Quickly exit this site by pressing the Escape key Leave this site
We use some essential cookies to make our website work. We’d like to set additional cookies so we can remember your preferences and understand how you use our site.
You can manage your preferences and cookie settings at any time by clicking on “Customise Cookies” below. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Cookies notice.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Your cookie preferences have been saved. You can update your cookie settings at any time on the cookies page.
Sorry, there was a technical problem. Please try again.
This site is a beta, which means it's a work in progress and we'll be adding more to it over the next few weeks. Your feedback helps us make things better, so please let us know what you think.
Freedom of information request reference no: 01.FOI.23.028676
I note you seek access to the following information:
1. a copy of the Metropolitan Police Service’s internal and external policies and/or guidance on
a) risk assessments and
b) special schemes/safeguarding procedures in domestic abuse and sexual violence cases;
2. a copy of the Metropolitan Police Service’s up-to-date Victims’ Right to Review
policy; and
3. any policy and guidance on the Metropolitan Police Service’s Victims’ Right to
Review process.
Clarification - you were able to confirm;
Question One (1)(a) is regarding Risk Assessments is specifically regarding domestic abuse/ sexual violence cases.
Question Three (3) is for the most up-to-date central policy and guidance the MPS may hold.
I have today decided to disclose some of the requested information. Some data has been withheld as it is exempt from disclosure and therefore this response serves as a Refusal Notice under Section 17 of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act) by virtue of the following exemptions:
Section 31(1)(a) Law Enforcement
Reason for decision
Some information held for Question One (a) has been withheld as it is exempt under Section 31(1)(a) Law Enforcement
In respect of Questions Two (2) and Three (3), additionally internal Appendix documents referred to within the MPS Victims’ Rights to Review Policy/Guidance disclosed today is exempt by Section 31(1)(a) Law Enforcement
Section 31(1)(a) & (b) - Law Enforcement - Disclosure would enable the public to try and further understand police handling of incidents regarding suspicious vehicles in localised area in a recent period of time.
Law enforcement measures are put in place to protect the community that we serve.
Disclosure would undermine the public’s trust in the police to handle incidents professionally and sensitively. Full disclosure may lead to a decrease in contact with the police should the public fear constant adverse disclosures under FOIA that may enable those with criminal intent to use disclosures to evade detection. Under reporting of crime is a real concern to the MPS and full disclosure may lead to a chilling effect amongst the most vulnerable in our community. This may erode trust in the police, which would not be in the public interest.
We believe that providing information not in the public domain would compromise law enforcement which may be likely to hinder the prevention and detection of crime. This would result in more risk to the public if used as intelligence in how to evade detection and consequently may require the use of more police resources to counter any disruption caused by malicious individuals.
Disclosure would undermine the public’s trust in police handling of incidents regarding vulnerable people considerately. Full disclosure is not in the public interest as it may lead to a decrease in contact with the police should the public fear constant adverse disclosures under FOIA that may empower those with criminal intent to use the information to evade detection.
Under reporting of crime is a real concern to the MPS and disclosure regarding specific incidents may lead to that chilling effect amongst the community and erode trust in the police, which would not be in the public interest.
The full disclosure of information would not, in the view of the MPS, greatly further the public’s understanding and instead could only be used to hinder law enforcement and crime prevention.
The strongest reason favouring full disclosure is the public interest in the public gaining the greatest possible understanding of how the MPS prevent and detect crime.
The strongest reason favouring non-disclosure is ensuring public safety is not compromised (by disclosing information held for a policing purpose), that will aid individuals trying to commit crime and evade detection.
The MPS has determined that the public interest favours the application of this exemption.
This decision is reached on the understanding that the public interest is not what interests the public, but is what would be of greater good to the public if disclosed to the public as a whole. As advised, the Public Interest has been met to a large extent by the information already disclosed into the public domain that we have provided access to.
Disclosure
Q(1)(a) - A copy of the Metropolitan Police Service’s internal and external policies and/or guidance on;
a) risk assessments specifically regarding domestic abuse/ sexual violence cases
The MPS currently uses DASH Risk Identification Assessment and Management Model.
In regards to Domestic Abuse related external policy/guidance, we refer you to the external Domestic Abuse, Stalking and Harassment and Honour Based Violence (DASH, 2009) Risk Identification and Assessment and Management Model available on the internet for you to view.
In regards to Domestic Abuse related internal policy/guidance, to answer your request the MPS can today refer to some information contained in our Domestic Abuse Policy under the Primary Investigation section;
DASH Risk Assessment
The Domestic Abuse, Stalking and Honour Based Violence (DASH) Risk Identification, Assessment and Management Model was implemented across all police services in the UK from March 2009, having been accredited by ACPO Council, now known as National Police Chief Council (NPCC).
DASH was introduced so that victims of domestic violence could be kept safe and meant that police officers attending reports of domestic abuse or where domestic violence was a factor, were using a common checklist for identifying, managing and assessing risk. Another advantage of the DASH risk assessment is that a large number of partner agencies (Social services, charities and Independent Domestic Violence Advisers) also use the DASH risk assessment as well as the police nationally. It allows a consistent approach to dealing with risk.
Purpose of DASH:
• Assisting officers to adequately identify assess and manage domestic abuse incidents.
• With the identification, assessment and management of any risk.
• By identifying risk to victims, and potential victims
• Improved information sharing with partner agencies
• Better intelligence sharing
• By identifying repeat victims and repeat offending
DASH Part 2 Risk Assessment Questions must also be used in all Medium or High-risk DA incidents, in addition to the standard DASH questions.
See Government guidance in relation to Risk Assessment of Offenders.
Standard - Current evidence does not indicate risk of causing serious harm.
Medium - There are identifiable indicators of risk of serious harm. The offender has the potential to cause serious harm but is unlikely to do so unless there is a change in circumstances, for example, failure to take medication, loss of accommodation, relationship breakdown, and drug or alcohol misuse.
High - There are identifiable indicators of risk of serious harm. The potential event could happen at any time and the impact would be serious.
The Offender Assessment System (OASys) defines serious harm as “‘an event which is life threatening and/or traumatic and from which recovery, whether physical or psychological, can be expected to be difficult or impossible”.
When reporting a Non Crime Book Domestic (NCBD) you must ensure that DASH risk assessment questions are put to both parties involved in the incident, and make clear which party is providing the answers to allow a full risk assessment to take place.
For further information see ACPO guidance on DASH.
The CPIC Sexual Offences team additionally have advised they also use DASH for Domestic Abuse cases and conduct a thrive risk assessment. They utilise available measures to safeguard survivors and do also consider special schemes were applicable.
They have adopted the THRIVE (threat, harm, risk, investigation, vulnerability and engagement) definition of vulnerability. This states that a person is vulnerable if, as a result of their situation or circumstances, they are unable to take care of or protect themselves or others from harm or exploitation.
Once any immediate threat to the victim has been removed by the arrest of the perpetrator, if there is a continuing risk as victim and suspect, may live at the same address. They consider if is there is a further risk of the potential for physical/psychological harm or witness interference or evidence loss if a suspect returns to the address while the victim is living there. There will be an ongoing risk assessment conducted and the risk level may change subject to any new information. Officers utilise the thrive risk assessment model and details held regarding this model is publicly available below;
College of Policing - Thrive risk assessment
It may be of interest to note the MPS in future will be adopting DARA, a new risk assessment tool supports police to spot the signs of coercive control and better protect victims of domestic abuse;
College of policing -Police better equipped to spot controlling behaviour
Q(1)(b) - A copy of the Metropolitan Police Service’s internal and external policies and/or guidance on;
b) special schemes/safeguarding procedures in domestic abuse and sexual violence cases;
It is important to note that Special Schemes are not ‘Domestic Abuse’ specific, so the information you have requested is not technically held in the context of the question posed.
However, to assist you, the MPS is able to refer you to internal guidance on our intranet on ‘Special Schemes (also known as Special Address Comments)’;
What is the purpose of a Special Scheme?
2.1 The primary purpose of a Special Scheme is to provide officers and staff with critical Police information that they;
(a) NEED to know prior to attending the address (i.e. they cannot attend without being told this information;
(b) NEED to action as a result of a 999 or 101 call being made from the address or following police attendance at the address.
2.2 It can (in certain circumstances) provide information that is not available on other MPS indices that needs to be passed to officers attending the address quicker than it would normally be obtained from normal Intel checks. An example might be edited/redacted information held on secure/restricted Crimint Servers. However, a SS should never be viewed as an alternative to conducting intelligence checks. Officers and staff should be conducting CRIS, CRIMINT, PNC and IIP checks as part of an initial response / investigation. If the information being considered for recording on a special scheme is available elsewhere then it should NOT be placed on a special scheme unless the officer, staff member or partner agency NEEDS to know that information before knocking on the door.
I hope this has provided insight. Should you require the full Special Schemes MPS Intranet Guidance, this can be submitted as a new FOIA request, with the understanding this information is not Domestic Violence ‘specific’.
The CPIC Sexual Offences team additionally have advised they utilise available measures to safeguard survivors and do also consider special schemes were applicable.
They have adopted the THRIVE (threat, harm, risk, investigation, vulnerability and engagement) definition of vulnerability. This states that a person is vulnerable if, as a result of their situation or circumstances, they are unable to take care of or protect themselves or others from harm or exploitation.
Once any immediate threat to the victim has been removed by the arrest of the perpetrator, if there is a continuing risk as victim and suspect, may live at the same address. They consider if is there is a further risk of the potential for physical/psychological harm or witness interference or evidence loss if a suspect returns to the address while the victim is living there. There will be an ongoing risk assessment conducted and the risk level may change subject to any new information. Officers utilise the thrive risk assessment model and details held regarding this model is publicly available below;
College of Policing - Thrive risk assessment
Q2 - A copy of the Metropolitan Police Service’s up-to-date Victims’ Right to Review policy
The MPS happy to be able to refer you to the information on our intranet under the heading ‘Victim Right to Review’ to answer this question regarding MPS Policy.
The public-facing MPS website has information and a link to make a request at;
Victims' Right to Review Scheme | Metropolitan Police
Additionally it may be of interest that the MPS is also able to refer you to MPS current Intranet Guidance on the CPS ‘Victims’ Right to Review’ below;
Victims’ right to review
This means that any victim of crime whose case has been NFA’d, discontinued or withdrawn by the CPS has the right to apply to them to have the case reviewed. Police have a responsibility to inform victims of this right. The link below gives guidance and information on how to do this.
It is very important that this is done quickly and a note made on the CRIS dets to detail how it was communicated to your victim.
The victim must write to [email protected]
For more information see the CJ Portal and the CPS Website.
The CJ Portal refers again directly to the following link provided above which will assist you further;
Victims' Right to Review Scheme | Metropolitan Police
Q3 - Any policy and guidance on the Metropolitan Police Service’s Victims’ Right to Review process.
The MPS happy to be able to refer you to the information on our intranet under the heading ‘Victim Right to Review’ to answer this question regarding MPS Policy and guidance.
The public-facing MPS website has information and a link to make a request at;