- Police & Crime Commissioner comments:
1.1 I welcome the findings of this report and the following sections set out how the Force are addressing the Areas for Improvement (AFI) identified. I will monitor progress through my Office’s existing oversight mechanisms.
1.2 I have requested the Deputy Chief Constable’s view on the report, and he has stated:
Surrey Police fully accepts the PEEL findings and that they reflect systemic challenges in how we have understood demand, aligned resources, supervised activity and used data to manage performance. This response reflects our clear and deliberate shift in how we address areas for improvement, moving away from a collection of isolated actions to implementing a coordinated programme of force-wide change focused on our operating model, workforce, supervision, data and governance.
Delivering sustainable improvement depends not only on what we do, but on how consistently and rigorously we do it. We now have the strong leadership, clear accountability and an unwavering focus on quality, outcomes and service
to the public that is necessary for this.
- Context
2.1 The approach to this response reflects the step change in how the Force is addressing HMICFRS findings. We recognise that the issues identified are not isolated but are symptoms of systemic challenges across demand management, operating model design, supervision, data, and workforce capability. This response therefore describes the whole-system force-wide change already underway and how this will address the aggregated thematics and root causes, rather than a list of localised improvements and functional initiatives per AFI.
2.2 Evidence gathering and fieldwork for the HMICFRS report concluded in October 2025. Since the Inspection we have gone live with our new force operating model. Our new model has its foundations in Our Plan and concludes the first phase of a force-wide redesign of how we understand demand, allocate resources, and assure the quality and consistency of our service. This is underpinned by a strengthened governance framework and a renewed focus on delivering sustainable, data and evidence-led improvement.
2.3 There are recurring themes across multiple areas:
• Demand exceeding available capacity
• Fragmentation in how strategy is formulated and delivered
• Inconsistent supervision and governance
• Weaknesses in data quality and system integration
• Workforce capability and capacity pressures
2.4 These factors collectively limit our ability to deliver consistent, high-quality service and outcomes; they are systemic and inter-related. The framework of our delivery plan is aligned to:
• Our Plan: making it connected and meaningful;
• The force Operating Model redesign (Op Solve – phase 1 and 2): making it planned, sequenced and sustainable;
• New integrated strategic planning, performance and governance framework: making it coherent, intelligent and measurable.
2.5 Instead of an AFI-by-AFI response, this report reflects the common themes that we have identified as indicators (symptoms) of root cause problems based on the findings from PEEL – the most recent and historic reports – and also drawing from internal performance data, workforce insight and other audit activity. These themes are themselves inter-related but are presented below together where they share a common primary driver. Although numbered, the themes are not hierarchical or sequential.
- Theme 1: Demand, operating model and performance
3.1 Relevant AFIs:
• AFI 2 The force needs to make sure that its operating model can meet current and future demand
• AFI 4 The force needs to fully understand how demand is affecting the well-being of its workforce
• AFI 7 The force doesn’t have effective processes in place to monitor how often its
neighbourhood officers are abstracted from their core roles
• AFI 8 The force needs to reduce the number of non-emergency calls that callers abandon
because they aren’t answered
• AFI 15 The force needs to understand its demand and performance relating to fraud and use this to improve outcomes
• AFI 17 The force needs to effectively triage and allocate fraud investigations in a timely way
3.2 Summary of Systemic Issue:
3.3 Demand, workforce deployment, and performance are not consistently aligned, leading to backlogs and delays, inefficient allocation, workforce pressure. Root causes include historic approach to data and performance management, localised management of duties, limited demand insight and weak linkage to capacity, and inconsistent processes.
3.5 To operate a fully evidence-led operating model where demand, resources, performance and workforce wellbeing are aligned, visible and sustainably managed.
3.5 Force Response
3.6 Clarifying our core service delivery and processes, redesigning how demand is understood, prioritised, allocated, managed and delivered across the organisation as a whole.
• Operating Model Reset (AFI 2): Data-led Op Solve (phase 1 – delivered, phase 2 – ongoing) aligning capacity, skills and capability, shift patterns to current and forecast demand. Mapping and redesign of process and workflows to remove duplication and inefficiencies. Centralised management of duties.
• Demand & Performance (AFIs 2, 8, 15, 17): Single performance framework with integrated metrics, key performance indicators, improved data and governance, clear expectations.
• Workforce Wellbeing (AFI 4): Detailed insight of how demand affects different teams and workforce segments, embedding workload visibility and wellbeing into performance regime, strategic planning and operating model decisions.
• Neighbourhood Abstraction (AFI 7): Tactical monitoring and strategic overview of abstractions; Op Solve 2 project linked with Local Governance Reorganisation and Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee, to specify and deliver a new Neighbourhood strategy.
3.7 Theme 2: supervision, investigation quality and outcomes
3.8 Relevant AFIs:
• AFI 9 The force should make sure it effectively supervises response and deployment and carries out risk assessments and updates victims when it is delayed
• AFI 10 The force needs to reduce its over-recording of crime and clear backlogs of crimes submitted for cancellation
• AFI 11 The force should make sure that supervisors effectively oversee investigations and that all investigative opportunities are progressed
• AFI 12 The force needs to make sure it has effective processes to manage pre-charge bail
• AFI 13 The force doesn’t consistently achieve appropriate outcomes for victims
• AFI 14 The force needs to improve its processes for identifying and recording missing people
3.9 Summary of Systemic Issue
3.10 Systemic weaknesses in supervision, quality control and end‑to‑end case management – driven by inconsistent standards, fragmented processes and limited oversight – impacts timeliness and quality of decisions. This results in missed opportunities, delays, backlogs and inconsistent outcomes for victims.
3.12 To deliver consistently high-quality, well-supervised first contact and investigations that prioritise risk, maximise outcomes and provide a timely, effective service to victims.
3.13 Force Response
3.14 Focus on strengthening supervisory practice and recognising this as a core performance function, standardising processes and improving end‑to‑end quality assurance.
• Supervision in Response and Deployment (AFI 9): clearer expectations, risk assessments applied, reviewed, escalated when appropriate, quality assurance
• Investigation Supervision and Quality (AFI 11) and victim outcomes (AFI 13): effective, consistent and confident supervision of the Crime Management Framework, built into the overall performance framework and overseen through Op Falcon
• Process & Data Integrity (AFIs 10, 12, 14): improve recording and workflow through standardising working processes using systems capabilities, integration and automation to address gaps and errors in data. Pilot the application of AI to assist in supervision of crime assessment, allocation, classification and crime management.
• Bail Management (AFI 12): Standardised, centrally monitored processes, with improved visibility and supervision of bail return dates, progression of cases on bail, use of RUI (Released Under Investigation).
• Early Intervention Hub (AFI 14): working with our new Unitary Authorities to proactively identify and support at‑risk individuals and families (including missing persons) through shared data and targeted prevention.
• Strengthening Quality Assurance and Organisational Grip: a single Chief Officer lead for investigation quality, criminal justice processes and victim needs to improve visibility of decision quality, supervisory activity and risk management across crime recording and allocation, investigation, safeguarding and case file preparation.
3.15 Expected Outcome
3.16 Stronger, confident supervision, improved investigation quality, reduced backlogs, and better victim outcomes.
3.17 Theme 3: workforce capability and wellbeing
3.18 Relevant AFIs:
• AFI 6 The force should make sure it provides regular continuing professional development opportunities to all its workforce
• AFI 16 The force needs to provide effective fraud training for all investigators and call handlers
3.19 Summary of Systemic Issue:
3.20 Workforce capability – as well as capacity – hasn’t been consistently aligned to demand, resulting in training and CPD being deprioritised and skills gaps, with limited visibility and strategic oversight.
3.21 Strategic Intention
3.22 To build a capable, confident and resilient workforce with skills aligned to demand, and development embedded within duties, visible through force performance framework and governance.
3.23 Force Response
• Centralised duties for the whole force (AFI6): setting in place the core mechanism for scheduling training and development days within the duties allocated, thus directing that CPD is undertaken, and allowing oversight of attendance and abstraction, and quantification thereof to inform evaluation of return on learning investment.
• Embedding Continuous Professional Development (AFI 6): embedding CPD as a core requirement by aligning it to organisational priorities, building into the Operating Model, improving oversight through governance boards, and ensuring it is consistently planned, protected and monitored across all roles.
• Strengthening supervisory responsibility for performance and development: strengthening supervisory accountability for workforce development by setting clear expectations for capability, performance and CPD, supported by improved PDR processes and a new performance framework with clear metrics and visibility from individual to force level.
• Improving Fraud Capability Across the Workforce (AFI 16): building broader frontline fraud capability by delivering role‑specific training and CPD for investigators and call handlers, improving triage, investigation quality and victim outcomes.
3.24 Expected Outcomes
3.25 Staff health and resilience is improved through increased capability, confidence and resilience. Skills development is central to operational delivery and service improvement.
3.26 Theme 4: governance, leadership and culture
3.27 Relevant AFIs:
• AFI 1 The force needs to make sure it clearly communicates its decisions and reasons for making changes and that the workforce understands them
• AFI 5 The force needs a clear strategy for equality, diversity and inclusion
3.28 Summary of Systemic Issue:
3.29 Fragmented execution of strategy, inconsistent communication and leadership alignment challenges have led to inconsistent messaging and workforce engagement, reducing understanding, trust and confidence in decision‑making. Change delivery and EDI strategy are two separate indicators of common issue which result in inconsistent integration of strategy into governance and decision‑making, with delivery remaining fragmented and reactive.
3.30 Strategic Intention
3.31 To deliver clear, consistent leadership and governance where decisions are understood, communicated effectively, and clearly linked to improved policing outcomes. Strategy,
governance, performance and communication will be coordinated and aligned to delivery, with clear expectations and accountability.
3.32 Force Response
3.33 Strengthening leadership clarity, embedding communication as a core leadership capability, and integrating EDI into the organisational system, rather than treating these as standalone initiatives.
i. Strengthening Strategic Communication and Change Narrative (AFI 1): A new approach within Op Solve set a clear force-wide narrative linked to Our Plan and the development of a new operating model. This explained decisions and trade-offs, how these were made, and linked change to operational benefit and public outcomes within a single change narrative across the Chief Officers and the Programme Team.
ii. Embedding Workforce Engagement and Feedback: new approach within Op Solve on how our workforce can influence, shape and alter decisions on matters of organisational change. Multiple mechanisms to listen to workforce views, involve and engage with staff associations, incorporate workforce insight to inform options, and participate in decision-making. Evaluation will inform how this evolves and is applied.
iii. Strengthening Governance and Accountability: The Strategy, Governance and Performance Directorate creates a single, aligned system that connects strategy, governance and delivery, ensuring consistent leadership, clear communication and coordinated execution.
iv. Developing an EDI Strategy and operationalising it (AFI 5): developing and embedding a clear EDI strategy aligned to Our Plan, with defined accountability and governance, and integrating EDI into decision‑making, culture and service delivery to improve workforce experience and external legitimacy, trust and outcomes. This will be overseen through the Chief Constable-led Trust, Culture and Belonging Board.
3.34 Expected Outcomes
3.35 Improved trust and engagement (internal and external), clarity of purpose and whole organisational alignment.
3.36 Theme 5: data, technology and insight
3.37 Relevant AFIs:
• AFI 3 The force needs to make sure it is using data and technology to improve productivity
3.38 Summary of Systemic Issue:
3.39 Data, systems and technology are not consistently integrated or used to drive performance, with fragmented systems, local workarounds (e.g. spreadsheets) and unreliable insight limiting effectiveness. This results in duplication, reduced productivity and weak visibility of demand, constraining timely, informed decision‑making. This is a fundamental cross-cutting enabler as technology does not fully support operational workflows, and insight was not systematically used to drive strategic decisions, resource allocation and performance management.
3.40 Strategic Intention
3.41 To operate with integrated, trusted data and technology that drives productivity, informs decisions and enables end-to-end efficient operational service delivery.
3.42 Force Response
3.43 The Force response is focused on resetting how data, technology and insight are used across the organisation, ensuring they function as core operational enablers rather than standalone services.
• Single Data Platform: Integrated, comprehensive, reliable “single version of truth”
• Data integration, performance & productivity (AFI 3): Integrating systems, data and workforce information to improve duties planning, deployment and forecasting, while aligning technology to end‑to‑end processes and reducing inefficiencies.
• Automation, AI and analytics: reduce manual processes, improve efficiency, improve insight from and across multiple data sources
• Governance: Strengthened ownership and asset oversight, particularly of information asset owners
3.44 Expected Outcomes
3.45 Greater productivity, better decision-making, and improved service delivery.
3.46 Expected Outcome
3.47 Improved timeliness, reduced backlogs, better demand insight, and balanced, sustainable workforce deployment enhancing operational resilience and workforce wellbeing.
Lisa Townsend
Police and Crime Commissioner for Surrey