Transaction Search Form: please type in any of the fields below.
Date: April 29, 2024 Mon
Time: 10:31 pm
Time: 10:31 pm
Results for law enforcement (u.k.)
3 results foundAuthor: Deloitte MCS Ltd. Title: The National Workforce Modernisation Programme: Evaluation of the Demonstration Sites: Final Report Summary: The Workforce Modernisation Programme (WFM), run by the National Improvement Agency (NPIA), aims to help the police service improve the quality of service it delivers to the public whilst delivering value for money. The program is operating within the wider context of policing reform and workforce reform within other sections. In the summer of 2007, nine forces volunteered to become demonstration sites to test the principles and methodology established by the WFM program. Over the course of the past two and a half years, these forces have initiated 15 WFM projects. The scope of these projects covers all four of the core policing capabilities, namely: response; investigation; neighbourhood; and intelligence. This report presents an independent evaluation of the WFM pilot sites. The report summarizes the findings from the evaluation, identifying the impact the program had across a balanced scorecard consisting of four quadrants: performance; efficiency, capacity and utilization; stakeholder and customer perceptions; and HR measures and staff perceptions. Details: London: Home Office and the National Policing Improvement Agency, 2010. 120p. Source: Internet Resource Year: 2010 Country: United Kingdom URL: Shelf Number: 118768 Keywords: Law Enforcement (U.K.)Police PerformancePolice Reform (U.K.) |
Author: Balch, Alex Title: Regulation and Enforcement to Tackle Forced Labour in the UK: A Systematic Response? Summary: This programme paper forms part of an interconnected series of research papers funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) into forced labour. The aim of the research is to examine the extent to which forced labour in the UK is influenced/ exacerbated by specific factors. This paper focuses on the problems that exist in terms of enforcement and regulation in the UK context. Two forthcoming papers look at business practices and the role of immigration policies. The purpose of this piece of work is to provide a critical analysis of the legislative framework and organisational field and how this affects regulation and enforcement. The approach is systemic in that it aims to locate the legal measures and organisational environment within the broader context of the protection of workers’ rights in the UK. The paper considers the legislative framework around forced labour, the organisations that are charged with regulating and enforcing the rules, and problems of knowledge and expertise within those organisations. The findings demonstrate how loose and complex the structural coupling is between the legislative system and the organisational field when it comes to forced labour. The UK government has decided against joining some international agreements that could help to tackle the problem, and there are questions over implementation with those it has opted to join. The system of protection for workers’ rights is patchy and inconsistent, partly due to the lack of a coherent regulatory authority or system of monitoring employment practices. It is likely that there are varying levels of awareness across all front-line staff. Large-scale multi-agency enforcement operations have been successful in harnessing the combined expertise and resources of the various organisations that can act to stop forced labour, but there have been mixed results in the courts. There are also questions over the capacity to carry out such operations in the future. The paper ends by developing a series of recommendations for improving the operation of the current system, proposing points of action in the light of findings and making suggestions for future research. Details: Liverpool: Joseph Rowntree Foundation, University of Liverpool, 2012. 65p. Source: JRF Programme Paper, Forced Labour: Internet Resource: Accessed March 11, 2012 at http://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/files/jrf/forced-labour-regulation-full.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/files/jrf/forced-labour-regulation-full.pdf Shelf Number: 124447 Keywords: Forced Labor (U.K.)Law Enforcement (U.K.)Legislation (U.K.) |
Author: Great Britain. Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Probation Title: It's Complicated: The Management of Electronically Monitored Curfews - A follow-up inspection of electronically monitored curfews Summary: Over the last six years, the use of court-ordered curfews has more than doubled. The maximum period of confinement is now likely to be extended from 12 to 16 hours per day, in an effort to increase public confidence in community sentences. Depriving someone of their liberty is a serious matter, whether this is done by sending them to prison or confining them to their home. The period of detention, in whatever way it is applied, should therefore be proportionate to the seriousness of the offence. Sentencing may properly contain an element of punishment but to be effective in reducing offending, it should also promote change and reform. It has become clear that electronically monitored curfews are now being used as an additional punishment for people convicted of minor offences that would not normally attract a prison sentence. Even at this level, however, punishment comes at a price. If the cost of electronically monitored curfews is to be fully justified, they need to be used more creatively and more effectively. This means providing targeted control and restriction and helping offenders to change their behaviour. Our latest inspection shows that curfews applied in recent years have only rarely been used to best effect. In the vast majority of cases in our sample, the curfew was unrelated to the circumstances of the offence. We saw very few instances where it had been imposed specifically to stop the individual from doing something, or was part of a strategy to address their behaviour. Such an approach would require thorough assessment at the pre-sentence stage, something which now only appears to happen in a limited number of cases. As in our earlier inspection, we remain concerned at the enforcement thresholds. Despite our previous comments, these continue to fall far short of what we think the public has the right to expect. We recognise that more rigorous thresholds, as we have advocated, could increase the numbers of minor offenders sent to custody for breach. A greater emphasis on compliance and the proposed introduction of other non-custodial options for breach, as proposed in the current sentencing review, would mitigate such an undesirable outcome. This latest inspection also exposed continuing inaccuracies in information conveyed by courts to the probation service or the electronic monitoring provider. These inaccuracies are sufficiently serious to undermine the efficient management of cases – an even more urgent concern if the Government approves proposals to extend the number of external providers of probation services. The matters raised in this report must be discussed and acted upon. Electronic monitoring, if used effectively, can be used both to punish and to promote change. Right now, it may do the former but rarely the latter. Details: London: Ministry of Justice, 2012. 39p. Source: Internet Resource: Accessed June 20, 2012 at http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/hmiprob/joint-thematic/electronic-monitoring-report-2012.pdf Year: 2012 Country: United Kingdom URL: http://www.justice.gov.uk/downloads/publications/hmiprob/joint-thematic/electronic-monitoring-report-2012.pdf Shelf Number: 125385 Keywords: Curfews (U.K.)Electronic Monitoring (U.K.)Law Enforcement (U.K.) |