/15 onwards the Home Office intended to roll CSF funding into the Police Main Grant. Again the amount of funding had yet to be decided. In his letter, Nick Herbert made it clear that that the Home Office had no intention of ring-fencing the Police Main Grant, nor the setting of a minimum or maximum amount that PCCs must or should spend on community safety activity. It would be up to the PCCs to decide how to use all of the resources at their disposal in pursuit of local priorities.

The Board noted the preparations for the PCC nationally and in Cheshire and Halton.  The Board also noted the Police and Crime Panel Update set out in paragraphs 6.1 – 6.2 of the report.

RESOLVED: That the report be noted.

The Board considered a report of the Strategic Director, Communities which briefed Members on the draft Police and Crime Plan for Cheshire 2013, Making Cheshire an even safer place to live

The Board was advised that Under the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011, Police &Crime Commissioners had to produce a Police & Crime Plan for their area for the term in which they would be in office.  Following the Police and Crime Commissioner elections in November 2012, the draft Police and Crime Plan had been developed for Cheshire and it set out the Commissioner’s objectives during his period of office for consultation.

The Board was further advised that the development of the Plan had taken into account a range of information regarding local and national priorities through a stakeholder analysis. The stakeholder analysis had brought together information from a number of sources in order to meet the statutory requirements for producing the plan.  

It was reported that information regarding financial and other resources and crime and disorder reduction grants had not yet been included, as the police grant announcement had only been made by the Home Office on 19 December 2012. Actions would also be included under each of the Commissioner’s objectives identified within the Police and Crime Plan. These actions were currently under development and would be included in the final version of the police and crime plan.

          Furthermore, it was reported that the PCC set out five key objectives within the draft Police and Crime Plan and for each of these objectives a number of performance measures were proposed in order to monitor progress. Details on the background information which had led to the objectives were set out in Appendix 1 to the report.

        It was also reported that consultation on the Police & Crime Plan was required under section 14(3) of the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act 2011. The closing date for comments on the draft Police and Crime Plan was the 25th January 2013.

        Furthermore, it was highlighted that there were some areas that Members may wish to highlight in their response, in particular, that there should be more focus upon domestic violence, prolific and persistent offenders and integrated offender management.  Halton repeat domestic violence offenders were of particular concern and in 2011 Members had agreed more investment in the domestic violence service.

        Following the consultation, an updated Police and Crime Plan would be presented to the Police & Crime Panel in February who would report / make recommendation(s) to the Commissioner.  The Commissioner was scheduled to consider the Panel’s report / recommendations at the Decision Meeting on 26 February 2013 and must provide the Panel with the response.

It was also reported that during March 2013, arrangements would then be made for an executive summary to be produced and for the Plan to be published and disseminated.

Members of the Board were encouraged to send any comments to Mike Andrews by no later than 21 January 2013.

In respect of establishing a Sentencing Unit  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.