Lambeth Gun Crime Programme: ‘Phoenix Programme’ (prevention strand) Defining our function…

1. Lambeth Gun Crime Programme:‘Phoenix Programme’ (prevention strand)Defining our function… In association with: Date Arial 14pt

2. The Phoenix ProgrammeThe content of today's presentation: • What is the ‘Phoenix’ Programme? • Why undertake this programme? • What is aim of this programme? • How will it achieve its aim? • How have we achieved our progress to date? • What were the blockages? • What would we have done differently? • Where do we see this programme in the future? • Putting it into context!

3. The Phoenix ProgrammeWhat is it? • Gun ‘enabled’ crime prevention and reduction strategy • Exclusively focussed towards local community • Meet urgent needs of the local youth offending team • Tailored towards addressing the needs of the individual young offender • Maximises the collective efficacy by empowering voluntary and community sector projects therefore, • local community now to engage with and tackle young offenders • Strong, resilient and credible partnership between the police, local authority and community

4. The Phoenix ProgrammeWhat is it? ‘Phoenix’ Programme

5. The Phoenix ProgrammeWhy undertake this programme? • Gun ‘enabled’ crime continues to attract young people • Stubborn resistance despite extensive campaigns and enforcement – social factors very powerful! Facts: • Gun enabled crime in Lambeth: 272 • Street robbery offences in Lambeth: 2516 But… • more than 20 murders in Lambeth since 2001 and, • fear of gun crime and stigmatisation growing in the community Figures sourced from MPS website and BCU intelligence unit

6. The Phoenix ProgrammeWhy undertake this programme? • Review commissioned by strategic leads • Effectiveness dogged by ‘mixed messages’ based on anecdote • Crime levels worrying • Excessive use of activity based programmes (a lot of passion but no substance) • Little evidence of a partnership or collaborative ethos • Failure to focus on, or understand, the cause of the problem • Obsession with the ‘strategic’ perspective • No tangible outcome

7. The Phoenix ProgrammeWhat is its aim? • Reduce gun enabled crime • Embed collaborative working through effective partnership between statutory and voluntary (community) sector • Minimise risk associated with gun enabled crime by working intensely with the local community • Improve intelligence – it challenges our beliefs! • Engage with, and tackle the ‘core’ group; the obvious priority • Engage with the bigger picture – family and carers • Improve life chances, attitude and behaviour

8. The Phoenix ProgrammeWhat is its aim? Community delivered intervention projects

9. The Phoenix ProgrammeHow have we achieved our progress to date? Reduction in offending…… Effective targeting • Critical Interventions • Numeracy and literacy • Parenting and relationships • Education, training and employment • Life skills and social skills • Offender behaviour group work • Substance misuse • Synthesising research • Academic • Community • NACRO • YOT • MPS Understanding to inform specific strategy • 50 cohort • Statutory • Mandatory • Community efficacy • Tangible outcomes • Integrated • Evaluated • Control group • Know crime • Know about crime • problems • Know what reduces crime • Know how to put it into practice • Know who to involve • Know where to • distribute resources • Know why – values, • politics, ethics

10. The Phoenix ProgrammeWhat have we learnt? • Programme management (our version): • Understand the market • Exploit diversity – without it you won’t survive • Requires considerable emotional intelligence: transformation takes place because of personality then processes • Highly consultative and uncompromising honesty – be provocative • Rigid adherence to agreed criteria • Identified what and who matters • Trusted relationship between strategic and operational leads • The term itself provided confidence and clarity for all concerned • Do not over promise • Ensure accountability threads through the entire process

11. The Phoenix ProgrammeWhat were the blockages? • Persistence of anecdote shaping decision making and policy • Superficial interventions – dodgy rationale • Limited innovation and lack of synthesis of results • Weak or no evaluations • Encouraging rhetoric but reluctance to surrender resources • External pressures to distil original criteria • In this case: police too fast,council too slow • Beware – some like process, other content and some neither! • Money has no political correctness • Personal agendas – ‘picking the blossoming flower’

12. The Phoenix ProgrammeHow have we achieved our progress to date? • Identified exactly what is required from the outset: • Credible delivery agents: black community groups • Effective and transparent governance structure • Evidence to support what the ‘real’ problem is – not anecdote or perception • A universal commitment in all quarters • A very ‘SMART’ action plan to realise key enablers • Adopted programme management fundamentals • Leadership in key positions • Community • Programme Office • Strategic Board

13. The Phoenix ProgrammeWhat would we do differently? • Demarcate between change management and programme management at an earlier stage – if that’s possible • Introduce programme management fundamentals from the outset • Insist on all enablers being in place before you start • Not assume anything or take things for granted • Not waste energy on justifying criteria: it can and will erode your focus

14. The Phoenix ProgrammeWhere do we see this programme in the future? • Motivate others in the community, still hesitant, to mobilise themselves • Hold the strategic sector to account and allow a greater level of influence in shaping policy • Use the current ‘cohort’ in the future as positive role models with active involvement in future interventions • Through a credible evaluation process attract funders away from ‘gimmicky’ and ineffective initiatives • Achieve the full ‘cross-cutting’ programme – ‘Phoenix’ is merely a programme within a programme

15. The Phoenix ProgrammeThe landscape prior to Programme management! Young offender

16. The Phoenix ProgrammeProgramme management: governance begins to take effect… Community delivery agents: ‘Phoenix’ programme

17. Lambeth Gun Crime Programme Board Action Report 14 Draft programme plan 20.2.06 24.0406 9.09.05 6.01.06 3.04.06 14.4.06 19.3.07 17.1006 20.3.06 30.0606 2.10.06 2.10.06 8.01.7 8.01.7 2.04.07 Programme Board: Strategic oversight, setting priorities, coordinating and directing Programme Board: Strategic oversight, setting priorities, coordinating and directing MPS Review and development Programme Office: Development Programme Office: Development Programme Office: Development, monitoring, evaluation and reporting functions Programme Office: Development, monitoring, evaluation and reporting functions GIP On-going activity Programme Consortium (LGCC and GIG merger) initiated Programme Consortium (LGCC and GIG merger) initiated LGCC Development Programme Launch P Commissioning Process I Commissioning Process I E Programme ‘Prevention’ strand Funding released Programme ‘Prevention’ strand Funding released Commissioning Process II Prevention Development Prevention Development Prevention Development Prevention Development Prevention Implementation Prevention Monitoring Prevention Monitoring Prevention Evaluation Prevention Monitoring Enforcement Development Enforcement Implementation Enforcement Monitoring Enforcement Evaluation Enforcement Monitoring Rehabilitation Development Rehabilitation Implementation Rehabilitation Monitoring Rehabilitation Evaluation Rehabilitation Monitoring Risk Cost Resources P – Pre-commissioning phase capacity building E – Evaluation of submitted work proposals

18. Lambeth Gun Crime Programme Board Action Report 14 Draft ‘prevention’ phase commissioning process 24.04.06 06.3.06 20.3.06 3.04.06 14.4.06 24.04.06 Programme launch (local press conference) Programme Board: Strategic oversight, setting priorities, coordinating and directing Programme Board: Strategic oversight, setting priorities, coordinating and directing Programme Office: Development, monitoring, evaluation and reporting functions GIP On-going activity Programme Consortium (LGCC and GIG merger) initiated: Services delivery LGCC Development • Pre-commissioning phase • Merger work continues • ’50’ cohort explained • Mandatory services • Discretionary method • Integrated programme • 12 months duration • Commissioning phase starts: • Invite ‘consortium’ to bid for funding • Stress compliance to criteria • Performance/evaluation tool • Programme Office support • Timely submission • Evaluation of bids • Criteria compliance • Sound rationale • Efficacy • Programme integrated • Cost/benefit • Selection of bids and funding allocations • Evaluation of bids • Funding allocated • Prevention ‘strand’ commences: • Allocation of ‘cohort’ subjects • Delivery of services • Monitoring and evaluation • ‘Control group’ evaluated • Thomas Coram Research Institute Programme Board: Evaluation and allocation Programme Office: Development and Consultation Programme Office: Development and support Programme Office: Evaluation function Programme Office: Monitoring and support function Prevention ‘strand’ Development Programme timetable Integrated project structure Evaluation tool adjustments Prevention Implementation Prevention Implementation Prevention Monitoring Risk LGCC disengagement / Corporate resistance / Conflicting organizational priorities / Resistance to evaluation (VCS) / Funding shortfall Cost Resources P – Pre-commissioning phase capacity building E – Evaluation of submitted work proposals

19. The Phoenix ProgrammeProgramme management: clarity and uncompromising collaboration….

20. The Phoenix ProgrammeProgramme management: a first….

21. The Phoenix Programme Questions?