Create your own Brochure

[Skip to content]

Search our Site
Thursday 20 July 2017
.

West Yorkshire Police Identification and Selection PPO/IOM Nominals via Corvus Scoring: Discussion Paper

Version: Tk/DT/2/1.0
Author: West Yorkshire Police; DOMU (Drugs and Offender Management Unit)

Purpose of Working Group:  To define the Police selection criteria for Integrated Offender Management and PPO identification following the IT re-specification of Police Corvus scoring

 

Representatives: (CA IOM Inspector Jim Dunkerley, CA Intelligence Adrian Knowles and Sarah El-zebedi, BA Intelligence Simon Speed, DA IOM Hub Inspector Steve Norman, AA IOM Inspector Dave Westwood, FA Intelligence Alanna Pilling, DOMU Head of Performance and Commissioning Bev Taylor, Matt Hirst Performance Manager and Simon Phillips Project Officer).

 

Discussion

Bev Taylor set the background, the parameters of decisions already made and outcomes expected from the debate.  These were: WYP have procured Corvus as the Intelligence tool to make sense of Niche police custody data

 

The group noted:

 

  • Manual scoring by DOMU Performance and Intelligence teams is still required until the Automated Corvus scoring goes live.

  • That Corvus scoring will not capture previous convictions and these need to be re-searched from PNC to be considered alongside all other indicators.

  • Once automated Corvus will provide a list of people  who attain the required level of scoring as an indicator for selection/entry into the IOM model therefore removing any subjectivity

  • All intelligence on Niche as defined by the current scoring methodology will be scored. The impact of this may be Intelligence scores will be inflated and some intelligence may not be relevant. Therefore it was stressed that the Corvus scoring can only ever be an indicator for initial selection.

  • Divisions MUST apply professional judgement to further research the scored intelligence

  • The importance of the role of partner agencies own selection and assessment criteria.

  • The standard Police colour bandings (Red, Amber and Green) of the current Matrix placed unintended emphasis upon certain nominals. This had led to confusion particularly within divisions and NPT teams as to what priority they should provide and why

  • Corvus did not provide a separate scoring for nominals who are under 18 and who have not already been identified by YOT as DYO.  ( eg IOM juveniles) 

  • Home Office new National Guidance suggests large CDRPs should have a PPO cohort of between 90 and 100. It was discussed that this should not be a simple mathematical division between the numbers of divisions within a particular CDRP but the numbers should be risk based to ensure resources followed risk. Specifically relevant to Leeds CDRP and the decision to cap its PPO cohort at 90

  • De-selection

 

 

Recommendations

1.     Red Amber Green identification to be discontinued

2.    New Terminology for the bandings to facilitate prioritisation of resources :

The new terms proposed are:-

 

PPO Consideration

Corvus Score 200+ (PPOs to be serious acquisitive crime conviction based selections)

IOM Case management

Corvus Score 150-199

Entry Level

Min Corvus Score 70-149

 

3.    Further research for relevant intelligence to The Force current priority MUST  be undertaken by DIU’s   

4.    Consider de-selection from cohort if considered offender management is with the Rehabilitation and Resettlement HUB and that the nominal has been at liberty for 6 months and during that time there has been no recorded offences (including charge/arrest) and/ or relevant intelligence.

5.     Consider de-selection from cohort with a Corvus score of less than 70 and use any changes in scoring as an evidence of IOM success.

6.    As part of the Intelligence reviews, being conducted by the DOMU intelligence DCI, an action plan be developed to  educate NPT teams  leading to provision of better quality rather than quantify intelligence submissions within divisions and for this action plan to be driven at Divisional Commander level  to support both the quality of selections and also Divisional tasking.

 

The working group request that recommendations 1 to 6 are agreed and taken forward by the WY IOM Executive group