Summary

Jointly owned by the College of Policing and NPCC, there are four main workstreams within the Race Action Plan supported by two enabling workstreams (Performance and Data, and Evidence and Evaluation):

Internal culture and inclusivity

Use of powers

Community engagement

Protection from victimisation

A Programme Board meets every two months to review activity and oversee progress, reporting to the Independent Scrutiny and Oversight Board. As at July 2023 there are 25 ice-breaker forces who have either already shown examples of good practice or are willing to pilot activity.

The report contains seven key recommendations:

Restructure of the Race Action Plan to better reflect an anti-racism programme: It is noted that this is not an operational policing programme, yet the structure is cumbersome and hierarchical, closely following structures that exist in policing itself – despite it being reported that the structure of policing manifests racism and other forms of discrimination. Additionally, there are concerns around frequent personnel changes and “level of burden” on workstream coordinators. It is recommended the programme structure is flattened.

Introduce tangible and measurable performance metrics: It is noted that “actionable and meaningful metrics are missing from the Police Race Action Plan” and suggested that forthcoming reports or inspections that crossover with HMICFRS and IOPC are highlighted.

Identify clear areas of focus: The lack of prioritisation and activity in some key areas is noted to be concerning e.g. no focus on stop and search in the Plan despite it being a major driver of mistrust in police by Black communities. This recommendation also calls for better acknowledgement of intersectionality.

Increase engagement with external stakeholders: There is a lack of meaningful stakeholder engagement, noting this as a reason that Black communities and civil society organisations are reluctant to be involved with the police. This includes feelings of not being listened to, concerns of being “mined” for information, and names being listed in publications stating they have been consulted without demonstrable evidence their responses have been truly considered.

Develop and deliver a clear communications strategy: There has been limited communication with the public. When raised by the ISOB they were told communication should be left to local forces – despite clear areas of national ownership. This means lack of public awareness of positive work delivered by the programme. A Race Action Plan website is recommended along with regular public updates and an annual summit – the programme has committed to implement this throughout 2023.

Improve the flow of information to the ISOB: The ISOB has limited information on local delivery and information is not always shared as openly as expected.

Provide adequate resourcing to the Plan: Much of the day-to-day running of the Plan falls to workstream coordinators with no individual administrative support. Frequency of personnel changes is also noted as a difficulty. It is recommended the programme put in long-term structures to support organisational memory e.g. proper functioning human resources and project management systems. A commitment has been made from NPCC to consider structure and resourcing in the programme.

Additionally, each workstream has specific recommendations for what should be included in the reiterated Plan and have flagged areas of concern which include:

Racial disparities in recruitment as part of the Police Uplift Programme

Lack of clarity on desired outcomes

Lack of scrutiny in local implementation

Lack of intersectional focus

Lack of focus in the Plan on technologies Black communities have expressed concerns about

Lack of external engagement

Siloed working

Poor resourcing