|
|
|
A primary inspection of Tayside Police was conducted in April 1999 by Her Majesty's Chief Inspector of Constabulary (HMCIC), Mr William Taylor QPM and Her Majesty's Lay Inspector, Mr Graham Harcus.
Inspections of forces take place on a three-year cycle. In the first year, a comprehensive primary inspection of management and operational functions takes place, out of which recommendations arise. The following year, a review inspection examines progress on these and any other significant changes or developments. In year three, HMCIC visits the force to discuss any matters of importance following the review inspection. HM Lay Inspector accompanies HMCIC on primary inspections. The primary and review inspections are published.
The first step in the inspection process is information gathering. All forces supply statistical information annually to the Inspectorate in a standard format, which is fed into a database and allows comparative analysis of data. The Inspectorate sends out a comprehensive list of questions, which require a written reply relating to structural, policy and corporate issues, covering a wide range of police functions.
When information gathering is complete, the Inspectorate staff officers spend several weeks in the force visiting and interviewing a cross-section of police and support staff in divisions and departmental posts. This forms the basis for briefing HMCIC and HM Lay Inspector.
Prior to the inspection of Tayside Police, HMCIC wrote to a number of bodies in an effort to identify any issues relevant to the process. These included Sheriffs Principal, Regional Procurator Fiscal and Chief Executives of the local authorities. Meetings were arranged with the Convenor and members of the Tayside Joint Police Board and council officials.
The inspection assessed the efficiency and effectiveness of the force by reviewing data, processes and results across a whole range of operational and support activities. Visits were made to headquarters departments, operational and support services, and to divisions by day and night. Interviews were held with staff at all levels, including staff associations and unions.
The report provides an informed assessment of the force, based on professional judgement. It does not represent a comprehensive account of all activities. That function is fulfilled by the annual report of the Chief Constable. A summary of recommendations is attached at Appendix A, a list of suggestions at Appendix B and good practice at Appendix C.
|
|