|
Status: This Position statement was approved by the General Policing Business Area on 14 September 2004 and establishes the Aims and Policy Objectives outlined in the main police response policy documents to ensure and maintain the value of security systems.
ACPO Aim
Our overall aim is to ensure that the value of security systems in terms of deterring criminality, providing reassurance and presenting opportunities for detection, is developed while reducing the distraction caused by false alarms.
ACPO Policy Objectives
ACPO has developed and maintained its policy on security systems with the intention of:-
•Setting standards for forces in relation to attendance at alarms, withdrawal of service following false activations etc.;
•Ensuring there is good, ongoing liaison and understanding between the police service and the security systems industry;
•Codifying agreements between the service and the industry;
•Supporting the development of new industry standards,
Deterring Criminality
The threat of detection remains one of the key deterrents to criminality. The existence of over one million alarm systems has an unquantifiable but significant effect on crime reduction and deterrence.
Providing Reassurance
The protection provided by security systems can reduce the fear of crime for those associated with the protected premises or business. A secure environment is not just important for individuals; the economic well-being of an area can also depend on having secure, stable locations at which to conduct business.
Opportunities for Detection
In the year 2003, at the 70,804 genuine alarm activations across England and Wales, over 4,500 arrests were made. As the focus on detecting crime sharpens within national policing plans, security systems present a valuable source of potential detections and opportunities for investigation of offences at the more serious end of the volume crime spectrum.
Next Steps
ACPO believes that it is possible to work with the security systems industry and its regulators to reduce drastically the number of false alarms notified to the police, which generate a major abstraction to operational policing resources. Our objective over the next three years is to increase the ratio of genuine: false alarms from 1:8.5 (in 2003) to something much closer to 1:2 (in 2007), i.e. achieve a rate of 0.1 false alarm calls per system per year.
Working with the industry
Good liaison already exists between ACPO and the industry, through the ACPO Security Systems Working Group and the Security Industry Liaison Group; and a growing network of contacts and liaison with key industry bodies and figures including the Security Industry Authority (SIA), the British Security Industry Association (BSIA), the Security Industry Training Organisation (SITO) and the Association of British Insurers (ABI).
This, combined with the ACPO policy developments outlined above, has helped to ensure that common interests are identified and pursued and has no doubt brought the police service to its current level of co-operation with the industry.
However, ACPO believes that a change in the relationship would benefit both the service and the industry, and would help to achieve reductions in false alarm calls. We want to be in a position to promote and support the management of the performance of the industry to meet policing objectives. We want to become more involved in highlighting good practice and monitoring the contribution each part of the industry can make to reducing false alarm calls. We want to support the raising of standards of practice at every stage in the process, i.e. equipment; installation; customer operation; and call filtering through Alarm Response Centres.
In order to achieve this we will conduct work to clarify the role of each link in this chain; identify good practice; and take steps to encourage better performance, e.g. through the use of ACPO branding such as “Secured by Design”.
Removing police attendance
Police response to alarms has been a building block in the relationship between the service and the industry, and has helped to encourage better practice through the understanding that removal of response is the penalty for generating unacceptably frequent false alarms.
A strategic option exists for the service to withdraw entirely from its role in attending alarms. Some parts of the security industry may be interested in taking on the attendance role. This is attractive in that it reduces waste within the police service, and displaces the costs of false alarms back to the industry, thereby creating an incentive for them to reduce false calls. However, the removal of any police attendance may affect public opinion; may affect the impact of alarms on reassurance and crime reduction; and would be likely to reduce opportunities for detection overall. Although there is no current likelihood of such a change, the possibility cannot be ruled out.
Feedback from forces suggests there is no appetite for this option at this time. If at a later date there is further interest in it, ACPO will research the costs and effects involved in order to inform the debate about this issue.
Corporacy
Individual forces, which are of course operationally independent, are entitled to take a view on the priority they attach to alarm calls. However the ACPO policy on alarms is negotiated nationally and the service’s position is weakened when forces choose to derogate from normal practice.
Consequently, any force wishing to reduce the priority to be attached to alarm activations should first discuss their plans with the ACPO lead on security systems. This will at least enable forces to make their decisions based on awareness of all the issues.
ACPO would prefer that forces subscribe to the principles outlined in this position paper, give them time to work, and give support by contributing to a consistent, national, corporate view and operational practice.
Summary of next steps
a)Our objective over the next three years is to increase the ratio of genuine: false alarms from 1:8.5 (in 2003) to 1:2 (in 2007), i.e. achieve a rate of 0.1 false alarm calls per system per year.
b)ACPO will continue to develop and apply the existing policy which is succeeding in reducing false alarm calls.
c)ACPO will conduct work to clarify the role in reducing false alarms of equipment; installation; customer operation; and call filtering through Alarm Response Centres. We will identify good practice; and take steps to encourage better performance, e.g. through the use of ACPO branding such as “Secured by Design”.
d)ACPO will conduct work to assess the value of current self-regulatory arrangements in ensuring best practice and optimum performance.
e)ACPO may conduct research inform the debate about whether the response to alarm calls should be transferred to the security industry.
f)ACPO will request forces to subscribe to the principles outlined in this position paper, give them time to work, and give support by contributing to a consistent corporate view and operational practice.
g)The above work will need to be resourced and options to achieve this will be the subject of further discussion.
Appendix A - Additional notes
The police service promotes good standards in the industry by supporting development work on British and European standards for equipment. We also operate a sanction against false alarms by removing our response when a threshold of false alarms has been reached.
What we now need to develop is a joint process whereby the performance of every link in the chain that leads to an alarm call is monitored and managed.
The links in the chain are:-
1. The customer. Most false alarm activations are attributed to operator error. This can be affected by the threat of sanction, i.e. police non-attendance; but it could be better influenced by the provision of training and designing out these errors by utilising the review of DD243.
2. The equipment. Standards exist for the technology itself, although technology is developing and the development of standards takes time. ACPO does not want to undertake the role of approval of technology because bodies already exist that do so.
3. The installers. The better quality installers are regulated by the National Security Inspectorate (NSI formerly NACOSS). They inspect to the ACPO Sector Scheme and are independently inspected to that Scheme by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service (UKAS).
4. The Alarm Response Centre (ARC). There are numerous ARCs operating around the country. They too are subject to an inspection regime by NSI, see 3. above) but the rigour of the regimes, and how well they contribute to a reduction in false alarms, is not clear to us. ARCs should operate as the “gatekeeper” of the alarms industry; if they are supported by the right systems, processes and incentives they have the potential to filter out false calls to a great extent. Anecdotal evidence suggests that if all ARCs operated to the standards of the most effective, false alarms passed to the police would be minimal.
The latest versions of this Policy and other related documents can be downloaded via the following links:
"Strategy for a Police National Alarms Policy (April 2005)"
"The Police National Alarms Policy (October 2005)"
The Police National Alarms Policy (October 2005) sets out the Police authorities rules and conditions regarding requesting a Police attendance. If any potential request for Police attendance does not meet all of these conditions, then a request for Police attendance must not be made. This policy has worked well and has caused a substantial reduction in the Police budget and resources problems that related to their responding to alarm activations.
Please see how MSI improved the situation by clicking on the RDV Logo above.
|
