APPENDIX B

 

Strategic Assessment

2014-15

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CONTENTS

 

1.				Executive Summary
				1.1  Overview
				1.2  Key Facts
2.				Introduction
				2.1  Maidstone Community Safety Partnership
				2.2  The purpose of this Strategic Assessment
				2.3  The background to Strategic Assessments
				2.4  The Strategic Assessment in Context
3.				Maidstone Crime, Outcomes and Perceptions of Crime
				3.1  Annual changes - 3 year time series
				3.2  Crime resolution outcome rates
				3.3  Perceptions of crime – Kent Crime and Victimisation Survey
4.				Performance 2012/13: Progress on Current Priorities
				4.1  Anti-Social Behaviour
				4.2  Domestic Abuse
				4.3  Substance Misuse
				4.4  Road Safety – Killed & Seriously Injured 17-24 year olds
				4.5  Reducing Re-offending
5.				Emerging Issues 2014 – 2015 and Recommendations
				5.1  Introduction
				5.2  Violent Crime
				5.2.1  Domestic Abuse
				5.2.2  Night-Time Economy
				5.3  Anti-Social Behaviour
				5.4  Substance Misuse
				5.5  Reducing Re-Offending
				5.6  Road Safety
				5.7  Theft (Shoplifting)
				5.8  Cross-cutting Themes
				5.9  Recommendations to Safer Maidstone Partnership
6.				Implementation and Monitoring
7.				Strategic Assessment Review Date
8.				How to get further information
				APPENDICES
				Appendix 1 – Methodology and Information Sources
				Appendix 2 – Contextual information
				Appendix 3 - Terrorism
				Appendix 4 - Glossary of Terms

1.    Executive Summary

 

1.1  Overview

 

1.1.1  Crime in Kent and Medway 2012/13

In the period April 2012 to March 2013 across Kent and Medway crime fell by 3.2%, or 3,227 crimes.  For the first time, total recorded crime fell to under 100,000 crimes.  This reduction means that as at March 2013, Kent was ranked third in its most similar group, and 21^st nationally.  Recorded crime fell in eight out of 12 districts, the exceptions being Ashford, Gravesham, Sevenoaks and Shepway.

 

The chart below shows the rolling year and average crime total for Kent and Medway up to March 2013.  The two red lines are the computed upper and lower statistical process control (SPC) limits for the crime data which shows that crime in Kent has reduced from around 102,000-104,000 crimes per year in October 2011 to around 96,000-98,000 crimes per year by March 2013.  In addition, the range ‘bandwidth’ has narrowed from around 5,000 crimes in February 2012 to under 3,000 in March 2013 which indicates that the total level of crime in Kent and Medway has become more predicable with fewer statistical ‘outliers’.

 

Recorded Crime SPC Chart – Kent Police Force total

1.1.2  Crime in Maidstone April 2012 to March 2013

Crime in Maidstone fell by 6.5% in the period April 2012 to March 2013.  This compares with a fall of 12.9% in the previous year, and 0.6% the year before that.  There were small increases in reported incidences of dwelling burglary, violent crime and violence against the person, but much larger increases in shoplifting and theft from motor vehicles.  Set against this were reductions in reported anti-social behaviour (-19.6%), criminal damage (-8.5%), sexual offences (-13.2%) and theft offences (-8.0%).  In addition, the number of deliberate fires was more than halved, and fewer road users killed or seriously injured.  The decrease in crime in 2012/13 meant that Maidstone improved its position relative to other Kent districts from 6^th place in 2011/12 (54.4 crimes per 1,000 population) to 5^th place county-wide (53.3 crimes per 1,000 population).  (See Section 3 for further details).

 

1.1.3  Crime in Maidstone April to September 2013

In contrast to the decrease in recorded crime in 2012/13, the first two quarters of 2013/14 covering the period April to September 2013 have seen a marked increase in recorded crime.  Maidstone reported an additional 602 offences, an increase of 14.9% compared with the same 2 quarters in 2012/13.  Four fifths (481) of this increase occurred in the second quarter of 2013 (July-Sept).  Maidstone had the 5^th highest increase in crime out of the twelve Kent districts and the 7^th highest crime rate per 1,000 population.  It should be noted that at quarter 1 Maidstone had third lowest increase in offences for the quarter 1 period.

 

Overall, Kent districts (excluding Medway) experienced a 12.2% increase in all crime when comparing to the year to date 2013/14 to the same period in 2012/13, with 4,965 more reports.  All of the Kent districts saw an increase in the number of reported crimes for this period.  Thanet had the largest increase in overall crime for the year so far with an additional 937 reports compared to 2012/13; this equates to an 18.7% increase.  Thanet also has the highest volume of crimes overall and the highest crime rate relative to its population at 44.32 crimes per 1,000 people, this is the same as position that was reported at quarter 1.

 

1.1.4  Kent Police and Crime Commissioner

Government legislation (the Police Reform & Social Responsibility Act 2011) introduced elected Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs).  PCC’s apply to every police force (apart from the Metropolitan Police in London).  Elections took place on 15 November 2012, and the newly elected PCC took over from Kent Police Authority on 22 November 2012. 

 

The PCC now determines:

·      The policing strategy for Kent & Medway

·      The force budget

·      The police element (or precept) of the Council Tax

·      The appointment (and if necessary dismissal) of the Chief Constable.

 

The legislation requires the PCC to issue a Police & Crime Plan.  The Kent Police & Crime Plan was published in April 2013 and runs from 1 April 2013 to 31 March 2017, with annual reviews.  The plan sets out the Commissioner’s vision and priorities for policing in the county which includes placing victims first, focusing on reducing crime and anti-social behaviour and protecting the public from harm.

 

PCC’s have a duty to cooperate with the broader Criminal Justice System, but are not a responsible authority on the Safer Maidstone Partnership.  PCC’s will be scrutinised by the Police and Crime Panel (PCP).  The PCP will scrutinise the actions of the commissioner, but not the Police Force.  For the present, all community safety partnerships will be required to undertake an annual Strategic Assessment.  However, the PCC may require a county-wide rationalisation of Strategic Assessments at a later date.

 

1.1.5  Kent Community Safety Agreement 2011-14

The following priorities were identified for 2011/12 as those with the potential to benefit from being supported at a county level, with the cross-cutting themes to be addressed within each priority.  These priorities have been reviewed annually and remained unchanged for both 2012/13 and 2013/14:-

 

         

 

1.1.6  Kent Community Safety Agreement 2014-17

The current Community Safety Agreement (CSA) remains in effect until March 2014 and a new multi-agency document covering the next three years from April 2014 to March 2017 is in the process of being developed by Kent Community Safety Unit.

 

There have been many changes since the last agreement was developed, including a mutual duty on the PCC and CSPs to cooperate to reduce crime, disorder and re-offending.  As a result, the development of the new agreement has been aligned with the annual review of the Police and Crime Plan, as well as future developments in relation to commissioning by the Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) and all budget setting processes.  These changes will hopefully help to ensure a dovetailing of priorities and a greater likelihood of crossover between partners providing opportunities for joint working and ideally more opportunity for investment in community safety generally.

 

KCC Community Safety Agreement Suggested Priorities:

Datasets from partner agencies have been sourced and analysed to look at volume and trends as well as comparing them to national datasets where possible.  The outcome of this initial analysis are the following emerging county-wide priorities:

·         Domestic Abuse

·         Anti-Social Behaviour

·         Violent Crime

·         Acquisitive Crime / Burglary

·         Substance Misuse

 

At a Kent community safety partnership workshop in October 2013, another priority in addition to the five above was also suggested, that of Road Safety.

1.2  Key Facts April 2012 to March 2013

 

Key crime statistics are summarised in this section: they should not be read out of context and are a guide to key crime highlights in 2012-13.

 

In 2012-13 all crime reduced by 577 from 8,873 crimes in 2011-12 to 8,296.  Over the four years 2009-10 to 20012-13 crime in Maidstone has fallen 11.8%, or over 1,000 fewer crimes per year.  

 

In all but four crime categories (criminal damage, percentage of domestic violence repeat victims, shoplifting and theft), Maidstone improved or maintained its position relative to the other 11 district councils in Kent.  Exceptional improvements in county rankings were for all crime (from 6^th position up to 5^th), in Burglary Dwelling (from 5^th up to 3^rd), Robbery (from 4^th place up to 3^rd), Theft From a Motor Vehicle (from 6^th up to 4^th place), and Theft Of a Motor Vehicle (up from 8^th place to 7^th).

 

Anti-Social Behaviour (ASB) reduced in Maidstone by nearly 20% or over a 1,000 fewer crimes.  The number of ASB incidents per 1,000 population has reduced from 32.9 to 27.7, although Maidstone’s county ranking remains 4^th.  The KCC average is 31.9 per 1,000 population.

 

At ward level High Street, Park Wood and Fant wards recorded the highest volumes of ASB with 911, 342 and 333 recorded incidents respectively for the period April 2012 to March 2013.  These three wards accounted for 36% of all ASB incidents in Maidstone.  Reducing ASB is the top priority of the Police and Crime Commissioner, and will remain a priority for the SMP.

 

The recorded number of incidents of Domestic Abuse decreased in 2012-13 by 79 incidents (4.2%) from 1,867, down to 1,788.  There was also a decrease in the number of repeat victims (from 451 to 435), although the percentage of repeat victims rose slightly (0.1%) from 24.2% to 24.3%.  Across Kent there was a 2.3% rise in the number of repeat victims of DA.  Given the well researched evidence that domestic violence is a most underreported crime, with an estimated 35 occurrences before a victim feels able to report, this is an area that should remain a focus for the Partnership.

 

Drug offences decreased from 422 in 2011-12 to 415 in 2012-13, a fall of 7 offences (1.7%).  Maidstone is now ranked 10^th in the County, (compared with 11^th place county-wide in 2011-12).  Our rate per 1,000 population of 2.66 is above the County level of 2.16.

 

At ward level, High Street ward had the highest volume of drug offences (204 offences, or 49% of all reported drug offences in Maidstone), ranking highest in the county with a rate of 20.9 per 1,000 population and thus, despite recent improvements, this area should remain a focus for the Partnership.

 

Road Safety:  Casualties from road traffic accidents increased by 26 (4.1%) from 640 in 2011-12 to 666 in 2012-13, although this has reduced from 726 in 2008.  The rate of increase is much higher than the county-wide increase of 0.5%.  However, the number of KSI casualties have reduced slightly from 59 to 58, a 53% reduction from 89 in 2008.

 

Maidstone continues to record the highest number of RTC casualties in the county.  At ward level, Boxley ward had the highest count of RTC casualties (100) in Maidstone, and was the 2^nd highest ward in Kent (after Brasted Ward in Sevenoaks).  The 17-24 age group continues to be over-represented in RTC’s and thus will remain an SMP prioritiy.

 

 

Reducing Re-Offending: In 2009 a National Audit Office report estimated that re-offending by young ex-prisoners costs between £8.5 to £11 billion per year.  https://www.nao.org.uk/report/the-youth-justice-system-in-england-and-wales-reducing-offending-by-young-people/.  Reducing re-offending has been a statutory duty of community safety partnerships since 1st April 2010, and is one of the cross-cutting themes of the Kent Community Safety Agreement 2011-14.  Preventing further offences reduces the number of victims, and the damage done to local families and communities.  Reducing re-offending cuts across other SMP priorities, especially Substance Misuse and Domestic Abuse.

 

Each quarter the Ministry of Justice publish local re-offending rates.  In 2010 it was identified that Kent’s overall performance and Maidstone’s local performance was not as good as it should be.  In March 2012 the actual re-offending rate for Maidstone was 8% higher than the predicted rate.  Since 2010 the actual re-offending rate has reduced and as at September 2012 was 5.22% below the predicted rate, which places Maidstone top when compared to the other 11 districts in Kent.  The Reducing Re-offending Sub-Group will continue to drive forward multi-agency work across the 7 Resettlement Pathways and to add value to each others work in terms of effectiveness and impact on offenders and victims.

 

Violence against the person increased slightly by 1.7%, from 1,543 incidents to 1,570.  Within this overall figure burglary of dwellings offences has increased by 1.6%, and robbery by 1 offence to 47 offences.  Overall, Maidstone continues to be ranked 6^th in the county for violent offences.

 

Theft and handling stolen goods continues to decrease 8.0% to 2,638 although Maidstone’s ranking fell from 8^th to 9^th.  Shoplifting offences have seen a rise from 913 to 994 offences (8.9%), which ranks Maidstone in 10^th place in the county.

 

Vehicle crime: Whilst theft from a motor vehicle increased  by 8.9% to 577 incidents, theft of motor vehicles decreased by 42 to 167 incidents in 2012/13.  Despite these mixed results, Maidstone improved its county-wide ranking in these two crime categories rank from 6^th to 4^th (theft from) and from 8^th  up to 7^th (theft of) place county-wide.

 

The number of Deliberate Fires more than halved from 178 fires down to -76 fires.

2.    Introduction

 

2.1  Maidstone Community Safety partnership

 

The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 required local councils, police and other agencies to set up Crime and Disorder Reductions Partnerships (CDRPs) and to work together to tackle local crime problems.  In Maidstone the CDRP is called the ‘Safer Maidstone Partnership’ and is referred to as the SMP.

 

The SMP brings together people from local government, the NHS, the police, the fire service, probation, local businesses, housing providers and voluntary and community organisations to work as a team to tackle issues such as crime, education, health, housing, unemployment and the environment in Maidstone Borough.

 

SMP membership is made up of the public sector agencies (Kent County Council, Maidstone Borough Council, Kent Police, Kent Police Authority, NHS, Kent Fire and Rescue Service, KDAAT, Kent Probation Service and Maidstone Prison) and also incorporates members from other key partners including Maidstone Mediation, Kenward Trust, Golding Homes and Maidstone Town Centre Management.  The SMP is chaired by Cllr John Wilson, MBC Cabinet Member for Communities and Leisure Services.  The SMP’s objectives are to:

·           Promote Maidstone as a safe place to live;

·           Take a preventative approach to tackle and reduce anti-social behaviour;

·           Reduce violent crime and reduce serious crime in the wards where the trend is higher than the borough average;

·           Reduce alcohol related crime in the town centre and identified rural locations;

·           Reduce re-offending to at least our predicted rate;

·           Reduce drug offences;

·           Tackle domestic abuse;

·           Reduce those killed or seriously injured on our roads.

 

Community Safety Unit

The Maidstone Community Safety Unit (CSU) continues to grow.  In the past year, existing Borough Council and Kent Police staff have been joined by partners from Kent Community Wardens, and local Registered Providers, such as Golding Homes.  In the coming months other partners including the Integrated Offender Management Unit and Licensing will also be based within the CSU.  Increasing the range of partners working as part of the CSU is a key priority to ensure community safety related issues are tackled holistically.

 

Partnership working in two-tier areas

The strategic assessment must outline the priorities to escalate to the county level.  Kent County Council prepares a community safety agreement based on the individual strategic assessments of partnerships within the county.  The county community safety agreement identifies:

·               Ways of co-ordinating across the county to address priorities;

·               How the responsible authorities might contribute to reducing crime, disorder and substance misuse through closer joint working across the county.

 

 

 

 

 

2.2  The purpose of this Strategic Assessment

 

This crime and disorder Strategic Assessment is prepared on behalf of the Safer Maidstone Partnership (SMP) to inform strategic planning and commissioning priorities for the community safety partnership.  This is the Strategic Assessment is for the period April 2014 to March 2015 and puts in place the priorities and planned activities for the 2012-17 Community Safety Partnership Plan.

 

The strategic assessment is part of an intelligence process that is used to help tackle crime and disorder and to improve community safety.  It provides a knowledge and understanding of local community safety concerns and considers what needs to be achieved to help improve community safety, including how the community can feel assured and confident that their concerns and fears are being addressed.  Emerging priorities are identified through intelligence analysis of patterns, trends and shifts relating to crime and disorder in the Maidstone borough.  It is produced annually and complemented by regular assessments that monitor CSP activities.

 

2.3  The background to Strategic Assessments

 

In 2006, a review of the partnership provisions of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and the Police Reform Act 2002 led to a series of recommendations to strengthen and extend existing requirements further through the experience gained from partnership working.  This resulted in a new set of national minimum standards which came into force in August 2007.  The 1998 Act included the requirement to produce a detailed crime and disorder audit through consultation with key agencies and the wider community and had to use the findings to identify strategic priorities and set targets and performance measures.  The new national standards placed a legal obligation on responsible authorities to comply with the specified requirements, one of which was the creation of a strategic assessment in place of the previous 3 yearly audit.

 

The introduction of strategic assessments hoped to move partnerships toward a more intelligence-led business planning approach.  It was also hoped that by removing the need to produce a three year audit and replacing it with the requirement to produce a strategic assessment at least yearly, partnerships will improve their understanding of problems and their potential causes and thus respond more effectively to the communities they serve.

 

2.4  The Strategic Assessment in context

         

The Strategic Assessment does not exist in isolation, but is linked to a number of partnership strategies and plans (see Chart 1 below).  The Strategic Assessment informs the work of the Safer Maidstone Partnership and is a key document which feeds into partners’ service and operational plans.

 

The Maidstone Sustainable Community Strategy is the topmost level of policy making for the locality.  It was first published in 2009 and its purpose is to set the overall strategic direction and long-term vision for the economic, social and environmental wellbeing of Maidstone.  The Sustainable Community Strategy was refreshed in July 2013 link

http://www.maidstone.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/19153/Maidstone-Sustainable-Community-Strategy-2009-2020-July-2013.pdf

 

          The Crime and Disorder Act 1998 gave statutory responsibility to local authorities, the police, and key partners to reduce crime and disorder in their communities.  A review of the 1998 Act took place in 2006, which resulted in a revision to these requirements.  Under this legislation district/borough level Community Safety Partnerships (CSPs) were required to produce an annual Strategic Assessment in place of 3 yearly crime and disorder audits.  For two tier authorities such as Kent, a statutory Community Safety Agreement was introduced to develop a more joined-up approach to public service delivery, enable more effective and co-ordinated strategic planning across partner agencies and to ensure sustainable and lasting improvements in delivering outcomes.

 

          The Kent Community Safety Agreement sets out how partners in Kent will work together to address the key community safety priorities for the County, identifying the shared objectives and outcomes required to improve the lives of the people of Kent. https://shareweb.kent.gov.uk/Documents/community-and-living/community-safety/community-safety-unit/Kent%20Community%20Safety%20Agreement%202011-14.pdf).

 

Chart 1 overleaf shows how the Strategic Assessment informs the Partnership Plan and how both inform the Maidstone Partnership Board and sit alongside national and county level policy documents.  The current organisation chart for the Safer Maidstone partnership is at page 6.

Chart 1: Strategic Assessment - Policy and Strategy linkages

 

 

Chart 2 – Safer Maidstone Partnership organisation

3.    Maidstone Crime and Perceptions of Crime Overview

3.1  Annual changes - 3 year time series[1]

Category	2010/ 2011	2011/ 2012	2012/ 2013[2]	Volume change[3]	% Change	Per 1k pop[4]	County Rank[5]
All Crime	9,354	8,873	8,296	-577	-6.5%	53.2	5 ↑
Anti-Social Behaviour	5,254	5,382	4,326	-1,056	-19.6%	27.77	4 ←
Assaults resulting in hospital admissions	N/A	80	59	-21	-26.3%	0.38	10 ↑
Burglary – Dwelling	400	431	438	7	1.6%	6.90	3 ↑
Burglary – Other	679	681	639	-42	-6.2%	4.10	6 ↑
Criminal Damage	1,574	1,395	1.277	-118	-8.5%	8.20	3 ↓
Domestic Abuse (DA) – number of incidents	1,832	1,867	1,788	-79	-4.2%	14.20	5 ←
DA - number of repeat victims	440	451	435	-16	-3.5%	3.45	5 ←
DA -  % repeat victims	24.0%	24.2%	24.3%	0.1%	N/A	N/A	6 ↓
Drug Offences	501	422	415	-7	-1.7%	2.66[6]	10 ↑
Metal Theft	N/A	182	274	92	50.5%	1.76	3 ↑
Re-offending rate:  % difference between actual v predicted rate	19.9%	8.03%	-5.22%	N/A	N/A	N/A	1
Robbery	48	46	47	1	2.2%	0.3	3 ↑
Sexual Offences	118	129	112	-17	-13.2%	0.72	5 ←
Shoplifting	971	913	994	81	8.9%	6.38	10 ↓
Theft & Handling Stolen Goods	2,983	2,868	2,638	-230	-8.0%	17.41	9 ↓
Theft from a Motor Vehicle	600	530	577	47	8.9%	3.7	4 ↑
Theft of a Motor Vehicle	281	209	167	-42	-20.1%	1.07	7 ↑
Theft of Pedal Cycle	141	120	117	-3	-2.5%	0.75	4 ←
Other Theft Offences	1,871	1,835	1,527	-308	-16.8%	9.80	9 ↓
Violent Crime	1,674	1,718	1,729	11	0.6%	11.10	6 ←
Violence Against the Person	1,508	1,543	1,570	27	1.7%	10.08	6 ←
Accidental Fires	N/A	261	187	-74	-28.4%	N/A	10 ↓
Deliberate Fires	N/A	178	76	-102	-57.3%	N/A	3 ↑
RTCs – all casualties	657	640	666	26	4.1%	N/A	12 ←
KSI casualties All ages	60	59	58	-1	-1.7%	N/A	11 ←
KSI casualties <16 yrs	4	5	4	-1	-20%	N/A	7 ↑
KSI car drivers 17-24 yrs[7]	6	3	5	2	66.6%	0.32	=11 ↓
KSI road users aged 65 and over	5	13	4	-9	-225%	0.25	=7 ↑

3.2  Maidstone Resolution outcome rate – April – December 2013

 

													Financial year
	Apr 13	May 13	Jun 13	Jul 13	Aug 13	Sep 13	Oct 13	Nov 13	Dec 13	Jan 14	Feb 14	Mar 14		Apr to Dec 2013
Volume	684	723	765	793	804	874	796	805	693	710	651	709		6,937
Outcomes	203	236	272	260	245	277	242	285	228	288	218	268		2,248
Outcome rate	29.7%	32.6%	35.6%	32.8%	30.5%	31.7%	30.4%	35.4%	32.9%	40.6%	33.5%	37.8%		32.4%

 

2012/13 baseline = 37.6% Outcome rate

 

All crime definition (for resolution outcomes)
Police and Crime Plan
Month	Recorded crime	Resolution outcomes	Resolution outcome rate			Charge		Caution		Taken into Consideration		Penalty Notice for Disorder		Family Work Conflict
Mar-12	690	247	35.8%			106		50		27		31		9
Apr-12	656	170	25.9%			94		41		3		18		3
May-12	758	280	36.9%			132		42		29		36		13
Jun-12	637	278	43.6%			144		36		39		30		1
Jul-12	637	259	40.7%			106		53		39		22		8
Aug-12	668	258	38.6%			137		63		11		28		7
Sep-12	685	302	44.1%			132		50		40		23		3
Oct-12	710	285	40.1%			130		64		3		28		11
Nov-12	734	281	38.3%			146		59		4		17		7
Dec-12	741	229	30.9%			122		49		17		15		4
Jan-13	710	288	40.6%			146		65		17		21		7
Feb-13	651	218	33.5%			123		50		2		21		8
Mar-13	709	268	37.8%			150		49		7		25		7
Total 2012-13	8986	3363	37.4%			1668		671		238		315		88

 

Apr-13	684	203	29.7%		116	39	6	17	12
May-13	723	236	32.6%		122	40	11	19	7
Jun-13	765	272	35.6%		146	62	2	14	10
Jul-13	793	260	32.8%		137	63	6	8	3
Aug-13	804	245	30.5%		156	38	2	13	9
Sep-13	874	277	31.7%		173	51	0	19	7
Oct-13	796	242	30.4%		143	49	1	17	15
Nov-13	805	285	35.4%		168	67	7	14	12
Dec-13	693	228	32.9%		134	52	1	15	7
Apr-Dec 2013	6937	2248	32.4%		1295	461	36	136	82

3.3  Perceptions of Crime - The Kent Crime and Victimisation Survey – survey methodology

 

3.3.1  Survey methodology

The Kent Crime and Victimisation Survey (KCVS) is a telephone survey conducted quarterly by Kent Police which aims to find out whether residents have experienced various types of household and personal crime in the last year.  As well as looking at perceptions of crime, worry, feelings of safety, perceptions of anti-social behaviour, the survey also looks at confidence in the police and the Criminal Justice System.

 

The survey was set up in 2005 targeting adults over 17 yrs.  The use of a random sample aims to ensure the results are statistically representative of the local population.  The overall sample size is 3,000.  All districts have a sample size of 216, with the exception of Medway which has 408 surveys. The telephone numbers used to contact Kent residents are provided by an external company and the sample is randomly computer generated. Also of note, households are not re-surveyed within 12 months.

 

3.3.2  The graphs below show Maidstone’s performance across a range of ASB categories compared to the other 11 district council’s in Kent.  The accompanying tables show Maidstone’s results for the last 3 years, and our county-wide ranking and the KCC average.

 

Graph 1 - Vandalism, graffiti or deliberate damage was a very or fairly big problem in their local area – Kent districts.

 

Category	2010/ 2011	2011/ 2012	2012/ 2013	County position	KCC average
% of people saying vandalism, graffiti or deliberate damage was a very or fairly big problem in their local area	10.4%	5.6%	5.4%	2	9.9%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Graph 2 - Rubbish or litter lying around was a very or fairly big problem in their local area Kent districts

 

Category	2010/ 2011	2011/ 2012	2012/ 2013	County position	KCC average
% of people saying rubbish or litter lying around was a very or fairly big problem in their local area	19.8%	13.8%	15.0%	5	17.5%

 

Graph 3 - Fly tipping was a very or fairly big problem in their local area Kent districts

 

Category	2010/ 2011	2011/ 2012	2012/ 2013	County position	KCC average
% of people saying fly tipping was a very or fairly big problem in their local area	10.2%	9.2%	10.2%	8	9.3%

 

 

 

 

Speeding vehicles were a very or fairly big problem in their local area Kent districts –

% saying speeding vehicles was a very or fairly big problem in their area

 

Maidstone	2010/ 2011	2011/ 2012	2012/ 2013	County position	KCC average
% of people saying speeding vehicles were a very or fairly big problem in their local area	25.0%	26.1%	26.9%	8	26.7%

 

Thanet had the highest ‘percentage of people saying speeding vehicles was a very or fairly big problem in their area’ at 30.2%.

 

Swale had the lowest figure at 23% and saw a decrease of 3.4 points.  Tonbridge and Malling saw the largest increase of 7.8 percentage points, from 17.8% to 25.6%

 

 

Graph 5 - Drunk or rowdy in public was a very or fairly big problem in their local area Kent districts

 

Category	2010/ 2011	2011/ 2012	2012/ 2013	County position	KCC average
% of people saying being drunk or rowdy in public was a very or fairly big problem in their local area	6.2%	7.5%	8.4%	6	9.6%

 

Graph 6 - People using or dealing drugs was a very or fairly big problem in their local area Kent districts

 

Category	2010/ 2011	2011/ 2012	2012/ 2013	County position	KCC average
% of people saying people using or dealing drugs was a very or fairly big problem in their local area	4.8%	4.2%	5.9%	5	6.5%

 

Graph 7 - Teenagers hanging around were a very or fairly big problem in their local area Kent districts

 

Category	2010/ 2011	2011/ 2012	2012/ 2013	County position	KCC average
% of people who consider teenagers hanging around was a very or fairly big problem in their local area	16.9%	8.8%	8.1%	2	10.6%

 

4.    Performance 2012-2013: Progress on current priorities

 

The Safer Maidstone Partnership priorities for 2012-2013 were:

 

Antisocial Behaviour – To reduce all aspects of ASB: To reduce the number of young people being victimised or involved in criminal behaviour.  To continue to work with partners, including Children’s Trusts to promote methods of diverting vulnerable young people away from crime and disorder. In addition, to work with partners to ensure that opportunities for sport and leisure are also promoted as a method of crime diversion.

 

Domestic Abuse - To work with partners to reduce incidents of domestic abuse, particularly in relation to repeat offenders and increased awareness and reporting.

 

Substance Misuse – To reduce the harm done by alcohol and drugs by further developing the three strands of education, intervention and enforcement, particularly in relation to binge and under-age drinking and the night time economy.

 

Road Safety – Working across agencies, to continue to reduce the number of persons (especially young road users aged 17-24 yrs) Killed or Seriously Injured on Maidstone’s roads through a combination of education, information and enforcement.

 

Reducing Re-offending:

·           To come to a view of what success in preventing re-offending may look like;

·           To understand what the data is showing;

·           To gain a better understanding of which agencies are doing what in terms of the 7[8] resettlement pathways;

·           To add value to each agencies work in terms of effectiveness and impact on offenders and victims.

 

4.1  Anti-Social Behaviour

 

Although the evidence shows that overall Maidstone continues to be ranked 4^th in the county for ASB incidents per 1,000 population, (up from 5^th in the County in 2011/12), at ward level High Street, Park Wood and Fant wards recorded the highest volumes of ASB with 911, 342 and 333 recorded incidents respectively.  In terms of public perception, the relatively highly concentrated nature of ASB in Maidstone means that overall the borough performs well compared with the rest of Kent.  Despite the large night time economy (NTE), public perceptions of drunk or rowdy behaviour or teenagers hanging about are well below Kent average levels.

 

Despite the decrease in ASB incidents, and given that much ASB occurs away from the town centre, there remains a need to support both town centre safe socialising and more focussed work in specific locations, including rural ‘hotspots’.  The ASB Sub-Group has:

·                Hosted the weekly SMP Partnership Tasking and Action Group meeting (including MBC and Kent Police ASB teams, PCSOs, KCC Wardens, Kenward Trust, and Registered Providers etc.) to identify cases and hot-spots and promote joint working.

·                Directed operations and supervision (undertaken by police and MBC Licensing Officers) eg Hallowe’en & 5th November at hot-spot locations.

·                Worked with licence holders through the Night-time Economy Forum and other direct liaison

·                Promoted Maidstone as a safe place to visit for leisure and entertainment.

·                Worked with local schools and hospitals to develop initiatives – such as ‘Wasted’ - aimed at raising young people’s awareness of the dangers of drugs and alcohol through the SMP Substance Misuse Sub-Group.

·                Supported the work of the SMP ASB sub-group and ‘Prevent and Deter’ to ensure early intervention for young people.

·                Supported a harm-based approach to managing ASB by prioritising victims of ASB using risk identification and assessment as a key part of the response process.

·                Supported the SMP Communication Plan to ensure that an accurate and balanced view is given on community safety and ASB.

·                Promoted schemes that identify and work with vulnerable children who may become involved in ASB.

·                Ensured Section 106 contributions are secured to ensure appropriate crime prevention measures are considered at the earlier stage of the design process in order to prevent ASB and crime.

·                Developed and promoted Youth Diversionary Activity:

Ø   Don’t Abuse the Booze – a two year in-school and on-street youth education programme

Ø   SNAP discos and KIYS Gigs

Ø   Community football & boxing

Ø   Switch on the Music

Ø   ‘In the ‘Stone’ youth website

Ø   Zeroth Gym

Ø   Hotfoot and D-Max play schemes

 

4.2  Domestic Abuse

 

Evidence shows that in Maidstone Domestic Abuse has decreased (by 79 incidents, from 1,867 to 1,788), raising Maidstone from 6^th in the County to 5th.  However, given the underreported nature of domestic abuse, this is an area that should remain a focus for the Partnership, particularly given the continuing economic austerity which can place households under stress.  During 2012/13 the role of DA Sub-Group has been assumed by the Maidstone Domestic Violence Forum, a registered charity.  The Forum has:

·                Worked with the main social housing providers to increase awareness of DA issues;

·                Supported the establishment of a DA One-Stop Shop to ensure all services are available under one roof;

·                Supported the Specialist Domestic Violence Court and the work of the Independent Domestic Violence Advisors;

·                Delivered domestic abuse prevention training to primary and secondary schools, through the Rising Sun project ‘Love Shouldn’t Hurt’ programme;

·                Delivered two poster publicity campaigns;

·                Delivered training for DA practitioners in recent legislation;

·                Refreshed the Domestic Violence Handbook;

·                Drafted a robust Action Plan, aligned with the Community Safety Plan.  The five priority areas for the Maidstone Domestic Violence Forum Action Plan are:

Ø   Increase the awareness of both the extent and impact of domestic abuse within the local community and across various agencies

Ø   Promote and improve co-operation and co-ordination across key partnership agencies in order to facilitate consistent and well informed policy and practice responses to domestic abuse

Ø   Improve the support and safety of those who experience or are threatened by domestic abuse

Ø   Improve the protection and support for children/young people affected by domestic abuse

Ø   Make perpetrators more accountable for their actions

 

4.3  Substance Misuse

 

Although drug offences have reduced slightly by 1.7% (7 fewer offences), offences per 1,000 population are above the County average, and Maidstone lies in 10^th place overall County-wide.  To tackle this, during 2012/13 the Substance Misuse Sub-Group has:

·                Directed operations and supervision (to be undertaken by police and MBC Licensing Officers) to ensure that premises are well run;

·                Worked with licence holders through the Night-time Economy Forum and other direct liaison;

·                Promoted Maidstone as a safe place to visit for leisure and entertainment;

·                Worked with local schools and hospitals to develop initiatives – such as Theatre ADAD’s ‘Wasted’ - aimed at raising young people’s awareness of the dangers of drugs and alcohol through the SMP Substance Misuse Sub-Group;

·                Overseen the delivery of the Don’t Abuse The Booze project, a two year project with a ‘whole borough’ integrated approach to firmly tackle problem drinking head-on by:

Ø   Developing a comprehensive programme of alcohol education in our schools, Pupil Referral Units (PRUs) and colleges;

Ø   Proactively reducing ‘pre-fuelling’ and binge-drinking;

Ø   Challenging alcohol fuelled anti-social behaviour in identified ‘hot-spots’ in town centre and rural locations;

Ø   Reduce excess emergency ambulance call-outs and A&E admissions.

 

The integrated approach will have a direct impact on reducing the four key harms arising from alcohol abuse: harms to health, harms to public order, harms to productivity and harms to families and society.

 

4.4  Road Safety – Killed and Injured 17-24 Year Olds

 

Evidence shows that road safety has improved on Maidstone’s road over the last 10 years.  However, young drivers in the 17-24 age group experience a disproportionate number of RTC’s, and the collisions they have are more serious. The Road Safety Sub-Group has:

·                Proactively targeted young drivers and drivers of two-wheeled vehicles.

·                Promoted focused campaigns on discouraging drink driving and using mobile phones.

·                Worked with the hospitals, A&E, Primary Care Trust and GPs to improve data collection.

·                Engaged with the business community (which often includes young drivers).

·                Developed a joint communications and community engagement strategy with partners.

·                Supported KFRS to promote their demonstration/learning events:

Ø   Car’n’Age

Ø   Carmageddon

Ø   Rush

Ø   Jack & Jill

Ø   Licence to Kill

 

4.5  Reducing Re-offending

 

Reducing re-offending was adopted as the SMP’s 5^th priority following an analysis of Maidstone’s actual re-offending rate against what its expected rate should be.  A re-offending sub-group was established in August with representatives from the Police, Probation, YOT, IOM and HM Prison Maidstone.  The purpose of the sub-group has been established as:

·         To understand what data is available and what it shows

·         Preventing re-offending by core nominals

·         To gain a better understanding of what agencies are doing what in terms of the 7 resettlement pathways these are

·         To add value to each others work in terms of effectiveness and impact on offenders and victims.

 

Planned Activity for 2014/15:

·           Change the format of the weekly CSU tasking meeting to include re-offenders

·           Work with short sentence offenders (i.e. under one year), and work with them earlier to assist resettlement.

·           To further integrate YOT into the nomination process;

·           To increase cohort numbers and look at those shortly to be released from prison – this will identify opportunities earlier and greater interagency cooperation helping to support offenders back into the community;

·           Explore ways to expand upon the successful trial of Restorative Practice interventions Cockham Wood young offenders’ project using offenders;

·           To understand how the group can contribute to the Trouble Families agenda.

 

5.  Emerging Issues 2014-2015 and Recommendations

 

5.1  Introduction

5.1.1  The UK economy is no longer contracting at the rate seen in 2008/09, and most economic indicators show that growth has returned.  This is reflected in the local economy which has recovered well.  Maidstone’s unemployment rate (as at November 2013) of 1.8% (2.5% in 2011 & 2.3% in 2010) is lower than the county average (2.4%) and much lower than the national rate (2.9%[9]). 

 

5.1.2  Unemployment rates vary across the borough, with the lowest rate in Sutton Valance & Langley (0.6%) and Barming (0.7%) wards and highest in High Street (4.9%), Shepway South (4.1%) and Park Wood ward (4.0%).  Over a quarter (27.4%) of those unemployed are aged 18-24, and this group is most likely to exhibit risky behaviour in terms of alcohol, drugs, vehicle & acquisitive crime and other related anti-social behaviour.  The effects of continuing economic hardship could result in increased prevalence of these crime categories.

 

5.1.3  Maidstone has the largest night time economy in Kent and prides itself on ensuring that visitors to the town’s entertainment venues are as safe as possible.  There is a continuing need to tackle alcohol related incidents, including revellers arriving in the town centre already drunk known as ‘pre-fuelling’.  The 2 year Don’t Abuse the Booze project currently being delivered by a partnership of agencies aims to tackle head-on alcohol fuelled anti-social behaviour and underage drinking, and seeks to educate and inform young people as to the consequences of their choices concerning alcohol consumption.

 

5.1.4  Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Bill:

Subject to its parliamentary progress, the Bill is expected to receive Royal Assent by the end of spring 2014.  The Bill[10] aims to protect the public from crime, serious disorder and anti-social behaviour by giving local police forces the ability to make decisions that fit the needs of the area they serve.  The Bill streamlines and simplifies 19 existing powers, replacing them with six new ones which will enable the police, local authorities and others to respond quickly and effectively to anti-social behaviour.

 

Two further changes are the Community Trigger and Community Remedy which it is hoped will empower victims and communities by giving them a greater say in the outcome of their reports and how agencies respond to complaints of anti-social behaviour.

 

The Community Trigger

What form the Community Trigger takes depends on partnership consultation, but it is based around lack of action by agencies.  When agencies fail to work together, the Community Trigger can be invoked by individuals, agencies and community groups.  Kent CSU is consulting with District CSU partnerships to ensure the most effective Community Trigger process is developed for adoption by Districts.

 

The Community Remedy

This is a list of actions providing suitable remedies/sanctions, other than prosecution.  The list is decided upon jointly by the Kent Police and Crime Commissioner and Chief Constable after consultation with district CSUs, and the community remedy adopted must have victim agreement.

 

5.1.5  There is one major sporting event in 2014 – the football World Cup in Brazil from 12 June to 13 July.  England’s three group matches take place as follows:

 

Match	Date	Kick-off Local Time	Kick off BST
England v Italy	Saturday 14 June	18.00	23.00
England v Uruguay	Tuesday 19 June	16.00	20.00
England v Costa Rica	Thursday 24 June	13.00	17.00

 

Television schedules may change, but if the weather during the summer is better than average, combined with football matches which end fairly late in the evening, there may be increased rates of alcohol-related crime, ASB, noise nuisance and domestic abuse.  Applications for extended licensing hours from pubs and clubs will be dealt with on their merits on a case by case basis.

 

5.1.6  The SMP has identified five emerging themes based on an analysis of the issues identified in the crime data pack for Maidstone and other partnership databases.  Intertwined through each of the emerging themes are the three common threads of: Targeting prolific offenders/repeat locations; Safeguarding vulnerable and young people; Prevention and early intervention.

 

5.2  Violent Crime

The Home Office defines violent crime as robbery, sexual offences, and a group of Violence Against the Person (VAP) offences ranging from assault without injury, through wounding, to homicide.  Violent crime costs society around £13 billion annually in England and Wales, of which £4 billion is incurred by the NHS and the Criminal Justice System.  In addition, more than 45% of violent offenders are thought to be under the influence of alcohol and young men are at almost four times greater risk of being a victim of violence than the rest of the adult population.

 

Looking specifically at violence against the person offences, in the period April 2012 to March 2013, crimes in this category saw a county-wide increase of 5.6% (830 additional offences).  In Maidstone, violence against the person increased from 1,543 offences in 2011/12 to 1,579 offences in 2012/13 (+1.7%), which placed Maidstone is 6^th in the county.  In contrast, in the first two quarters of 2013/14 (April to September 2013), Maidstone experienced an increase in violent crime compared to previous years of 35% or an additional 315 offences.  This was the highest increase in the county.  For the current financial year to September 2013, at ward level, High Street and Shepway North wards recorded the highest volumes of violence against the person with 545 and 137 recorded crimes respectively.

 

Maidstone Hospital recorded 59 admissions of Maidstone residents, for assault.  Approximately 85% of all admissions to Maidstone Hospital were male and 15% female.  Of those recorded, the majority of males reported to have been assaulted in the street, bar/pub or at school/college, where as the majority of females reported to have been assaulted in the street or at home.

 

5.2.1  Domestic Abuse

The cross-government definition of domestic violence and abuse is:

‘any incident or pattern of incidents of controlling, coercive, threatening behaviour, violence or abuse between those aged 16 or over who are, or have been, intimate partners or family members regardless of gender or sexuality.  The abuse can encompass, but is not limited to:

• psychological
• physical
• sexual
• financial
• emotional’

It is known that domestic abuse is one of the most under reported crimes: the Crown Prosecution Service reports that women on average experience an average of 35 incidents of domestic abuse before reporting an incident to the police.  National figures for England and Wales from 2010/11 estimate that 7% of women aged 16-59 were victims of domestic abuse in the past year, as were 5% of men.  Extrapolating this to Maidstone’s female population aged 16-59 yrs would suggest that some 3,192 women are victims of domestic abuse each year.  Using this locally derived figure compared to actual domestic abuse incidents in Maidstone suggests that only around 56% of domestic violence incidents were reported in 2012/13.  Nationally, domestic abuse represents approximately 25% of all violent crime.  In Maidstone, there are on average 34 domestic abuse incidents reported to the police each week.

 

However, year or year, incidents of domestic abuse have decreased in Maidstone borough by 4.2% or 79 incidents, compared to a county-wide increase of 1.5%.  Per 1,000 population, Maidstone has the 5^th lowest rate of domestic abuse incidents and 6^th lowest percentage of repeat victims in the county.  Of the total reports, almost a quarter (24.3%) are repeat incidents.

 

Despite an overall improving situation, given the under-reported nature of the crime, and analysing further local postcode data based around caseloads, the highest volumes can be seen primarily in the Park Wood, Shepway North and High Street wards.

 

Due to the under-reported nature of the crime, and repeat incidents, recommendation is made that Domestic Abuse remains as a priority for the partnership (within the wider priority of Violent Crime) , focusing on those areas with frequent reports of domestic abuse.

 

5.2.2  Maidstone’s Night-Time Economy (NTE)

During recent years there has been significant focus on tackling Night Time Economy crime, including violent crime and there are many examples of successful partnership projects which are in effect.  In addition, Kent Police has developed a strategy looking at tackling Violent Crime, which includes ‘NTE Based Violent Crime and ‘Youth Related Violent Crime’ as two of the five priorities.

 

Staffed entirely by volunteers, the Urban Blue’s[11] principle objective is to help ensure that Maidstone is a well managed, safe and secure destination for people enjoying the town's vibrant evening and night time economy.  Urban Blue volunteers offer a ‘safe haven’ and first aid for those people find who themselves in difficulty and ensure that no further harm comes to them.  Urban Blue makes sure that clients – most of whom are aged 18-22 yrs – are sobered up and get home safely.

 

Although Urban Blue clients are given literature and advice concerning their drinking, it is recognised that in most cases there are few real consequences attached to their drunken behaviour.  In order to bring home to clients the implications of their public drunkeness, it is proposed that Police capture evidence of drunkeness and incapability.  Police could then either prosecute or provide an alternative to prosecution, for example by clients working a number of shifts on the Bus, so they can see at first hand the outcomes of binge drinking.

Recommendation is made for Violent Crime is adopted as a priority, sub-divided into two themes of Domestic Violence and Night Time Economy.

 

5.3     Anti-social Behaviour

Anti social behavior is defined as ‘acting in a manner that caused or was likely to cause harassment, alarm or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as the perpetrator’.  Significant progress has been made in reducing ASB during the previous 12 months - overall there has been a decrease in the number of reports of ASB by nearly 20%.  However, Maidstone still has the 4^th highest levels in the County (after Thanet, Canterbury and Swale).  Analysis of ASB across Maidstone, highlights that 5 wards (High Street, Shepway North, Fant, Park Wood, and East) account for over half of ASB incidents in the borough.  In surveys, Maidstone residents regularly feature ASB as one of the most frequently identified issues and this, together with geographic hot spots in the wards identified above, continue to be relevant as areas of concern.

Due to the high volumes of anti social behaviour in the borough, it is recommended that ASB continues as a priority for the partnership.

 

5.4  Substance Misuse

The UK has amongst the highest rates of young people’s cannabis use and binge drinking in Europe.  In the UK there are some 13,000 hospital admissions linked to young people’s drinking each year.  Early drug and alcohol use is related to a host of educational, health and social problems.  Offenders who use heroin, cocaine or crack cocaine are estimated to commit between a third and a half of all acquisitive crime.

 

In Maidstone total drug offences have reduced marginally by 1.7% or 7 incidents.  There have been no identified seasonal trends.  In contrast, 235 hospital admissions were recorded for Maidstone residents between June 2012 and May 2013, which is a slight increase compared to previous years.  The majority of those admissions were from Fant and North wards, however, High Street ward has the highest volume of drug offences in Kent, 204 incidents or 20.9 per 1,000 population.

 

          Due to the high level of drug offences in certain wards, and the increase in hospital admissions, it is recommended that substance misuse including alcohol remains as a priority.

 

5.5  Reducing Reoffending

Significant demands are placed on CSP resources by individuals who are repeat ASB offenders - particularly those who perpetrate low-level offences as a result of alcohol consumption.  Reducing re-offending across the age range is a Government target for all CSP’s.  This is particularly important when those who have already been through the criminal justice system commit over half of all crime.  It will enable a more strategic engagement between CSP’s and other local partners, such as the third sector and Local Criminal Justice Boards, in planning and commissioning services for offenders.  Therefore, SMP should continue to support the work of IOM to continue to have a positive impact on the number of offences caused by repeat offenders.

 

Maidstone data shows that in 2012-13 the actual re-offending rate was 5.2% lower than the predicted re-offending rate.  In the period July 2011 to June 2012, 85 young people entered the Criminal Justice system for the first time, with 15.6% being identified as re-offending.

 

Although the re-offending rate has improved recently to the 2^nd lowest in Kent, recommendation is made that Reducing Re-offending remains as a priority, being a cross cutting theme across all priorities.

 

5.6  Road Safety - Killed or seriously injured (KSI)

In the UK, over a 1,000 people die each year on the roads, tens of thousands are seriously injured and hundreds of thousands are otherwise hurt.  In 2000 the government set targets for the reduction of casualties by 2010 and much progress has been made.  New targets are currently under review covering the period from 2010 to 2020 are likely to be very demanding.

 

In 1994 across Kent some 73 people were killed and a further 1170 seriously injured on Kent roads; by 2011 this had reduced to 43 persons killed, with 476 seriously inured.  Despite these reductions, road traffic is still the biggest cause of unnatural death, injury and harm to the people of Kent, especially young people aged between five and 25.  Kent County Council is the Highway Authority for Kent and has a Statutory Duty under the Road Traffic Act for road safety with the aim to reduce casualties through a combination of safer road engineering and education, in conjunction with Police enforcement activity. However, road safety is not just the remit of one organisation and certain aspects such as education benefit from a partnership approach.

 

In Maidstone on average, the number of people of all ages KSI in the period 1994-98 was 115 per year.  By 2009 this had reduced to 64, and by 2012/13 had reduced further to 58, a halving from the 1994-98 average.  In 2012/13 casualties from road traffic accidents increased by 26 (4.1%), from 640 in 2011-12 to 666, although this has reduced from 726 in 2008.  The rate of increase is much higher than the county-wide increase of 0.5%.  However, the number of KSI casualties have reduced slightly from 59 to 58, a 53% reduction from 89 in 2008.

 

Category	2010/ 2011	2011/ 2012	2012/ 2013	Volume change	% Change	County Rank
RTCs – all casualties	657	640	666	26	4.1%	12 ←
KSI casualties All ages	60	59	58	-1	-1.7%	11 ←
KSI casualties <16 yrs	4	5	4	-1	-20%	7 ↑
KSI car drivers 17-24 yrs[12]	6	3	5	2	66.6%	=11 ↓
KSI all road users aged 65+	5	13	4	-9	-225%	=7 ↑
Powered 2 wheelers	12	7	13	5	71.4%	=7 ↓
Cyclists	1	8	4	-4	-50%	=6 ↑
Pedestrians	10	13	8	-5	-38.5%	=11 ↑

 

Maidstone car user casualties over the last 5 years have consistently been above the Kent and Medway districts’ average.  In Maidstone the car drivers involved in the highest number of collisions were 18 year olds (124 in total). In the last 5 years 20% of car drivers involved in crashes were aged 17-24.

 

 

Vehicle speeding and the perception of speeding is a significant area of concern for residents (in 2013, 26.9% of residents said that speeding vehicles were a very or fairly big problem in their local area).  The concern regarding speeding is not felt only in the urban areas but also in rural areas of the Borough.  Effective speeding enforcement is an enormously difficult activity and the offence is one committed by almost the entire (generally law abiding) driving community.  Significant steps have been taken to develop the parish council based Community Speed Watch volunteer scheme in the Borough; however more work is needed to ensure the scheme is available for individuals willing to volunteer.

 

Research carried out by Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) has identified the headline crash causation factors for incidents that cause death and injury on the road.  In any road crash the three constituent parts are the Environment (the road), the Machine (the vehicle) and the Road User Behaviour (the human).  TRL research shows that 2% of crashes are caused solely due to a poor road environment; 3% are solely due to vehicle failure; whilst 75% are solely due to the behaviour of the road user.  Contrary to popular belief that all accidents are caused by speeding, the conclusion from DfT research is that excessive speed was "possible, probable or definite" in just 7,600 (12.5%) out of 60,797 accidents analysed, which also includes inappropriate speed within the speed limit.

 

Pedestrian safety: - Although car drivers have been identified as a main priority, across Kent pedestrians accounted for 16.6% of all KSI casualties[13].  For the three years 2011-2013 Maidstone had the worst or second to worst record for pedestrian KSI casualties.  The wards with highest levels of pedestrian casualties are High Street, Bridge East and Park Wood, with those most at risk being pedestrians aged 11 – 16.  The most risky time period is weekdays, 8am - 9am and 3pm - 8pm.

 

Summary:

Based on the current data for 2012/13, we have seen an overall reduction of 1 KSI casualty based on the same period last year.  However, total casualties are 4.1% higher than the same period last year and Maidstone continues to experience the most road casualties in Kent.  However, young drivers in the 17-24 age group experience a disproportionate number of RTC’s, and the collisions they have are more serious.  The focus for 2014-15 will be on three user groups: young drivers aged 17–24, powered two-wheelers (p2w) riders, and teenage pedestrians (secondary school age), since these groups are over represented in the data.

 

Since total casualties are 4.1% higher and Maidstone continues to experience the most road casualties in Kent, recommendation is made that Road Safety remains as a priority.

 

5.7  Theft (shoplifting)

Although overall some theft offences have decreased, Maidstone shows an increase in shoplifting across its town centre retailers.  Despite some improvements and better performance, it is felt the partnership could heavily influence crime prevention and community safety in this area, looking at how such theft has knock-on effects for funding drug taking, increasing drug dealing and the trading of stolen goods.

 

Recommendation is made for a time-limited Task and Finish group to be set up for Theft (shoplifting)

 

 

5.8  Cross Cutting Themes

Data analysis also acknowledged that the priorities are often inter-related and has identified three distinct cross cutting themes that run through all of the priority focus areas.  Actions contained within this plan are therefore built around the five identified priorities and three cross cutting themes, as shown in the chart below:

 

Cross cutting themes
Anti-social Behaviour	Domestic Abuse	Reducing Re-offending	Road safety (KSI)	Substance Misuse (including alcohol)
Targeting prolific offenders / repeat locations
Safeguarding vulnerable and young people
Prevention and early intervention

 

 

5.9     Recommendation to Safer Maidstone Partnership

Our priorities for this year have been distilled from a wide variety of information shared with our partners and represent the most important issues to focus on this (2014/15) year.  Based on the information in this Strategic Assessment, it is recommended that the Safer Maidstone Partnership confirm the following 2014/15 priorities based on the areas where maximum impact could be achieved given a continuing reduction in resources and capacity:

1.    Violent Crime (Domestic Abuse and Night Time Economy)

2.    Anti-social Behaviour

3.    Substance Misuse

4.    Reduce Re-offending

5.    Road Safety – KSI 17-24 year olds

 

With one time-limited Task and Finish Group to tackle Acquisitive Crime – specifically shoplifting - and the associated negative effects stolen goods have in the community.

All the priorities will require a robust multi-agency response, but because they are important for residents and communities, achieving them will have a positive impact on people’s quality of life.

 

 

6.      Implementation and Monitoring

         

To ensure that the identified priorities and are delivered, the Partnership will review and monitor progress as follows:

·      At SMP level through quarterly Sub-Group Chair reports

·      At Sub–Group level through Action Plan monitoring by Sub-Group Chairs

 

 

7.      Strategic Assessment review date

 

The purpose of this document is to inform the annual SMP Partnership Plan and to assist the SMP and its partner agencies to draw up specific actions.  Therefore this document is reviewed annually and agreed by the Safer Maidstone Partnership in March each year.  It is also independently assessed by Kent CSU.

 

 

8.      How to get further information

 

If you would like further information about the Safer Maidstone Partnership, please contact: Community Partnerships Team, 6^th Floor, Maidstone House, King Street, Maidstone, Kent ME15 6JQ. Tel: 01622 602000. www.maidstone.org.uk

 

We can provide this Assessment in large print, on tape and in Braille. For people whose first language is not English, we can arrange to have the Assessment translated into your preferred language.  Please telephone (01622) 602000 for further assistance.

Text service for the deaf or speech-impaired

If you're deaf or speech-impaired, you can text Kent Police.  Start the message with the word ‘police’ then leave a space and write your message including what and where the problem is.  Send your text to 60066 (the Kent Police communications centre) and they will reply with a message.
Appendix 1

            Methodology and Information Sources

 

Unless otherwise stated, data collected for this Strategic Assessment relates to the time period April 2012 to March 2013.  The main body of this assessment is broken down into three sections.  The first, the crime and perceptions of crime overview, gives a three year time series analysis of crime activity, anti-social behaviour, fire and road safety data, together with our position relative to the other 11 Kent district councils.

 

The second section looks at the current partnership priorities with emphasis on the assessment of performance against these.  This is done through time series analysis since the previous assessment was undertaken and reasons for any changes in a particular issue.

 

The third section of this assessment, ‘Emerging Issues 2014-2015 and Recommendations’, further analyse the emerging potential issues identified from the performance section, with greater detail on the scope of the problem, including the scale of the problem, any reasons for changes in levels and the suggested cause of the problem including the relevance of location, time, the offender or the victim.  Following this further analysis, after going through a priority selection process with key partners, a final list of recommended partnership priorities for the upcoming year is produced.

 

A community prioritisation process allowed for the views of the local community of what issues should be deemed an emerging priority for the local area and was gathered through the Maidstone Resident Satisfaction Survey.  In addition, PCSO’s and Community Safety Unit Police staff engaged with local communities at public events such as the Maidstone Mela, 36 Engineers Day, Switch on the Music and Uprockin’ young people’s festival.  Also public opinion and those categories that are of most concern are highlighted through the quarterly Kent Crime and Victimisation Survey.

 

            Information sources

 

The list below includes the details of those data sources used to inform this strategic assessment, including the agency supplying the data, the time period the data refers to and any issues surrounding the validity and reliability of the data.  All information was correct at time of document production.

 

Kent Community Safety Unit crime data

 

All data provided by the County CSU is using recorded crime data provided by the Business Information Unit at Kent Police.  This data places the incidents at the time at which they were recorded by the Police.

 

Kent Police Intelligence Analysis data

 

Data provided by Kent Police is ‘committed’ data.  The ‘date’ used is the mid point between the earliest and latest dates that the offence could have been committed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ambulance data

 

All ambulance pickup submissions have been compiled by the County Community Safety Unit utilising data supplied by the South-East Coast Ambulance service.  This data has been cleansed and sanitised for use on CrimeView and, due to NHS data protection requirements, some data loss does occur within the cleansing process.  (E.g. ward-level occurrences of 4 or less are suppressed and shown as zero.)

 

 

Other data sources include:

·      British Rail Police

·      Clean Kent

·      K-DASH (formerly Women’s Support Services, now merged with North Kent Women’s Aid)

·      KIASS - Kent Integrated Adult Social Services

·      Kent Community Wardens

·      Kent Drug and Alcohol Action Team

·      Kent Highways

·      Kent Fire and Rescue Service

·      Kent Integrated Youth Service

·      Kent Police

·      Kent Probation Service

·      Kent and Medway Public Health Observatory

·      Kent Trading Standards

·      Youth Offending Service

Appendix 2

            Contextual information

 

Maidstone demographic and economic summary

The latest population figures from the 2011 Census show that there are 155,200 people living in Maidstone Borough, a rise of 16,300 people (11.7%) since 2001.  This population size makes Maidstone Borough the largest Kent local authority district area, and is the 6^th highest rate of population growth of any Kent district. 72% of the borough’s population live in the Maidstone urban area with the remaining 28% living in the surrounding rural area and settlements. The age profile of Maidstone’s population is shown overleaf.  Overall Maidstone has a very similar age profile to the county average.  Maidstone has a slightly higher proportion of people in the 25-59 age groups, and a smaller proportion of teenagers and retired people compared to the KCC average.

 

Chart1: Maidstone population age profile

 

 

The borough’s population is forecast to grow at slower rate over the coming years with current forecasts suggesting a 4.7% growth over the next 15-years[14].  Based on KCC’s assessment of the district authority’s future housing targets as at June 2011, this rate of growth is lower than the county average (10.9%).

 

Ethnic Profile:  93.3% of Maidstone’s population is of white ethnic origin with the remaining 6.7% being classified as of Black Minority Ethnic (BME) origin[15].  The proportion of Maidstone’s population classified as BME is lower than the county average of 7.6%. The largest ethnic group in Maidstone is White British, with 90% of residents from this ethnic origin.  Within the BME population, the largest ethnic group is Indian (accounting for 1.0% of all residents) with the second largest group being residents of Black African and Chinese (each accounting for 0.9% of all residents).

 

          Deprivation:  The Indices of Deprivation 2010 provide a measure of deprivation at both district and sub-district (Lower Super Output Area) level, relative to other areas in England[16].  Table 1 presents the national and county rank of Maidstone based on the 2010 Index and also shows how the rankings have changed since the 2007 Index[17]. In 2010 Maidstone Borough was ranked as the 9^th most deprived district in Kent (out of 12 districts, with the most deprived - Thanet - being ranked 1).  Nationally, Maidstone ranks 217^th out of 326 local authority districts in England.  Although this rank still places it within England’s least deprived half of authorities, on the national ranking, Maidstone has moved up the deprivation scale from 270^th in 2004 (out of 354 local authorities), 225^th in 2007 (out of 326 local authorities), to 217^th in 2010.  This indicates that Maidstone’s level of deprivation has increased, relative to other areas in England.

 

Table 1: Kent Districts IMD rankings

 

Levels of deprivation vary across the borough.  Parts of Maidstone are within England’s top 20% deprived of areas and yet other parts are within England’s least 20% deprived of areas.  More detail is shown on Map 1. The greatest levels of deprivation are found within the areas of Park Wood, Shepway and High Street.  Neighbouring some of the most deprived areas of Maidstone are areas with relatively low levels of deprivation.  The least deprived areas of Maidstone are found in the areas of Bearsted.

 

Map 1 – Index of Multiple Deprivation 2010

 

 

Mosaic profile of residents

Mosaic Public Sector is a classification system designed by Experian[18] to profile the characteristics of the UK population. Each household in the UK is classified as belonging to one of 13 groups and 69 types.  This process has been taken further in Kent where county specific data has been included in Experian’s model to re-segment these 69 UK types into 13 groups relevant only to Kent. 

 

The 13 Kent specific groups have been named Kent and Medway A to M. These groups identify clusters of individuals and households that are as similar as possible to each other, and as different as possible to any other group.  They describe the residents of a postcode in terms of their typical demographics, their behaviours, their lifestyle characteristics and their attitudes.  The characteristics of the Kent & Medway groups are presented overleaf.

 

Table 2: Kent & Medway household groups A to M

 

 

The Mosaic profile of residents in Maidstone is shown in Chart 2 alongside the county profile.

 

Chart 2: Mosaic profile for Maidstone

 

Unemployment

Maidstone’s unemployment rate is currently 2.5%.  This is slightly lower than the county average of 3.2% and considerably lower than the national average of 3.8%[19]. In July 2012 there were 2,430 unemployed people in Maidstone which is +0.6% higher (14 more people) since June 2012 and +0.4% higher (10 more unemployed people) since July 2011.  The rate of increase in unemployed people in Maidstone has slowed considerably since 2011, when unemployment increased 7.9% between June 2010 and June 2011.  In Kent, unemployment increased 5.3% year on year, compared with an increase of 1.9% across Great Britain.

 

Table 3: Unemployment rates

 

 

Unemployment rates vary across the district.  The lowest unemployment is in Boughton Monchelsea & Chart Sutton ward where 0.9% of the working age population are unemployed.  The highest rate is in Park Wood ward where 7.0% of the working age population are unemployed. The majority of those unemployed are aged 18-24 years old.  This is a pattern seen locally and nationally.  In Maidstone, 18-24 year olds account for 27.3% of all of those unemployed and in the KCC area the proportion is 29.0%.  More information is provided in Chart 3.

 

Chart 3: Age profile of Maidstone unemployed

 

 

Out of Work Benefits

Out of work benefits claimants includes those people aged 16-64 who are claiming a key Department of Work and Pension (DWP) benefit because they are not working. This definition is used as an indicator of worklessness.  As at February 2012, there were 8,620 people in Maidstone who were claiming out of work benefits.  This is 9% of all 16 to 64 year olds and is lower than the county average of 10.8%. The largest proportion of those who are out of work are claiming Employment Support Allowance or Incapacity Benefit i.e. they have a health condition which is restricting the sort of work that they usually do.  A lower proportion is classified as jobseekers (claimants of Jobseekers Allowance) than the average for the KCC area.  14% of those who are workless in Maidstone are lone parents who are claiming Income Support.  This is higher than the KCC rate of 13.4%[20]. Chart 4 shows out of work benefits claimants by main reason for which they are claiming.

 

Chart 4: Out of work benefit claimants

 

 

Local context - Maidstone the place

Maidstone Borough, which covers 40,000 hectares, sits at the heart of Kent, positioned between London and the Channel ports and is home to 143,000 people.  Maidstone, as the County Town of Kent, is the administrative and retail capital.  The Borough combines the services provided by a large urban area, with excellent schools, shopping and a general hospital, with a very attractive rural hinterland, which includes the Kent Downs Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (ANOB) and thriving villages.  Housing in Maidstone Town has traditionally been considered relatively affordable compared to the south east average, but this is not the case in rural Maidstone and for those on average or low incomes.

 

Maidstone has the largest town centre shopping offer within Kent with approximately 700 shops, 75 cafes and restaurants, employing some 4,400 people.  The Borough also boasts the largest night time economy in Kent, creating £75 million a year and employing around 1,500 people.  The Safer Maidstone Partnership has fostered close working with the Police, Street Pastors, Urban Blue Bus, and Town Centre Management to ensure that Maidstone has a safe night time economy.  The SMP’s approach to ensuring Maidstone is a safe place to socialise has resulted in much positive press and TV coverage.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Map 2: The Maidstone borough area

 

 

Maidstone is an exceptionally green Borough with a number of parks, the largest of which is Mote Park, which is Grade II on the English Heritage Register of Historic Parks.  Maidstone Borough is considered a good place to live and work with high rates of employment, relatively low levels of adults claiming incapacity benefits and a higher proportion of residents who have a degree than the South East average.

 

Larger numbers of people commute into than out of the Borough.  The Borough has a very mixed business sector with large numbers of small and medium size businesses with particular strengths in professional services (law and accountancy) and construction. There is a growing media industry led by Maidstone Studios and the Kent Messenger Group.  Maidstone has an extensive further education campus (Mid Kent College) and a higher education offer with Mid Kent College seeking to increase their range of courses and facilities.

 

Residents living in the Borough have relatively high wages (although many higher earners commute out of the Borough to achieve these).  Maidstone came out as the top destination for business in the 2010 study of locations for business in Kent.

 

Transport links are generally good although rail travel could still be improved. 2011 saw the introduction of High Speed services from the Maidstone West to St. Pancras.  Rail journey times to London from some of the smaller rural towns (Staplehurst and Marden) are as low as 40 minutes.  The Borough is well served by the motorway network with the M20 and M2 both providing links to the M25 and the Channel Ports.  The international high speed railway stations at Ebbsfleet (15 mins) and Ashford (25 mins) are also extremely accessible.

 

What matters to Maidstone residents

The Council carried out extensive consultation when developing the Sustainable Community Strategy for Maidstone 2009-2020.  Residents were asked to identify what was good and bad about living in the Borough as well as their dream for Maidstone.  The top three positive comments related to Maidstone included shopping, parks and the river.  Other positive comments related to cleanliness, the countryside and nightlife.  The top three negative comments related to traffic congestion, public transport and the quality of roads.  The top three dreams for Maidstone residents related to resolving transport issues, improving the river and an improved theatre/concert facility.

 

A residents’ survey was undertaken in 2011.  This was the first survey the Council had undertaken since the Place Survey in 2008 and showed improved satisfaction in a number of areas including providing value for money, keeping residents informed and the way the Council runs its services.  It also showed some areas that need improvement, such as people from different backgrounds getting on well together and satisfaction with the local area.

Appendix 3

Terrorism

 

The current threat level to the UK from international terrorism is severe.  The most significant international terrorism threat to the UK remains violent extremism associated with and influenced by Al Qa'ida.  The Prevent Strategy, launched in 2007, seeks to stop people becoming terrorists or supporting terrorism.  It is the preventative strand of the government’s counter-terrorism strategy, CONTEST.  ‘Prevent’ is about stopping people becoming terrorists or supporting violent extremists.  There five elements:

 

1.      Challenging violent extremist ideology and supporting mainstream voices;

2.      Disrupting those who promote violent extremism and supporting the institutions where they are active;

3.      Supporting individuals who are being targeted and recruited to the cause of violent extremism;

4.      Increasing the resilience of communities to violent extremism;

5.      Addressing the grievances that ideologues are exploiting.

 

The current international terrorist threat is quite different from previous threats, with contemporary terrorists groups claiming a religious justification for their actions. They seek mass casualties and are both sophisticated and unconventional in their techniques: they do not provide warnings and seek out soft targets, in particular crowded places.

 

The responsibility for preventing violent extremism and supporting those individuals and communities who may be vulnerable rests with us all, including partners and communities.  The threat is very real and will be around for a number of years, but despite the threat, the Police must be proportionate and measured in their response.  Delivering an effective Prevent programme requires action by a range of agencies, front line workers and, in particular, neighbourhood policing teams who come into contact with communities and vulnerable individuals.

 

The Prevent Strategy 2011 review

In 2011, the government launched a review of the Prevent strategy.  This review was independently overseen by Lord Carlile of Berriew.  The review found that the previous Prevent programme tended to confuse the delivery of government policy to promote integration with government policy to prevent terrorism.  Thus, in trying to reach those at risk of radicalisation, funding sometimes reached those extremist organisations that Prevent should have been confronting. The Prevent strategy has been re-focused, and now contains three objectives:

 

1.      respond to the ideological challenge of terrorism and the threat from those who promote it;

2.      prevent people from being drawn into terrorism and ensure that they are given appropriate advice and support;

3.      work with sectors and institutions where there are risks of radicalisation that need to be addressed.

 

Appendix 4

          Glossary of terms

Although some terms may not be specifically discussed in this Assessment, the following table of abbreviations are in common usage in policing and community safety.

 

ABA	Acceptable Behaviour Agreement
ASB	Anti-Social Behaviour
ASBO	Anti-Social Behaviour Order
CDAP	Community Domestic Abuse Programme
CSP	Community Safety Partnership
CST	Central Support Team
CSU	Community Safety Unit
DA	Domestic Abuse
DV	Domestic Violence
IDVA	Independent Domestic Violence Adviser
JFMO	Joint Family Management Officer
KCC	Kent County Council
KCVS	Kent Crime and Victimisation Survey
KDAAT	Kent Drugs and Alcohol Action Team
LSP	Local Strategic Partnership
MARAC	Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference
NDTMS	National Drug Treatment Monitoring System
NEET	(Children) Not in Education, Employment or Training
NTE	Night Time Economy
PACT	Partners and Communities Together
PCC	Police and Crime Commissioner
PCSO	Police Community Safety Officer
PDU	Problematic Drug User
PPO	Prolific Priority Offender
RTC	Road Traffic Collision
SMP	Safer Maidstone Partnership
SDVC	Specialist Domestic Violence Court
VATP	Violence Against the Person
YOS	Youth Offending Service