Hampshire Police Authority

25 September, 2001

Hampshire Independent Custody Visiting Scheme (formerly Lay Visiting)

Report of the Clerk

Contact: Miss S. Jackson. 01962 871595

1. Introduction

1.1. Independent Custody Visiting (formerly Lay Visiting) to police stations owes its origin to Lord Scarman, whose report on the Brixton disorders in 1981, recommended a system of independent, unannounced inspection of procedures and detention in police stations by local community members. The main reason was to counter growing mistrust of the police and to increase their accountability to the general public. Whilst Scarman advocated a statutory arrangement, Home Office Ministers approved a lay visiting system which was non-statutory.

1.2. In 1983 the Home Office produced provisional guidance and this was subsequently updated by Home Office Circular 4/92 which was issued to all chief officers and police authorities in January, 1992 advising scheme revisions.

1.3. The Government has now issued Home Office Circular 15/2001 which provides further guidance aimed at improving the service and establishing standards of performance across all areas of custody visiting activities, from recruitment and training to visiting procedures and feedback.

1.4. It is necessary, therefore, to review the operation of the Hampshire Scheme and consider what changes, if any, the Authority wishes to make in response to the revised guidelines.

1.5. In addition, and linked to the outcome of that review, it will be necessary to update the booklet "Guidelines for Lay Visits to Police Stations" which is issued to all Members of the Hampshire Scheme.

2. Revised Guidelines

2.1. The Authority's Lay Visiting Scheme was based on HOC4/92 but has been amended from time to time to reflect best practice which has evolved both locally and nationally, and with the advice of the National Association for Lay Visiting (now Independent Custody Visiting Association). Consequently, much of what is included in the new guidance is already incorporated in the Authority's Scheme but there are still areas where changes could be made.

2.2. Detailed below are the key areas where changes to the Authority's current Scheme should be considered. A copy of HOC15/2001 is attached.

(i) Paragraphs 1 to 5 - Introducing Independent Custody Visiting

The guidance confirms the change of name from "Lay Visiting" to "Independent Custody Visiting" and reiterate that whilst the Home Office provides central guidance on how Independent Custody Visiting should be organised and carried out, responsibility for delivery lies with police authorities working in consultation with police forces.

RECOMMENDATION A

It is recommended that the Hampshire Lay Visiting Scheme be renamed the Hampshire Independent Custody Visiting Scheme with immediate effect.


(ii) Paragraph 6 - The Process

This paragraph provides an explanation of Independent Custody Visiting.

CURRENT POSITION:

Current procedures accord with those set out in the revised guidelines.


(iii) Paragraphs 7 to 8 - The Purpose

These paragraphs refer to the expectations and value to those involved in the process.

CURRENT POSITION:

The purpose of Independent Custody Visiting, as stated in the revised guidelines, reiterates and expands upon the purpose stated in the Authority's own Guidelines.

RECOMMENDATION B:

It is recommended that the purpose of Independent Custody Visiting, as set out in the revised guidelines, be adopted.


(iv) Paragraphs 9 to 12 - Evolution of Independent Custody Visiting

These paragraphs set out the history and background of Lay/Independent Custody Visiting.

COMMENT:

The issue of the revised guidelines does, as suggested, provide an opportunity to boost the visibility of Independent Custody Visiting procedures both locally and nationally. Although no specific proposals are made as to how the visibility of procedures could be raised, the Scheme Administrator and the Authority's Media Services Officer will consider ways that this can be done.



RECOMMENDATION C:

It is recommended that the Scheme Administrator in consultation with the Media Services Officer consider ways of raising the profile of the Hampshire Scheme as a result of the issue of the revised guidelines.


(v) Paragraphs 13-17 - Organisation and Infrastructure

This section sets out the Police Authority's roles and responsibilities with regard to Independent Custody Visiting.

COMMENT:

The Authority's Deputy Clerk is the Scheme Administrator with overall responsibility for the central administration of Independent Custody Visiting.

The Hampshire Scheme has operated on a "panel" system based on policing divisions since 1992 and therefore accords with the current guidance. Each Panel has a Convenor who is responsible for organising the work of its members and reporting back to the Authority on a regular basis.

All Independent Custody Visitors (ICVs) have the opportunity to attend an annual Seminar and the Scheme Administrator makes arrangements for six monthly meetings with the four Convenors and police representatives to discuss the overall running of the Scheme.

The Scheme Administrator, in liaison with a police colleague, arranges the recruitment and training of ICVs with input from Panel Convenors as appropriate.

RECOMMENDATION D:

It is recommended that the current arrangements relating to the organisation/structure of the Hampshire Independent Custody Visiting Scheme continue as they accord with those set out in the current guidelines.


(vi) Paragraphs 18 - 21 - Organising Recruitment

These sections require police authorities to establish clear policies for recruiting, selecting and ensuring adequate numbers of ICVs. It suggests a small group to oversee recruitment.

CURRENT POSITION:

The recruitment of visitors to the Hampshire Scheme has, over the life of the Scheme, been conducted on an ad hoc basis in response to need and, to date, sufficient new recruits have been attracted to ensure the continued viability of the Scheme.


Whilst it is recognised that membership of the Scheme should be representative of the local community in terms of such factors, as age, gender and ethnicity, it has proved difficult in practice to ensure such an outcome, despite targeted action being take. All efforts will continue to be taken, however, to help ensure that the Scheme is as representative as possible whenever a recruitment campaign is undertaken.

With regard to the suggestion to establish a small group to advise on and help oversee the recruitment and selection process, it is suggested that the Scheme Administrator, the four Panel Convenors and the relevant Police representative undertake this role as necessary.

RECOMMENDATION E:

It is recommended that the current ad hoc recruitment policy be continued and that the Scheme Administrator, the four Panel Convenors and a Police representative, together, be responsible for the recruitment and selection process.


(vii) Paragraphs 22 - 29 - The Recruitment Process

These paragraphs recommend that a job description and person specification be drawn up for the role of Independent Custody Visitor against which applicants should be assessed and which would also act as defence in allegations of discrimination in the selection process.

It also recommends the development of a standard application form, an information pack for applicants, and suggests that interviews should take place before appointment.

CURRENT POSITION:

Previous recruitment campaigns have involved the placing of adverts in the local media and the targeting of ethnic minority groups. Posters have also been placed in local libraries and police stations. Word of mouth recommendations also account for a number of approaches to the Authority for details about the Scheme. The Scheme Administrator has also conducted radio interviews concerning the Scheme and Custody Visitors themselves have been interviewed or appeared on community television slots.

Whilst a standard application form for membership of the Scheme is used, this will need revising in the light of the new guidance. No specific job description or person specification is used currently although the booklet produced by the ICVA which sets out the duties/role of a Custody Visitor in some detail, is sent to the applicant together with general information specifically about the Hampshire Scheme.

The application process does not currently include an interview stage. Instead, applicants who have read the pre-read material and remain interested in the Scheme, are invited to attend a one day training seminar at a police station. This provides an opportunity for the applicant to experience at first hand the conditions in a custody suite and then to judge for themselves whether or not they feel suited to the role. The next stage in the training process is six months on the job probationary period at the end of which the Scheme Administrator and the relevant Panel Convenor assess whether or not that person had the potential to be an effective ICV.

The role of Independent Custody Visitor is a voluntary one and a formal interview as envisaged by the new guidance can be a daunting prospect and some individuals who might not do themselves justice in an interview situation might, nonetheless, make a good Custody Visitor given the opportunity to train for six months with their experienced panel colleagues. The end of the probationary period built into the Hampshire Scheme provides a further safeguard should an individual, despite training, be considered by the Panel Convenor not to be suitable for the role. All applicants are the subject of a police vetting check and the applicant is asked to provide the names of two referees.

The four Panel Convenors have been consulted on the new guidance and have suggested that where large recruitment drives are being planned an information evening is held at which Custody Visitors and the Scheme Administrator can be on hand to provide information to interested individuals. This will sift out some people who do not feel suited to the role whilst others who remain interested will be invited to complete an application form which would then be sifted by the Scheme Administrator and the Panel Convenors with the successful applicants attending the initial training day.

The ICVA will be issuing its revised practical guidance on recruitment procedures in the near future which will be helpful when revising the procedures in Hampshire.

RECOMMENDATION F:

That the recruitment process in Hampshire be revised in the light of the new guidance and the views expressed above.


(viii) Paragraphs 30 - 37 - Who Should Be Selected?

This section provides details of the qualities required and recommends that Magistrates and Police Authority Members should not serve as independent Custody Visitors.

CURRENT POSITION:

The Authority has always supported the participation of Magistrates, should they wish to do so, in the custody visiting process subject to certain safeguards whereby individuals do not visit police stations within their own Bench area. In practice there has never been an instance in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight where a conflict has arisen as a result of a magistrate acting in this role.

In addition, Authority Members themselves are given the opportunity to serve as Custody Visitors if they choose to do so. Indeed, the Authority has considered that it is a strength of the Scheme that a small number of its Members volunteer to serve as ICVs as this provides a firm link between the Scheme and the Authority and an understanding of each other's roles. Consultation with the Panel Convenors, has revealed strong support for the continuation of this situation. Currently there are three Members who serve in this role and two new Members have expressed an interest in attending the next training event.

Paragraph 35 of the Home Office Circular is very clear in expressing the view that the direct involvement by Police Authority Members in the Scheme is not a practice which is viewed favourably. The Home Office considers that such an involvement by Members could be prejudicial to the public perception of the "independence" of the Scheme and that consequently Members should withdraw at the earliest opportunity. However, this Circular provides guidance to police authorities and it is possible, in theory, for Members to continue to be Custody Visitors although this would seem to be inconsistent with the sentiments expressed by the Home Office.

RECOMMENDATION G:

It is recommended that the Authority should consider whether or not to exclude Magistrates and Police Authority Members from the Scheme in the light of the revised guidelines.


(ix) Paragraphs 38-39 - Basis of Service

It is suggested that the use of formal contracts is not appropriate for a Custody Visiting Scheme but there is a need to set out within a written memorandum of understanding the agreed responsibilities and legitimate expectations of an Independent Custody Visitor. It also refers to the Authority's responsibility to provide a pass for admittance to police stations.

CURRENT POSITION:

A draft memorandum of understanding has been circulated to Panels for comment but has yet to be introduced. This will now be done in the light of the revised guidance.

The Authority issues each Visitor with an identity card but they are not time limited. Consideration will be given to this at the next Panel Convenors/Police meeting.

RECOMMENDATION H:

It is recommended that (a) the use of the Memorandum of Understanding be approved and that (b), as a result of the re-naming of the Scheme, new identity cards be issued as soon as practicable.


(x) Paragraphs 40-41 - Tenure

This section recommends a minimum age of 18 years with no upper age limit and that appointments should be reviewed on a regular basis. A probationary period of six months is suggested before an initial three year appointment is confirmed. There is no limit to the total length of service but a balance needs to be struck between experience and the need to avoid staleness and bring in fresh perspectives from time to time.

CURRENT POSITION:

Any adult person residing in the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Police Authority area (other than those within the excluded categories of the Scheme) may currently be appointed as a Custody Visitor.

There is no upper age limit and Visitors are appointed on a four year renewable basis following the successful completion of a six month probationary period. Renewal of a Custody Visitor's term of office is subject to a review of their performance in the role (the monitoring of which is undertaken on an ongoing basis).

RECOMMENDATION I:

It is recommended that the current arrangements whereby Custody Visitors are appointed on a four year renewable basis following a six month probationary period be continued.


(xi) Paragraphs 42-43 - Removal

Independent Custody Visitors may be removed for misconduct or poor performance but must be given the opportunity to respond either in writing or by personal representation where there is an attempt to remove them. It is also recommended that there is the right of appeal to the Authority.

CURRENT POSITION:

There have not been many occasions in the past where it has been necessary to write to a Custody Visitor with regard to poor performance but, in each case, the individuals concerned were advised of the grounds on which removal was being considered and invited to respond. There is currently no formal process laid down for an appeal to be made to the Police Authority and this will be remedied at the earliest opportunity.

RECOMMENDATION J:

It is recommended that the current (pre-appeal stage) procedures be continued and that the Scheme Administrator approach the ICVA for a model appeal process to be adopted in Hampshire.


(xii) Paragraph 44 - Complaints Procedures

This paragraph outlines the need to ensure there are procedures established to deal with complaints made by or about ICVs, including complaints from or about police officers or detainees, with clear channels of feedback to all concerned.

CURRENT POSITION:

Instances of complaints are very rare but any that have been received in the past (from whatever source) are investigated with appropriate action being taken at the relevant level and feedback provided to interested parties.

Given the range of issues/complaints that can be involved, a flexible approach to the response made has been found to be the most effective way to deal with such matters.

RECOMMENDATION K:

It is recommended that the current, flexible approach, to dealing with complaints be continued.


(xiii) Paragraph 45 - Payment

This paragraph recommends that Independent Custody Visitors should only be reimbursed for their legitimate expenses incurred in carrying out visits and should not receive any other form of payment.

CURRENT POSITION:

Visitors are currently reimbursed their travel expenses in connection with the conduct of visits, their attendance at the Annual Meeting of all Visitors, their attendance at any National Conferences, and meetings of Panels. Some modest incidental expenses such as postage are also reimbursed.

In addition, since the Scheme was last revised in 1992 and established on a panel based system, the Authority has paid an honorarium to the four Panel Convenors whose contributions to the success of the Hampshire Scheme have been significant. These individuals are solely responsible for the drawing up of the rota of visits for the police stations in their areas and ensuring that the minimum number of visits stipulated by the Authority are achieved. Although the guidance does not recommend any other form of payment or retainer to be paid to ICVs it is strongly recommended that the honorarium paid to the Panel Convenors is continued. The current payment is £275 which has not been reviewed since 1996. It is suggested that this be increased to £350 from April 2002.

RECOMMENDATION L:

That the current system of reimbursement to Independent Custody Visitors and Panel Convenors be continued and that the honorarium paid to Convenors be increased to £350.


(xiv) Paragraph 46 - Insurance

This requires police authorities to make insurance provision to deal with claims relating to personal injuries or any other matters which may arise out of the Independent Custody Visitors' work.

CURRENT POSITION:

Appropriate insurance is maintained to cover the activities of Visitors whilst on police premises (ie public liability and personal accident).

RECOMMENDATION M:

That the current position be noted.


(xv) Paragraphs 47-48 - Responsibility for Training

These paragraphs emphasise that the responsibility for training lies with the Police Authority with input from the police and experienced ICVs an advantage. It highlights the ICVA as a useful source for delivery and best practice.

CURRENT POSITION:

The Authority fully recognises its responsibilities in respect of training and has co-ordinated the provision of training, both initial and refresher, in close conjunction with appropriate police personnel, the Panel Convenors and the ICVA. The support and input provided by the ICVA in respect of the training of Custody Visitors has proved very helpful.

RECOMMENDATION N:

It is recommended that (a) the close working relationship with the ICVA be maintained; (b) that the training modules developed by the ICVA for use nationally be employed, as appropriate, in the Authority's training programme; and (c) the involvement of Panel Convenors in the training process be continued.


(xvi) Paragraphs 49-53 - Structure and Contents

This section suggests that training should be divided into three broad categories; initial training, induction training, and continuing training.

CURRENT POSITION:

The initial training in Hampshire occurs during the one day training session delivered jointly by the Scheme Administrator and a police colleague using a combination of locally based training approaches and the "standard" ICVA package. This is supported by appropriate pre-reading material. Induction training is undertaken during the six month probationary period when new Custody Visitors are initially paired with experienced colleagues in order that they can develop their skills and gain confidence in the performance of their new role. Continuing training is provided whenever appropriate. Refresher training events are organised on a yearly basis as far as possible and these sessions are delivered, in the main, by an ICVA trainer. The quarterly meetings of Custody Visitor Panels and the Annual Meeting of Custody Visitors also provide ideal opportunities for the sharing and dissemination of best practice and the addressing of practical issues which emerge from the visiting process. Periodic attendance at ICVA organised conferences and other gatherings has also provided a further opportunity to benefit from others knowledge and experience.

RECOMMENDATION O:

It is recommended that the current training structure be endorsed.


(xvii) Paragraph 54 - Evaluating Training

This section recommends that feedback from training sessions must be obtained and measured against training objectives and its impact on visiting at police stations.

CURRENT POSITION:

Custody Visitors in receipt of training are asked to complete evaluation forms and these are used to review the format and effectiveness of future courses. The carrying out of visits, and any feedback received, enables an evaluation to be made of the conduct and performance of individual Visitors. This gives an indication of whether training objectives are being achieved and where further additional training can usefully be delivered.

RECOMMENDATION P:

It is recommended that the current processes for the evaluation of training be continued.


(xviii) Paragraphs 55 - 61 - Frequency and Coverage

These paragraphs recommend that visiting programmes should be established and suggests frequency levels which should be determined in consultation with the police. The frequency of visits should be monitored by Panel Convenors and the Scheme Administrator against expectations and a report made to the Police Authority at regular intervals. Visits to all police facilities where detainees are held including non-designated police stations which only accommodate detainees for a short term was also recommended. The officer in charge of a local police station should always inform the Authority where a death in custody occurs.

CURRENT POSITION:

On the whole, visiting frequency levels in the Authority's Scheme accord with the minimum levels set out in the guidelines. There is scope, however, to review the levels and this will be considered at the next meeting of the four Panel Convenors, the Scheme Administrator and the police in October. The carrying out/frequency of visits is monitored by the Scheme Administrator and reports on this matter are submitted on a six monthly basis to the Authority. Where insufficient visits are taking place, the causes are investigated, in conjunction with the relevant Panel Convenor, in order to ensure that corrective action is taken. Visits to non-designated custody suites have taken place in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight for some time at the request, in the first instance, of Custody Visitors and supported by the Chief Constable.

The Authority's own Guidelines for Lay Visits to Police Stations currently stipulate that the relevant Convenor should be notified if a death in custody occurs in their Panel area. The Guidelines permit the making of a visit following a death in custody although Custody Visitors would not be allowed to see the body or have access to the custody record. Special visits are also permitted under the Authority's Scheme whereby the officer in charge of a station could make arrangements through the relevant Panel Convenor for a visit to be made in circumstances where there are local tensions which such a visit might help to diffuse. This has happened in recent years in relation to large scale police operations.

RECOMMENDATION Q:

It is recommended (a) that the current visiting frequency be reviewed; (b) that the current practice of visiting non-designated custody suites continue; (c) that the arrangements relating to the making of special visits be continued.


(xix) Paragraphs 62-64 - Working Arrangements and Conducting Visits

These sections recommend that police authorities contact the ICVA for detailed practical guidance and emphasise that visits must be made in pairs. Visits should be random and unannounced.

CURRENT POSITION:

It has always been the practice in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight for visits to be undertaken by pairs of Visitors. Where one member of a visiting team is unexpectedly not able to attend and the remaining Visitor arrives at the police station unaware of that fact, the visit is aborted. Visiting rotas are prepared by the Panel Convenors and visits are unannounced and do not conform to a regular pattern.

RECOMMENDATION R:

That the current practice of conducting visits in Hampshire and the Isle of Wight continues.


(xx) Paragraphs 65-68 - Visiting Procedures at Stations

These sections relate to the procedures to be followed when carrying out a Custody Visit.

CURRENT POSITION:

Current procedures accord with those set out in the revised guidelines.


(xxi) Paragraphs 69-77 - Access to Detainees

These paragraphs set out the categories of detainees who may be visited in police custody and outline the manner in which those persons can be seen. It also refers to persons detained by non Home Office police forces such as the British Transport Police who are not covered by these arrangements although they may be visited with the consent of the Force concerned. Reference to this should be included in the Authority's Scheme.

CURRENT POSITION:

Current procedures accord with those set out in the revised guidelines.


(xxii) Paragraphs 78-84 - Conversations with Detainees

These sections highlight the fact that conversations between detainees and Independent Custody Visitors should focus on the detainees rights and entitlements and the conditions of detention. Whilst conversations with detainees are private, immediate concerns, with the detainee's permission, will be passed on to the police for corrective action to be taken. Independent Custody Visitors do not have a right of privilege and contents of conversations may be passed on or disclosed in legal proceedings. It is important for Independent Custody Visitors to make detainees aware of this fact and for Visitors not to be drawn into discussing the reasons for detention or discussing areas outside their remit. Visitors must not pass messages for any items for detainees.

CURRENT POSITION:

Current training practices cover the issues raised in these paragraphs but the wording of the Authority's Scheme needs to be amended to reflect the situation more specifically in line with the Guidance.


(xxiii) Paragraphs 85-86 - Custody Records

The areas on which Independent Custody Visitors should concentrate on when checking custody records are set out in this section. When a detainee cannot decide whether or not to allow access themselves the presumption should be in favour of allowing access.




CURRENT POSITION:

Current procedures accord with those set out in the revised guidelines.


(xxiv) Paragraph 87 - CCTV Footage

Access to CCTV footage is a matter for local discretion but the Home Office view is that Independent Custody Visitors should carry out their functions in person, as their role is interactive with detainees and police. In addition, it may infringe the privacy of detainees who have not given their permission for a visit to take place. Visitors should, however, be able to see that CCTV is operational.

CURRENT POSITION:

Where CCTV is installed in a custody suite, Visitors are able to check that it is working properly. In practice, Visitors are not able to view CCTV footage.

RECOMMENDATION S:

It is recommended that whilst Visitors should routinely check the functioning of CCTV systems operating in custody suites, they should not have access to recorded footage.


(xxv) Paragraph 88 - Medical Issues

This paragraph states that Independent Custody Visitors have no right to see detainees' medical records. They should establish from the custody officer that treatment instructed by a medical examiner has been administered and has been recorded in the custody record.

CURRENT POSITION

Current procedures accord with those set out in the revised guidelines.


(xxvi) Paragraphs 89 - 91 - Dealing with Issues and Complaints

These paragraphs outline the procedures to be followed when dealing with issues of concern and complaints raised by detainees and, on occasions, by remand and sentence to prisoners who may be held in Police Stations.

CURRENT POSITION

Current procedures accord with those set out in the revised guidelines.


(xxvii) Paragraphs 92 - 95 - Effective Working Partnerships

These sections set out the need for professional working relationships between the Police and Independent Custody Visitors. It highlights potential problem areas that both sides need to be aware of and the need to establish local solutions for dealing with these problems. It is suggested that there may be a need for Police Authorities to develop their own code of conduct for Independent Custody Visiting.

CURRENT POSITION

The Hampshire Scheme does not currently have a code of conduct for visiting and, again, this should be a matter to be considered between the Panel Conveners, the Scheme Administrator and the Police.

RECOMMENDATION T:

It is recommended that consideration be given to the introduction of a formal code of conduct.


(xxviii) Paragraphs 96 - 98 - Reporting on a Visit

These sections emphasise the need for accurate and concise reports and for all parties in the process to receive copies.

CURRENT POSITION

Current procedures accord with those set out in the revised guidelines.


(xxix) Paragraphs 99 - 100 - Confidentiality and Disclosure

These paragraphs explain that Independent Custody Visitors do not have a right of privilege and may have to disclose the contents of visits and even appear as witnesses in Court cases. Report forms should include an undertaking not to reveal the names of persons visited.

CURRENT POSITION

Current procedures accord with those set out in the revised guidelines.


(xxx) Paragraphs 101 - 105 - Feedback and Making a Difference

This section stresses the need for effective feedback and relationships between the Independent Custody Visitors, the Police Authority and the Police. It suggests that the appropriate responsible officer in the Police Service should be at the rank of Assistant Chief Constable and that the Scheme Administrator should ensure that reports from ICVs are regularly received by Police Authorities and that visiting features in the annual report of the Authority.

CURRENT POSITION

Much good work has gone into building effective working relations between Custody Visitors and the Police since the Scheme was last revised in 1992. Both parties are well briefed as to the expectations placed upon them in performance of their respective roles, and whenever possible, issues raised during the course of visits are assessed as quickly as possible. The Scheme Administrator has a liaison point within the Force on all matters relating to the day to day running of the Scheme and for training related matters. The Scheme itself has the strong support of the Chief Constable and the ACPO Team and the meetings of the Panel Convenors and the Scheme Administrator are attended at Chief Superintendent level.

Where issues raised are incapable of early resolution these are referred to either the officer in charge of the Police Station or the Divisional Commander for action as appropriate. Panel Convenors can approach their relevant Divisional Commander direct, the designated Police Officer in the Operational Support Unit, or the Chief Superintendent responsible for custody matters in the Force, direct on any particular issues concerning Custody Visiting.

The receipt by the Scheme Administrator of copies of visit forms enables issues raised and follow up action taken to be closely monitored. Moreover it enables any trends emerging from visits to be determined and appropriate action taken. This will be aided in the near future by the provision of a computerised package produced by the ICVA specifically for Scheme Administrators.

The Scheme Administrator also produces regular reports for submission to the Police Authority on how the Scheme is operating with, attached as appendices, the six monthly reports from Panel Convenors.

A brief report on the operation of the Scheme and the number of visits undertaken throughout the year is included in the Police Authority's Annual Report.

RECOMMENDATION U:

It is recommended that the current procedures for feedback/action be continued.


(xxxi) Paragraphs 106 - 108 - Sharing Experience and Concerns

Local meetings of ICVs are encouraged for support, problem solving and to combat any feelings of isolation. Local conferences are welcomed and the ICV's national and regional conferences and seminars are valued.

CURRENT POSITION

Currently, Panels meet on a quarterly basis to discuss the operation of, and issues affecting, the Scheme in their own areas. In addition the Scheme Administrator meets with the four Panel Convenors and the Police on a six monthly basis to discuss issues of a more general nature effecting the Scheme. An annual meeting is also held to which all ICVs are invited. At these meetings, in addition to providing an opportunity for discussion regarding the operation of the Scheme, presentations are made on any specific matters/issues affecting Custody Visiting (e.g. the work of a police surgeon or a duty solicitor).

As a member of ICVA, the Police Authority receives details of both regional and national conferences and, where appropriate, arrangements for the Scheme Administrator and/or Visitors (together with a Police representative if appropriate) to attend are made.

RECOMMENDATION V:

It is recommended that the current structure of meetings and conference/seminar attendances be continued.


(xxxii) Paragraphs 109 - 114 - Reviewing Performance

This section suggests that Police Authorities should review and monitor the performance of their ICVs. The findings of ICVs and details of authorities' monitoring and review arrangements should appear in their annual report. The ICVA may be able to assist and HMIC will continue to report on Custody Visiting during their inspections.

CURRENT POSITION

The receipt of copies of visit report forms enables checks to be made on
(a) the frequency with which visits to specific custody suites are occurring;
(b) the number of detainees in custody who agree to receive a visit, and (c) the quality with which visit report forms are being completed.

Previous HMIC inspections have reviewed the operation of the Hampshire Scheme and appropriate statistical information has been provided to inform those reviews.

RECOMMENDATION W:

It is recommended that, in consultation with the ICVA, consideration be given to whether a more detailed system of performance review should be introduced, bearing in mind the voluntary nature of Custody Visiting.


(xxxiii) Paragraphs 115 - 120 - Raising Awareness

These sections set out the need for Police Authorities to raise awareness locally and publicise the Independent Custody Visiting processes in their areas. Explanatory notices/posters are available through the ICVA to be displayed in custody suites and elsewhere in police buildings in order to raise awareness of the existence and purpose of the Custody Visiting system. These posters have recently been updated to take account of the new name of the ICVA (formerly NALV) and new posters will be circulated to all relevant establishments in the near future. The verbal explanation given by escorting officers to detainees using the cue card for this purpose prior to a visit (when their consent is being sought) furthers the awareness process.

Publicity for Custody Visiting beyond the confines of police stations has, to date, largely been confined to that organised in support of periodic recruitment campaigns. However, an article has been included in the Police Authority's Annual Report for the last few years and a section of the Police Authority's website will include information about Custody Visiting and, hopefully, the ability to complete electronic application forms.

The Scheme Administrator and the Authority's Media Services Officer will be looking at how to improve the effectiveness of the advertising/publicity organised in support of recruitment campaigns and, more generally, how to raise awareness of the Scheme.

RECOMMENDATION X:

It is recommended that consideration be given to identifying ways of achieving greater publicity about the existence and operation of the Scheme.

3. Conclusion

3.1. It is refreshing to note that there is much in the new guidance which is already a feature of the Hampshire Scheme. However, there are several areas where improvements can be made and procedures revised and these will now be undertaken with a view to instigating changes at the earliest opportunity.

RECOMMENDATION:

That the Independent Custody Visiting Scheme be revised in the light of Home Office Circular 15/2001 and the recommendations contained in this report and a copy be circulated to all Independent Custody Visitors in due course.

4fR22901