Evidence submitted by The Association
of Chief Police Officers (ACPO)
CONTENTS
| 1. | Project Initiation
|
| 2. | Project Achievements |
| 3. | Implementation across Forces
|
| 4. | Challenges |
| 5. | Areas of Confidence |
| 6. | Areas of Less Confidence
|
| 7. | ACPO View |
| 8. | Appendices (not printed)
|
| 9. | Further Material |
| |
ANNEX
| Snapshot of Genesis (not printed)
|
| Central Referral Process |
| Partnership Structure |
| |
1. PROJECT INITIATION
The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) has an established
project to manage the implementation of the Freedom of Information
Act 2000 (FOI or "the Act") across the Police Service.
The national project was initiated in December 2001, after the
Chief Constables Council agreed to provide funding; all forces
paid £3,500 to fund the project until January 2005. A Project
Manager (a Chief Inspector) and a Project Support Officer were
recruited from and are housed by Hampshire Constabulary. The national
project uses PRINCE2 project management methodology. The Project
Initiation Document, which describes the project approach, is
attached.
The project is nearing completion and currently is on stage
nine of a probable total of 10 stages. The project is due to finish
in March 2005, allowing the team to report to ACPO on the initial
impact the Act has had on the Service.
The projects objectives were to produce the following:
— A model Publication Scheme, approved by the Information
Commissioner.
— A Communications Strategy for the Police Service.
— FOI Compliance Guidelines: best practice and lessons
learnt from overseas public authorities.
— A Training Strategy for the Police Service in
conjunction with Centrex.
— A Manual of Guidance detailing a common interpretation
of responsibilities required under the Act and guidelines for
action where legislation allows discretion to be applied.
— A national template for local administration of
FOI legislation, completed under a Workflow system.
— A Single Point of Contact to advise and assist
the Police Service on FOI issues and to provide an interface with
other organisations (including the Information Commissioner).
Mid-way through the project, the project was audited by the
National Audit Office (NAO). The conclusions have been adopted
and implemented and also disseminated across the Service. The
report is attached.
2. PROJECT ACHIEVEMENTS
It has been recognized by ACPO that it is best value to develop
best practice and guidance nationally and then share the results
amongst the 44 forces, to prevent repetition of work and duplication
of effort. The key achievements the Service has completed nationally
are:
2.1 The production of a Compliance Toolkit for the Police
Service
A "Compliance Toolkit for the Police Service" was
produced and issued to all forces in April 2002. The toolkit:
— Introduced the national project team and described
what the project team would produce
— Provided an overview of FOI
— Gave guidance on Section 45 Code of Practice—Discharge
Functions
— Gave guidance on Section 46 Code of Practice—Records
Management
— Provided LCD draft regulations on fees
— Introduced and described the ACPO Publication
Scheme
— Provided useful references
2.2 The production and approval of the Publication Scheme
A model Publication Scheme has been adapted by all 44 forces.
The DCA and the ICO were instrumental in organising meetings to
design and agree the Publication Scheme. This is an example of
successful collaborative work between the Police Service, the
DCA and ICO.
2.3 The creation of a discussion group on FOI on Genesis
Genesis is a database hosted by Centrex that is accessed
via a secure network and logon over the Police National Network.
It is a notice board that allows users to communicate through
message threads and discussion forums, and to share information
and documents through topic areas. Para 10 contains a snapshot
of the Genesis database (not printed).
Around six to eight hundred documents are available for download
from Genesis from the following areas: Project Plans; Lessons
Learnt from Abroad; Metropolitan Police Experience; FOI Personnel;
Training; Dealing with Requests Process Maps; PowerPoint Presentations;
FOI National Project; Information Audit Documents; Guidance on
Force Policies; Miscellaneous National Documents; National Working
Parties; ACPO Disposal and Retention Scheme; Safety Camera Partnership;
Procurement Exemption; Manual of Guidance; Written Articles on
FOI; Mosaic Attacks; FOI Workflow System & ACPO Standard Letters.
The Service will continue to use Genesis post January 2005
to facilitate the continued sharing of best practice and decisions
(eg additional information classes for the Publication Scheme).
2.4 Extensive research on best practice and lessons learnt
by overseas public authorities
The project team have carried out several visits to public
authorities overseas to learn from their experiences of implementing
their local FOI Act. Guidance on best practice and lessons learnt
were collected. Destinations have included Australia, America
(FBI) and Canada.
Reports on the findings of the research trips have been extensive,
and have been shared across the Police Service and with other
Public Authorities where appropriate (including the DCA, ICO and
the Home Office), to ensure best value has been gained to offset
the cost of the trips.
We attach the report from the Metropolitan Police Service's
visit to the FBI as an example. (Not printed.)
2.5 The production of approved disposal guidelines for policing
records
Disposal guidelines for policing records and general records
held by forces have been produced and approved by the National
Archives and the ICO. These have been adopted by all forces.
Papers have been circulated to all Chief Constables on the
definition of historical records and what should be sent to their
local county archivists.
2.6 The delivery of national training
25 training courses are being delivered, resulting in about
350 trained central decision makers across the country. Central
decision makers are the individuals that will be applying the
Public Interest Test. The provision of national training ensures
a consistent application of this test across the country. We note
that these central decision makers will have access to each other
via Genesis and the established networking systems.
250,000 leaflets have been issued to all Police Service employees
to raise awareness. In addition, posters and a central training
website (provided by NCALT which all Police Service employees
can access to train on-line) have been provided.
Material for one day training courses to be held locally
by each force has been issued. These are for the local decision
makers within each BCU and department who will supplement and
support the central decision makers.
2.7 The production of a draft Manual of Guidance
The draft Manual of Guidance is currently around 350 pages
long, and has taken approximately 1500 to 2000 working hours to
produce.
Research for the Manual of Guidance has been shared out across
all forces.
The Manual of Guidance will be submitted to the Bichard Working
Group to be incorporated into the Code of Practice.
2.8 The production of a Statement of Requirement for a Workflow
System to log and process FOI requests
A framework agreement is being constructed, to allow all
Police Forces, all emergency services, all local authorities and
the Home Office to select one of the chosen suppliers either now
or at a later time.
Therefore each public authority that signs up to the framework
agreement has not only taken advantage of the large discount available
in the framework (up to 33% off) but has also saved on the resources
to produce a Statement of Requirement.
The Statement of Requirement has taken approximately 750
hours to produce. Therefore the cost savings to organisations
are extremely substantial.
A statement of requirement for a Workflow system was promised
by the DCA in November 2003 but was actually produced in April-May
2004, and has caused considerable problems to authorities due
to the tight timeframe of the procurement process. We believe
this is an example of a product that the DCA should have organised
to be available to all Public Bodies as the potential savings
to the Public Sector could have run into millions of pounds.
2.9 Established Hampshire Constabulary as the single point
of contact
The project office receives approximately 150 emails and
answers approximately 200 phone calls a week.
The office is in regular contact with both the DCA and the
ICO; this centralised contact ensures consistency.
2.10 Designed the central referral process
A central referral process is required to manage requests
that are issued to several (or all) forces at the same time. To
date several such requests have already been received. The Police
Service require an essential overview of these requests, to ensure
that all forces respond uniformly and to allow the determination
of best practice and lessons learnt to be shared across all forces.
The Annex includes a diagram illustrating how the central
referral process is to work, which is currently with the Chief
Constables Council for ratification and funding.
We note that this is an area that we felt should have rested
with the DCA to develop a strategy for public authorities in general.
This is an example of a missed opportunity, which could have prevented
the duplication of effort across public bodies.
2.11 Established the procedure for partnership agencies
The Police Service shares its data with many partner agencies,
who also share their data with us. It is imperative that partnership
agencies have a clearly established process for handling requests
for data that may belong to a partner agency.
The national project team have recently completed some research
on this subject on behalf of the Lord Chancellors Department.
The project team have determined that establishing and sharing
best practice for partnership working with partner agencies is
key, in addition to creating work packages to share work across
agencies to prevent the duplication of effort and to ensure compliance
to the Act on data sharing. A diagram illustrating the process
can be found in the Annex.
The paper is to be presented to the Lord Chancellors Advisory
Board for ratification on 22 October 2004.
We note this is another area where the Service feels the
DCA missed an opportunity for a more efficient implementation
of the act; this topic should have been addressed by the DCA across
the whole public sector to provide an overview to all public authorities.
3. IMPLEMENTATION ACROSS
FORCES
Each force has a Project Manager for FOI implementation.
The country was divided into seven regions, including Scotland
as one region. Each region has an assigned regional chair. Below
we present a brief summary of the implementation work carried
out across the Police Service.
3.1 Compliance Toolkit for the Police Service
As noted above (cf. 2.1), one of the first products of the
national project was a Compliance Toolkit for the Police Service,
to ensure all forces were briefed on the legislation and what
preparation was required. Initially six weekly newsletters were
produced to inform all force Project Managers on progress by the
national project, until this was superseded by the Genesis database.
3.2 Regular regional meetings
The national Project Manager meets with all force Project
Managers at regional meetings held every six weeks. At these meetings
the Project Manager raises the state of each forces preparedness
and questions whether they are experiencing any issues.
3.3 Sharing of work across forces
Work has been shared across forces wherever possible. For
instance, as noted above, all forces were involved in the preparation
of the Manual of Guidance (cf. 2.7), in particular the interpretation
of exemptions. Each of the regions was given one or more topics
to research and report back the findings to the national project.
Research topics for the Manual of Guidance included:
— Communications/Marketing
— Contracts and Confidential
— Government Protective Marking Scheme
— Campaign and vexatious requests
— Post Publication Scheme
— Section 30 (Investigation), Section 31 (Law Enforcement)
and Section 32 (Court Records) Exemptions
3.4 Disseminated best practice
The national project team has researched, collated and disseminated
best practice, lessons learnt and good advice across the Service
(cf. 2.4).
3.5 Identified high risk areas to the Service
The national project team have identified the high risk areas
to the Service, to ensure the Service moves forward together.
Where possible procedures and templates have been produced and
shared with forces, to ensure a corporate approach. Identified
high risk areas include:
— Safety Camera Partnership Scheme
— Chief Constable Expenses
3.6 Letters to Chief Constables
Where necessary, letters have been sent to Chief Constables
by the Project Executive. Letters regarding the publication of
BCU minutes and Chief Constable Expenses are attached.
3.7 Review of force Publication Schemes
The national team have centrally checked all force Publication
Schemes to ensure they are being maintained correctly and are
up to date; those forces who were found wanting have had letters
sent to their Chief Constables from the Project Executive.
3.8 Regular ACPO meetings
Quarterly ACPO meetings are held with all the regional chairs
in attendance and this is to continue post implementation. These
meetings are, and will continue to be, used to ratify new Publication
Scheme information classes and to disseminate best practice.
4. CHALLENGES
The key identified challenges to the implementation of FOI
for the Police Service include the following:
4.1 Consistent application of the Manual of Guidance
The Manual of Guidance will be submitted to the Bichard Working
Group to ensure it is linked to the new Code of Practice for Police
information management (cf. 2.7). This is a key area where we
need consistency. Although there are 44 forces we are all doing
the same role, ie policing, and there is a massive opportunity
for the Service to be "divided and conquered" by requests
if there is inconsistent application of the Manual of Guidance.
4.2 Central referral process
Our ability to identify vexatious and campaign requests across
forces is a key challenge. The central referral process is designed
to highlight these types of request; a paper on the proposed process
is going to the Chief Constables Council for ratification (cf.
2.10).
4.3 Data sharing
Ensuring we and our partner agencies communicate effectively
regarding the release of data we share. The national project has
prepared a paper on data sharing on behalf of the Lord Chancellor's
Advisory Board (cf. 2.11).
4.4 Lack of commitment by forces
Some forces may not be taking the implications of the Act
as seriously as others and therefore may not be committing sufficient
resources to preparing for FOI. These forces are being challenged
by the Project Executive through guidance and letters.
4.5 Consistency between ACPO and ACPOS
A consistent response from ACPO and ACPOS is required. Regular
meetings are being organised via the Information Compliance Partnership
Group and ACPOS are adapting the ACPO Manual of Guidance. The
intention is for ACPO and ACPOS to agree any future information
classes to be added to the Publication Scheme.
5. AREAS OF
CONFIDENCE
The Police Service has confidence in:
5.1 The ICO
The Police Service has confidence in the ICO policy officers,
whom have been extremely helpful. Two officers have been permanently
attached to the Police, to assist in interpreting policy and exemptions,
namely Sections 30, 31 and 32 which are distinctly Police related.
In the recent reorganisation of the ICO office, one of those officers
has been given responsibility for the Police Service post 2005,
giving us confidence in the decision making process as they have
a thorough understanding of the policing business. We have an
extremely good working relationship both nationally and locally.
They have always assisted forces when required to give presentations
to Senior Management and these have always been well received.
Richard Thomas's office has assisted greatly throughout the project
and ACPO greatly appreciate their help and support through the
implementation phase. We are confident that this relationship
will continue post 2005.
5.2 Central referral process
When the central referral process is fully operational the
Service believes that we will be able to have a central overview
of the requests that are received which have national implications.
The Service will be able to assist applicants when appropriate
by giving a Service response as well as individual force responses,
to ensure that there is consistency in disclosure.
5.3 Our ability to learn from experience
The Service has confidence in our ability to learn from each
force's experiences whilst dealing with requests. The Genesis
database will be used to gather and disseminate best practice
post implementation (cf. 2.3).
6. AREAS OF
LESS CONFIDENCE
ACPO has less confidence in:
6.1 Lord Chancellors Advisory Board
The governance of the Lord Chancellors Advisory Board, how
it is organised and its membership; there is a lack of synergy
from the Board members. We feel the set up and membership of the
Advisory Board was a good concept to provide an overview of the
Public Sector. However, it has not actually fulfilled its anticipated
role of providing governance and direction to the Public Sector;
it seems to have worked with an individual sector approach rather
than across the whole sector.
6.2 Requests affecting several authorities
The Police Service believes that there is no holistic overview
of requests that would affect more than one Public Authority.
We have major concerns within the Police Service that we may be
"divided and conquered" by requests; the Service consists
of 44 separate authorities and there is a risk that one or more
forces may disclose differing information to the same request.
We feel that many other organisations within the Public Sector
are vulnerable to "divide and conquer" requests, and
this is an area that requires further research and development
centrally.
6.3 Consistency from the DCA
There have been high staff turnover levels in the DCA since
the development of the Publication Scheme in 2003. Indeed, the
individuals who drafted the legislation in the DCA have since
moved on and it is our belief that there is nobody left within
the team who was involved in writing the legislation. This is
causing problems in interpreting the legislation in certain areas
and ACPO are having to take QC advice on certain sections where
the wording is not clearly defined (eg Section 8). The DCA representatives
that attend Project Board meetings are never the same, resulting
in little consistency.
6.4 Fees
Fees within the Act are causing us concern due to the impact
of these on the Service plus the lack of a planned review process
that is essential to reassess costs after the initial implementation.
6.5 Data sharing
Due to the different levels of preparedness of authorities
within the public sector, it is unclear how each individual authority
will deal with requests and ACPO are concerned that there is a
possibility that our information may be released inappropriately
without consultation.
6.6 Publicity
Publicity of the Act to the general public; we are unsure
as to what will be done and what the impacts to the Service may
be.
6.7 Future FOI conferences
Pre the development of the Publication Scheme, considerable
conferences were hosted by the DCA, which were extremely informative,
well received and free to Public Authorities. Post the delivery
of the Publication Scheme (mid 2003) this has ended. Since then,
the Project Executive, Project Manager and numerous force Project
Managers have been consistently bombarded by conference organising
companies to give speeches on FOI free of charge at conferences
where delegate places cost around £400 to £600. This
is an area where we feel the public sector has wasted considerable
money; a more centralized approach could have been continued by
the DCA or another central body to keep authorities informed and
up to date.
6.8 Future DCA guidance
All guidance the DCA has provided has been Whitehall centric
and consideration to other authorities has not been given. For
example the Fees Working Group didn't include a Police Service
representative and the national project team had to push for our
inclusion. In addition, all the guidance that is produced undergoes
Quality Assurance by Whitehall bodies, again ignoring the Police
Service and other public authorities.
7. ACPO VIEW
In addition to the remarks made above, we feel we have the
systems in place for FOI but we acknowledge that these are as
yet untested. The Police Service is at a high level of preparedness,
although we accept there are still dangers to certain areas of
business, particularly historical cases. The Service has a holistic
overview and is hoping this will be enough, due to the lack of
extra resources being provided by the Government.
8. APPENDICES (NOT
PRINTED)
Project Initiation Document (cf. 1)
National Audit Office Review (cf. 1)
FBI High Level Learning by the MPS (cf. 2.4)
The Freedom of Information Manual ACPO v1 (Section 1 only) (cf.
2.7)
Letters to Chief Constables (cf. 3.6)
(i) re publication of BCU Minutes
(ii) re Chief Constable Expenses
9. FURTHER MATERIAL
(AVAILABLE UPON
REQUEST)
All Stage Plans and End Stage Reports for the project (cf.
1)
Compliance Toolkit for the Police Service (cf. 2.1)
Video of Australian research (cf. 2.4)
Other research material (Papers on the Public Interest Test, Sections
30 and 31, Procurement) (cf. 2.4)
ACPO disposal and retention schedule (cf. 2.5)
Manual of Guidance (cf. 2.7 note file size is over 1MB)
Workflow System Statement of Requirement (cf. 2.8)
Safety Camera Partnership Report (cf. 3.5)
The Association of Chief Police Officers
5 October 2004
Annex
CENTRAL REFERRAL
PROCESS (CF
2.10)
PARTNERSHIP STRUCTURE
(CF 2.11)
| 
