Scribd
Upload
51 views2 pages

UK Home Office: STAFS MSF

This document provides a peer comparison of police force performance in Staffordshire and similar forces for the 2004/05 period. It evaluates each force's performance in seven key areas and gives them a grade for their performance in the last year as well as their direction of change from the previous year. Staffordshire received grades ranging from good to poor in the seven areas and showed improvement or stability in most areas according to the assessments. The full police performance assessments from 2004/05 published by the Home Office are available online for further details.

Uploaded by

UK_HomeOffice
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
51 views2 pages

UK Home Office: STAFS MSF

This document provides a peer comparison of police force performance in Staffordshire and similar forces for the 2004/05 period. It evaluates each force's performance in seven key areas and gives them a grade for their performance in the last year as well as their direction of change from the previous year. Staffordshire received grades ranging from good to poor in the seven areas and showed improvement or stability in most areas according to the assessments. The full police performance assessments from 2004/05 published by the Home Office are available online for further details.

Uploaded by

UK_HomeOffice
Copyright
© Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 2

Police Performance Assessments 2004/05 Peer Comparison

POLICE PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENTS 2004/05

PEER COMPARISON

The table below shows the performance of Staffordshire compared to its peers for
the period 1 April 2004 – 31 March 2005.

EXPLANATION

Police forces operate in different environments and it is reasonable to expect that


performance will vary because of this. By comparing forces which operate in similar
environments we are able to identify relative strengths and weaknesses. Therefore,
each force is compared to forces which are most similar to it. Peers are identified
using a range of geographic, demographic, and socio-economic information and
each force has its own unique group of peers.

The first force in the table (name in bold) is the ‘force of interest’. The other forces in
the table are its peers in alphabetic order.

Each force is assessed in seven key performance areas: Reducing Crime;


Investigating Crime; Promoting Safety; Providing Assistance; Citizen Focus;
Resource Use and Local Policing.

Two assessments are made in each of the seven areas, both of which are based on
a combination of performance data and professional judgement.

The first assessment concerns the performance delivered by a force over the last
year (2004/05). Typically, this judgment is made by comparing the performance
achieved by a force to that achieved by a group of similar forces (its peers). For each
performance area a force can be graded ‘excellent’, ‘good’, ‘fair’ or ‘poor’.

The second assessment is made on direction by comparing the performance


achieved by a force in one year to that achieved by the same force in the previous
year (ie 2004/05 compared to 2003/04). For each performance area a force can be
graded ‘improved’, ‘stable’ or ‘deteriorated’.

FURTHER INFORMATION

The Home Office and Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary published ‘Police
Performance Assessments 2004/05’ in October 2005. All assessments plus
underpinning data are available at:

http://police.homeoffice.gov.uk/performance-and-measurement/performance-assessment
Police Performance Assessments 2004/05 Peer Comparison

Reducing Investigating Promoting Providing Citizen Resource Local


Force
Crime Crime Safety Assistance Focus Use Policing

Staffordshire Good Good Good Good Fair Good Poor

Improved Improved Stable Stable Deteriorated Improved Stable

Cambridgeshire Fair Fair Fair Good Poor Poor Fair

Improved Improved Stable Stable Improved Stable Improved

Cheshire Good Fair Fair Poor Fair Fair Good

Improved Improved Stable Stable Deteriorated Improved Stable

Derbyshire Fair Fair Fair Good Fair Good Fair

Improved Improved Stable Stable Improved Improved Improved

Hampshire Good Good Good Excellent Fair Good Good

Improved Improved Improved Improved Improved Improved Improved

Leicestershire Fair Fair Good Good Fair Fair Excellent

Improved Improved Improved Stable Stable Improved Stable

Northamptonshire Poor Poor Poor Good Fair Good Poor

Improved Deteriorated Stable Stable Stable Improved Stable

Warwickshire Fair Fair Good Good Fair Good Fair

Improved Improved Improved Stable Stable Improved Stable

End

You might also like