Agenda item

Daniel Tomey, Concierge Service Manager gave witness evidence.

In the presentation and discussion the following points were made:

·         In the last five years there had been a change of focus in the concierge service. The monitoring of CCTV in the borough and communications had been improved, concierges had been made responsible for their cameras, all housing cameras were networked, office upgrades were undertaken, performance indicators were put in place and there was a focus on staff training. In this time the CCTV contract ended and the service was insourced.

·         Next steps included undertaking a consultation on a restructure, considering how the service engaged with residents which would include increasing the number of electronic noticeboards, more training for staff on anti-social behaviour legislation and information sharing, ensuring all capacity was used, considering the use of technology e.g. movement sensors which would mean not all camera footage would have to be shown on screens at one time, improving three of the offices and improving signage visibility.

·         The Housing CCTV Service had over 1000 cameras and 12 concierge sites. 2 of the concierge sites were managed by  tenant management organisations (TMOs) and 10 were managed by the council. They were open between 16-24 hours a day. There were 33 estates. There were 6 roof access systems and these included 11 cameras. There were also new build video entry systems in place.

·         In terms of monitored CCTV, (Security Industry Authority) SIA licensed officers actively viewed live camera streams. Complimentary systems such as PA, intercom and access control were used and officers undertook investigating and reporting. This included making statements and attending court, calling the emergency services or Anti Social Behaviour team etc when appropriate and writing reports to the relevant council teams.

·         Unmonitored CCTV was logged into each day by staff to ensure the cameras were working. If an incident was reported, the CCTV footage was obtained and sent to the police where appropriate.

·         CCTV could be a deterrent for a short time but to be effective it required monitoring, immediate action, information sharing and third party action. The number, location and quality of cameras was important as was lighting. It was also important to work closely with partners, and have visible cameras, signage and the concierge visible.

·         Customer satisfaction surveys had indicated that 87.5% of respondents considered the service provided to be good or very good, 88% of respondents were satisfied that the concierge service provided value for money and 94% of respondents considered that the introduction of the concierge service had reduced the number of incidents or crime and anti social behaviour in their block/estate.

·         Performance monitoring included monitoring anti social behaviour, crime reports per office and per person, the number of incidents, where and when they occurred and the number of arrests as a consequence of concierge actions.

·         One in five perpetrators were identified from CCTV.

·         Concierge staff built relationships with residents e.g. they took in parcels for residents and arranged repairs where necessary. They were often able to identify those involved in incidents using CCTV footage.

·         The sites managed by TMOs received the same funding as the council run sites did. They had chosen to run the sites themselves so the council did not usually get involved with their management.

RESOLVED:

That the evidence be noted.