FINAL DRAFT FINAL DRAFT FINAL DRAFT FINAL DRAFT FINAL DRAFT
‘Safer Highland’ - Guidance on Strategic Arrangements
Strategic Responsibility for Community and Public Protection
Draft Proposals
1Background
1.1Like colleagues across Scotland, Chief Executive Officers of the Highland Council, NHS Highland and Northern ConstabularyCommunity Planning Partnership have been involved in consideration of the best strategic arrangements to support public protectionn. within the new community planning partnership.
Chief Executives have sought to establish co-ordinated strategic arrangements to ensure1.2 effective and efficient working, with clear objectives, without unhelpful duplication or overlap across planning and reporting processes.
1.3This activity accords with the commitment of the Community Planning Partnership to review partnership working, delivery and performance management arrangements in the following key SOA areas:
people are, and feel, safe from crime, disorder and danger;
attitudes and behaviours towards alcohol and other drugs are changed and those in need are supported by better prevention and treatment services;
the cycle of deprivation is broken through intervention in early years.
This culminated in a stakeholder workshop on 22 January 2009 with Scottish Government colleagues, to examine the interface across a number of existing strategic groups and committees involved with public protection:
adult support & protection
child protection
community safety and anti-social behaviour
drugs & alcohol misuse
sexual offenders
violence against women
1.3The workshop achieved a significant level of consensus, which was that:
1.4This guidance takes account of these various drivers and objectives, which were considered at meetings of senior officers involved with the existing strategy groups between January and June 2009. It sets out principles, to be reflected in the organisation and operation of inter-agency arrangements across the
1.There was a continuing need for groups in specific areas, but that such groups should have a clear workplan, with coherence between strategy, implementation and links to operational practice.
2.The current groups were at different stages of development, and agencies and the Chief Executive Officers had responsibility to provide adequate and effective support across all of public protection.
3.There should be a review of whether all groups were necessary or required because of regulation, but that a leadership group should be established, comprising Chief Executive Officers and Chairpersons, to which the groups should report, to ensure synergy and co-ordination.
4.Managers and staff should be reassured that this process was about strengthening public protection and building cohesion, not about reducing the importance of any of the particular issues.
1.4Further to the above, it was acknowledged that there would still be unresolved governance issues, but these should be resolved in the longer term.
1.5One issue appeared to need some further consideration:
Are the six groups identified above the appropriate groups to consider in terms of our definition of public protection?
1.6A small core group was established to take this work forward, involving Bill Alexander (NHS Highland/Highland Council), Jan Baird (NHS Highland), Kathleen Clarke (NHS Highland), Mhairi Grant (Northern Constabulary), Ralph Noble (Northern Constabulary) and Fiona Palin (Highland Council).
1.7Additional discussions have also included Bruce Duncan (Northern Constabulary), David Goldie (Highland Council) and Carron McDiarmid (Highland Council).
1.8At a subsequent meeting of the core group with Alistair Dodds, it was confirmed that:
The Leadership Group should commence a review of the membership, operation and remit of each group. It should consider how the various groups and committees are resourced, and how they might be more efficiently supported and administered.
The Leadership Group would wish to ensure that each group is working effectively, with a clear set of objectives as part of a workplan, without unhelpful duplication or overlap across planning and reporting processes, and that the necessary measures to underpin public protection are in place as part of these various processes.
Initial priorities would be to examine the following areas, which should be the subject of a further meeting with Chief Executives on 6 May 2009:
oConfirm the chair and current membership of each group.
oConfirm the current workplan of each group.
oReview whether all strategic groups are still required, whether remits require amendment, and potential structures for the leadership group and strategic groups.
oIdentify and review the administrative infrastructure that supports all six groups.
Further recent developments
2.1It was also subsequently agreed with Alistair Dodds that the new posts of Development Officer and Training Officer for the Adult Support & Protection Committee should be held and not filled, pending the outcome of this review process.
2.2Also, the Scottish Government and CoSLA issued the framework agreement for alcohol and drug partnerships on 20 April.
2.3This new framework is designed to be consistent with, and to build directly upon the Scottish Government’s Purpose and national performance framework; and the Concordat between the Scottish Government and CoSLA. The governance and accountability arrangements for these partnerships should be consistent with existing accountability arrangements between the Scottish Government and local partners - through community planning structures.
2.3The HDAAT has committed to a development day to consider the requirements of this framework.
3Proposals: Strategic Groups
3.1In considering the needs of organisations and agencies engaged in public protection, in the widest sense, it is proposed that our definition of public protection should include the following key areas:
Adult Support and Protection
Child Protection
Alcohol and Drugs Partnership
Child Protection
Multi Agency Public Protection Arrangements (regarding violent and sexual offenders, known as MAPPA)
Violence Against Women
Youth Justice
3.2It should be noted that
1.5Two other strategic aspects of public protection will be addressed in other strategic forums, but will also be subject to consideration at the proposed Leadership Group:
domestic abuse against males will be addressed within the Community Justice Authority;
hate crime (against minority groups) will fall within the remit of the Community Planning Equalities & Diversity Working Group, which will accord with the hate crime incident reporting facility.
1.6it is proposed community safety and anti-social behaviour have been removed from the list initially considered on 29 January, because:
Regarding Community Safety –
Officers from the principal agencies involved with the Joint Community Safety Tasking Group propose that this central group should have an increasingly operational agenda, focussing on common issues in the Areas/Commands/CHPs. Work has begun to progress this.
Regarding Anti-social Behaviour –
The current review of the Anti-social Behaviour Partnership indicates that issues of anti-social behaviour can be best addressed in the Joint Community Safety Tasking Group and the strategic fora identified above. It should be noted that, in terms of the national framework for anti-social behaviour, issues with regard to prevention and early intervention will be dealt with through some of these other strategic groups.
The existing joint working arrangements will continue through the Joint Community safety Tasking Group, which will integrate community safety and anti-social behaviour.
3.4It should also be noted that it is proposed that youth justice is added to the list of strategic areas – which was raised by some of the participants at the workshop. Indeed, there is an established multi-agency strategic group for youth justice, and youth crime is frequently cited in consultations as one of the major safety concerns for communities.
3.5The core group considers that two areas of public protection strategy remain outwith this structure, and may have to be addressed differently:
domestic abuse against males, which could be addressed locally within the Community Justice Authority;
hate crime (against minority groups) which could fall within the remit of the Equalities Working Group that the Council seeks to form with partner agencies.
Operational arrangements with regard to community safety and anti-social behaviour will be addressed in the Joint Highland Community Safety Tasking Group (JHCSTG). The provisional revised remit and membership for the JHCSTG is attached at Appendix 1.
2Structure
3.6The core group has mapped the existing structures relevant to the six strategic areas identified at paragraph 3.1, and this is attached as Appendix 1 (to follow separately).
4Revised Structure
2.14.1It is proposed that tThe revised ‘safer Highland’ strategic structure should will be based on the model used by the Child Protection Committee and some of the other groupsmost of the existing groups, with a strategy group and a delivery group for each area of activity, involving a three tier model. In addition, Chief Executive Officers and the chairs of the Strategy Groups will form a Leadership Group. This is illustrated in Appendices 4 and 5.
2.24.2This would involve a Leadership Group, six strategy groups with associated delivery groups and a Public Protection Support Team, and would replace the existing Committees and Lead Officer Groups and combine infrastructure and support functions. The proposed structure is shown in Appendix 2It is intended that the following structure will be in place from October 2009..
24.3’Safer Highland’ Leadership Group: Public Protection
It is proposed that theThe membership of this group will be:-
Chief ExecutiveThe Highland Council
Chief ExecutiveNHS Highland
Chief ConstableNorthern Constabulary
All Chairs of strategy groups (6)
Procurator Fiscal
The role of this group will isbe to:
provide leadership and vision to promote a ‘safer Highland’;
ensure a consistentacross all key areas of Public Protection, to set consistent strategy across allall aspects of service delivery that support a ‘safer Highland’;
consider and endorse the workplans of the strategy groups, and support the implementation of these and any other actions to achieve a ‘safer Highland’;
areas and ensure its implementation, monitor joint agreed joint outcomes,, and consider issues and performance annual reports from the strategy groups.
It is envisaged that the group will meet around bi-annuallyevery four months, to consider ing key issues, including three annualperformance and annual reports and relevant interim reports against agreed agreed joint deliverywork plans at each meeting.
Because of the different organisational boundaries, the chair of the Highlands & Islands Delivery Group would represent MAPPA on the Leadership Group.
24.4Strategy Groups (6)
The chair and vice-chair of each strategy group will be confirmed by the Leadership Group. It is proposed that they should normally be officers with senior management responsibilities for that area of activity in one of the public agencies (other than for the Adult Support and Protection Committee, where legislation requires an independent chair).
It is proposed that tThese groups, which may also be referred to as committees as a result of legislative and national guidance requirements, will have have the followinga membership normally composed of ;
A Chief Executive / Chief Constable from the Leadership Group
CChief Officers -, such as Directors, Heads of Service or Service Managers - from each public sector agency relevant to the subject matter of the strategy group.
These groups will be expected to meet at least quarterly, to:
lead and ensure the coordinated development of strategy in that area of activity;
consider and agree joint actions within the workplan, and to oversee the delivery of those actions;
ensure performance management arrangements are robust;
support activities in each agency that ensures that outcomes are delivered and reported to the leadership group.
It is proposed that the strategy groups will have a chair identified by the Leadership Group and a vice chair.
A Chief Executive or the Chief Constable will act as a sponsor and be a link with the Leadership Group on each Strategy Group, changing around every two years (listed at Appendix 2).
There is a Government expectation that the chair of the Adult Support & protection Committee should be ‘independent’. Otherwise, this model is not recommended. It is also proposed that the other chairs should be of broadly equivalent seniority across their agencies, with particular knowledge of the issues for each strategy group.
These groups will be expected to meet quarterly, maintaining oversight of delivery plans ensuring joint objectives are achieved and deliverables are appropriately reported to the Leadership Group.
A template is provided at Appendix 3, for Groups to confirm the proposed chair and vice-chair, remit, membership and workplan.
24.5Delivery Groups (6)
It is proposed that eEach strategy group would will have an associated delivery group. These groups will comprise:
Lead Officers from appropriate public sector agencies
Senior officers from other significant service providers
The chair should be identified by and be a member oa member of the appropriate strategy group.
The aims of these groups is are to:
provide advice on the work-plan to deliver on strategy and joint objectives;
ensure effective and co-ordinated operational arrangements to achieve implementation of the work-plan;
support other identified areas of activity to deliver the workplan;
hold operational teams to account in delivery of joint objectives;
report timeously on progress, risks and barriers.
2.6develop and implement a delivery plan which will meet the joint strategic objectives as defined by the Leadership and Strategic Groups.
2.6Political Champions
It is proposed to recommend to Highland Council that an elected member is identified for each of these strategic areas, to
provide a political perspective to the activities of the strategy groups;
provide a public profile, and support the articulation of relevant issues to the wider community;
ensure that issues with regard to each strategic area, including in relation to implementation of the SOA and ‘Strengthening the Highlands’ are highlighted in appropriate political forums, including at strategic committees and at the Highland Council;
support the development and operation of governance arrangements to achieve a ‘safer Highland’.
2.7Public Protection Support TeamSupport Staff to ‘Safer Highland’ work
The Groups currently have their own dedicated support staff. They are variable in size, funded in different ways – some by central government ring fenced funding, some by local organisation funding – and cover a range of functions including ranging from strategy development and training through information and communications to administration support.
There is need to ensure that effective support is in place across all the workstreams to:-There may be opportunities to streamline the management and support functions currently in place, to:
fulfil the clerking requirements of the Leadership, Strategy and Delivery Groups;
organise and coordinate all meetings;
provide administrative support to all groups which includes development of workplans, quality assurance and training;
provide and coordinate training;
support the development and implementation of multi-agency policy and strategy.
, and this proposal involvesIt is intended that further work should be undertaken to assess the potential for better co-ordination, collaboration and cross cover between the teams including the options of streamlined management for the team as a whole. This will needfor this, to identify the benefits and disbenefits of such an approach and to scope the development of a Public Protection Support Team. which could comprise:
1 Manager
Multi-agency Policy Officers
Clerks
Trainers
Quality Assurance Officers
The purpose of this team would be to;
fulfil the clerking requirements of the Leadership, Strategy and Delivery Groups
organise and coordinate all meetings;
provide administrative support to all groups which includes development of workplans, quality assurance and training;
provide and coordinate training.
2.8Further priorities for the Leadership Group will also include:
consideration of updated Governance arrangements;
consideration of the appropriate groupings for community and public protection at the local level.
There would be capacity through the re-organisation of existing support staff, but the detail of this has still to be fully scoped.
5Implications
5.1Financial
It is envisaged that these proposals are implemented within existing resources, maximising efficiencies and economies of scale. Funding to support Adult Support & Protection is not yet allocated and is available to enable this flexible approach across the key areas. In the meantime, some co-ordination of responsibilities of other public protection support staff should be considered.
5.2Staff
This model will require a change in roles of some existing staff but will serve to reduce duplication and bureaucracy, give clearer direction to staff and widen general knowledge and understanding of the Public Protection agenda.
5.3Governance & Accountability
This model is felt to improve governance arrangements with clearer accountability to Chief Executive level. It will raise the profile of some existing groups to ensure equal status where appropriate.
5.4Impact on existing groups
The existing structures supporting the key areas in Public Protection are wide and varied. This will bring a consistent approach and clarify roles and responsibilities. The roles of current Local Implementation Groups and focus groups will need to be further explored to ensure local ownership. Clear links into existing operational structures will have to be made such as Service Management Groups, Area Community Care Managers etc
5.5Principles of Protection and Support
The role and remit of strategy and delivery groups within this model must reflect the principles which underpin the area of work. Some may be replicated across many or all groups and some may be more specific. Some examples of the former may be information sharing, early intervention and risk focus.
6Summary of Proposals
6.1The definition of public protection should include the following key areas:
Adult Support and Protection