Drugs and Alcohol
Communities Against Drugs Initiative 2001 2002
The following document was published by the Home Office Crime Reduction Programme Unit as HOC 23/2001. It is addressed primarily to Chief Officers of Police (England & Wales), Clerks to the Police Authority, Chief Executives of Local Authorities (England & Wales) and Drug Action Teams, but may be of interest to a wider audience of practitioners.
1. This circular is intended to help Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships (CDRPs) to use their Communities Against Drugs funding effectively in 2001 - 2002. It sets out to partnerships:
The arrangements for allocation of funds
The purposes for which the funds are intended
Sources of advice and guidance to partnerships on spend
Conditions of grant.
2. The circular is also for the information of Drug Action Teams (DATs) in England, and Drug and Alcohol Action Teams (DAATs) in Wales, and of Local Authority Finance Officers to whom the Communities Against Drugs funds will be paid in the first instance.
3. This circular is intended to be read in conjunction with a guidance note ‘Communities Against Drugs – Getting Started’ which is at Appendix A. From time to time, the circular refers to key points in Appendix A.
4. The Communities Against Drugs initiative is aimed at illicit drugs as covered by the Government’s 10 year strategy to tackle the problem of drug misuse, ‘Tackling Drugs to Build a Better Britain’ (1998). The initiative is not intended to deal with problems or crime caused by alcohol, or other substance misuse.
5. Further guidance will be issued on the Communities Against Drugs initiative for 2002 – 2003 and 2003 – 2004.
Background
6. The Chancellor of the Exchequer’s budget in March 2001 set out a three year programme to support communities in tackling drugs. The full details of the overall programme are set out in the “Communities Against Drugs” leaflet (sent out to partnerships and also available on the Crime Reduction website (www.crimereduction.gov.uk).
7. The single largest element of this package is £220m (£50m/£70m/£100m over the 3 years) for Crime and Disorder Reduction Partnerships in England and Wales to:
disrupt drugs markets,
tackle drug related crime and
strengthen communities.
8. The budget also made funds available for the Employment Service to assist drug misusers into employment, for developing DAT capacity, for drug testing within the CJS, developing the Positive Futures programme and enhancing business involvement in tackling drug abuse.
Allocation of Funds
9. This funding is being channelled directly to CDRPs for their use in meeting the purposes set out above. Funding is allocated to CDRPs on the basis of a formula which reflects the needs of each area. The intention is that each CDRP will receive some funds but that those with the greatest problems and the largest population will receive a greater proportion of the money.
10. The allocation of funds is being done in two stages. The first year’s funding (and a base line allocation for years 2 and 3) was allocated in April 2001 to allow partnerships to know their baseline for the purposes of planning their audits and strategies. In order to undertake this quick allocation for this financial year, 2001/2, a simple formula was used, based on information that was readily available. The formula used for the allocation of funds is set out in detail in Appendix B. But the key features to note are that the funding was divided up on a three-way calculation.
20% of the funding divided equally between partnerships in England and in Wales,
30% of the funding based on the CDRP share of the population, and
50% of the funding based on levels of acquisitive crime (which may be taken as a proxy for drug related crime) in each CDRP.
11. This relatively simple formula has given each partnership its allocation for 2001/2, year 1 of the programme. Table 1 in Appendix B sets out the allocation for each partnership.
12. The allocation for 2002 - 2003 will be later this year, and the formula for allocation will be reconsidered for years 2 and 3.
Capital/Revenue Split
13. The funding allocated to each partnership has to be divided between capital and revenue expenditure. The overall fund is divided between capital and current expenditure on the following basis:
2001/2 | |
Capital | £16m (32%) |
Revenue | £34m |
The allocation to each partnership will have to be divided accordingly. Partnerships have to spend their capital allocation on capital spending; current expenditure may be spent on capital items or on running cost expenditure. The capital revenue split in years 2 and 3 is still under discussion, but the capital element is likely to be similar to, or more than, that in 2001 – 2002.
Conditions of Grant
14. The full grant conditions relating to the Communities Against Drugs initiative are attached at Appendix C to this notice. The conditions of grant set out the basic requirements on the local authority in terms of audit and accountability, and the conditions on which the money is to be assigned to CDRPs. The paragraphs below point to a number of key conditions.
15. CDRPs may plan on the basis of the initial allocation. There will not be any form of bidding process - the funds will be paid to the relevant local authority who will act as treasurer for the partnership. The money is transferred to the local authority for the specific use of the CDRP and for the designated purposes of Communities Against Drugs and for no other purpose. For audit purposes, the local authority will need to provide an annual statement of expenditure for each year of the funding programme and provide this to the auditor appointed by the Audit Commission.
16.The grant will be paid in three installments during 2001 – 2002. An initial installment of 25%, on receipt of signed grant conditions, will be followed by two further automatic payments of 25% and 50% later in the year (local authorities may apply to draw down grant funds earlier on the basis of need). The first installment of grant in 2002 – 2003 will be paid on application by the appropriate local authority. Guidance on the administrative arrangements, and conditions for drawing down grant in 2002 – 2003 will be issued separately.
17. Partnerships are encouraged to use this funding quickly and effectively for the purposes for which it is given. Local authorities are able to make particular arrangements to carry funds over from one financial year to the next in their reserves. If there are good value for money reasons to do so, then Communities Against Drugs funds may be carried over from one financial year to another.
18. The local authority will make the money available to the CDRP when there is an agreed partnership plan to use the money that has been approved by the local Drug Action Team and the local police commander who may be members of both partnerships. This agreement would normally be shown by a covering letter signed by the relevant officers, with a plan attached. (A template and example of such a plan is shown at Annex 3 of Appendix A.). In the longer term, partnerships might wish to integrate this into other, perhaps already established, community safety planning mechanisms. Partnerships must send a copy of the final version of their plan to the Crime Reduction Director.
19. Local Authorities should not sign and return the grant conditions on the basis of this circular. A separate letter will be sent to them shortly by Crime Reduction Director.
The purposes of the funding
20. The purpose of the funding is to enable communities to deal effectively with the problems caused by drugs in order to improve the quality of life in their area. The three purposes of the fund are:
Disrupting drugs markets
Tackling drug related crime and disorder
Strengthening the ability of communities to resist drugs and to act against drug misuse.
21. This could involve a range of activities which will tackle drug supply and drug related crime, and reduce the demand for drugs. The Communities Against Drugs leaflet sets out a number of possible uses for money, and some particular ideas are discussed below. These purposes may require a range of interventions and solutions, and partnerships need to address all three in drawing up their plans. It is important to emphasise however that activities funded under this programme must be directly related to the purposes of the initiative.
22. It is up to CDRPs to decide how best to use the money in their own area. They will be conducting their second crime audit now, and starting to prepare their strategy for the next few years. In order to ensure that the money is spent in a way that will tackle both drug supply and demand, it will be important to carry out a careful analysis of drugs markets. Such an analysis should map how general crime relates to drugs, and highlight specific patterns of drug related crime, which may include prostitution and handling stolen goods. (The Communities Against Drugs toolkit on www.crimereduction.gov.uk gives useful advice on how best to do this.) Any analysis should also include DAT information identifying the most significant drugs problems are in their areas. CDRPs and DATs should share their information and expertise in analysing the markets and identifying solutions. The money should be spent in accordance with these local priorities. But it is important to note that this is new money that is not intended to replace other mainstream and programme funding but to provide additional resource.
23. As paragraph 17 above points out, the single most important condition set on the use of the money is that the partnership’s plan for its use must be agreed by the DAT and the local police commander (who may also be members of both partnerships). This joint working should produce strong long term benefits for both partnerships and enable both to operate more effectively by working together than they could on their own.
24. Partnerships are recommended to set up a specialist sub-group to examine ways of managing this programme (or task a suitable existing partnership group to do this). This subgroup could include members of the DAT and develop knowledge and expertise of benefit to both the CDRP and the DAT. A model for how such a group might operate is set out at Section 6 of Appendix A.
What should the money be spent on?
25. This money should be spent as part of a careful strategy to meet the outcomes of the programme and spend will need to be justified in terms of those outcomes. Spend should be profiled for use straightaway rather than allocated in a piecemeal fashion throughout the year. Funding is available for use this year, before the regular 3 yearly CDRP audit and strategy process is complete. CDRPs should therefore is look to see what is emerging from their current crime audits, or what is in their existing plans and strategies, that would meet the conditions of this grant. Some partnerships may have identified needs or developed plans to tackle drugs markets or drug related crime that were either not put forward for funding or which did not succeed in getting funding. There may be successful local initiatives to tackle relevant issues such as street robbery, burglary or theft which could be continued and developed. It may be useful to revisit these, and discuss them with the DAT, DPAS and the Crime Reduction Director in the Government Office and the National Assembly of Wales. (Contact details are set out at Annex 1 to Appendix A of this circular).
26. CDRPs will need to consider how to use these funds in the context of their audits and strategies in a way that will meet the national and local aims. Early discussions with the DAT are an essential part of that planning, as is the use of a specialist subgroup where partnerships decide to use that model of working (see also paragraph 33 about monitoring and evaluation). Invaluable support, advice and help with developing programmes is available from the Crime Reduction Teams and the DPAS
27. In looking at the best way to spend money locally, each partnership will rely on local knowledge in the police, partnership and DAT of their drug and crime problems (which will inform the market analysis described above) and of the nature of their local communities. Every community may have its own particular problems. Solutions will need to be tailored to those problems, and partnerships are encouraged to be imaginative and innovative. But they also need to recognise that there is a growing body of evidence about “what works” (and also what does not work). Partnerships must make sure that they know the range of choices open to them, and to recognise those solutions which have found to be effective. DPAS and the Crime Reduction Teams are well placed to advise. The Communities Against Drugs Toolkit (www.crimereduction.gov.uk) contains important basic information on “what works”.
28. This circular gives some examples about how partnerships might use these funds to disrupt drugs markets, tackle drug related crime/anti-social behaviour. The leaflet “Communities Against Drugs” also gives some examples for illustrative purposes:
Capital funding could be spent on – mobile police stations or police stations in shopping areas to make the police and community accessible; CCTV (which will also need revenue support); improved street lighting or alleygates behind houses where drug dealing or drug related crime are problems. The justification for any particular scheme needs to be tied to drug markets/drug related crime, not to general undifferentiated crime reduction.
Revenue funding could be spent on – supporting ASBOs (through meeting legal costs or paying professional witnesses) where drug related disorder is a problem; neighbourhood warden schemes to provide reassurance; supporting particular policing schemes through overtime or civilian support. Provision of additional services such as housing managers to enforce planning and housing remedies to tackle problems and improve the quality of life on estates where drug dealing/use is rife, or youth diversion schemes to provide alternative life styles for young people could also be considered.
This funding is to provide services that would not otherwise be provided – it is not to shore up or replace mainstream funding.
29. The Communities Against Drugs Toolkit (www.crimereduction.gov.uk) and Appendix A to this guidance contain a range of other suggestions about how problems can be tackled.
30. In looking at local problems, partnerships should also be aware that these may form part of a larger drugs market or drug crime problem. Drugs markets do not respect local authority boundaries, and although those addicted to drugs may commit crime close to home to feed their habit, they may travel some distance to buy their drugs. The crime and the markets may therefore be in different places. Partnerships need to take account of these broader issues and consider whether there would be benefits in pooling some of their funding for force-wide or regional schemes which may have greater effect on local problems (see also paragraph 34 about displacement).
31. Partnerships will also want to take account of the effects of their actions on neighbouring areas. Activities should be monitored to ensure that they do not simply displace problems across boundaries. DATs should play a role in ensuring that the activities proposed by one partnership will not have a detrimental effect on other localities. It is important that partnerships consider working across partnership boundaries in organising spend and activity (see also paragraph 34 below).
32. Crime and Disorder Partnerships should consult the Local Strategic Partnership (LSP) as they develop, to ensure that links with other partnerships are well established and to ensure that the money is consistent with the strategic aims of the LSP, and in particular the Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy. Managing the issues around demand and supply can be important tools in regenerating the poorest and most deprived communities. The use of these funds to tackle drug supply to assist regeneration in these areas is strongly encouraged.
Guidance and Advice
33. Essential guidance and advice on dealing with the problems of drugs markets and drug related crime can be found in the
Communities Against Drugs toolkit on the Crime Reduction website (www.crimereduction.gov.uk) - comprehensive guidance on how to assess need and to plan and manage programmes tackling drug crime and supply. Other toolkits and areas of the site may also provide useful advice and guidance.
Calling Time on Crime - the HMIC report on crime reduction (ISBN 1-84082-486-7)
34. Crime Reduction Directors will offer informal feedback on plans. Partnerships are invited to send their developing plans to the teams. They will find this particularly helpful when considering whether it would be useful to pool their funding with a neighbouring partnership, for example to help tackle a drug supply market operating in an adjoining area or across boundaries Partnerships should consider working across partnership boundaries in organising spend and programmes to tackle supply (see also paragraphs 30 and 31 above). It is important to ensure that activities in one area do not simply displace drug supply to neighbouring areas. DATs should be able to help in ensuring that the activities proposed by one partnerships will not have a detrimental effect on a neighbourhood area, and they will take account of this in considering CDRP plans.
Arrangements for reporting on use of funds and audit
35. The funds will be passed to local authorities to act as treasurer for the partnership. The local authority will be sent conditions of grant, by the Crime Reduction Director, setting out the purposes for which the funding is given, and the conditions which need to be satisfied before it is assigned to projects. The use of the money will need to be in accordance with those purposes. The normal local audit and accountability arrangements will apply, and the district auditor will need to be assured that the money was properly assigned, according to the requirements of the condition of the grant.
36. The money is however the responsibility of the partnership. The CDRP will need to keep track of expenditure, to ensure that the money is spent appropriately according to the purposes set out above. The CDRP will need to explain how the money has been spent as part of its 3 yearly audit/strategy reporting cycle. The CDRP will also take the lead in producing a brief annual report on the use made, and to be made, of Communities Against Drugs funds in the previous and forthcoming financial years. This will be submitted through the formal DAT(DAAT) reporting system (and copied to Crime Reduction Director). DATs and DAATs are required to report on their activity via reporting mechanisms which fall at the end of April. They are asked to report on their total activity to tackle the supply of drugs, including the use of the funds, and outcomes, supplied via this funding initiative using the information prepared by the CDRP. A copy of the full DAT plan must be sent to Crime Reduction Director as soon as it complete.
37. Every CDRP will be required to monitor the use of the money. CDRPs should make their own monitoring arrangements which should not be disproportionately time consuming or resource intensive. The objective of the monitoring should be to make sure that the money is being spent as the CDRP intended. It should also provide a broad insight into the extent of delivery and whether the desired outcomes have been achieved (see also paragraph 24). The monitoring should cover:
inputs - resources and time put into projects;
processes - how the project operates;
outputs – what gets done (e.g. numbers of addicts seen, additional police hours provided and capital items purchased)
outcomes – whether the outputs have had an impact (e.g. reductions in drug related crime, reductions in drug use changes in communities’ perceptions about drug abuse).
38. Communities Against Drugs is part of the communities aim of the Government’s 10 year anti-drugs strategy which deals with the effect of drugs on communities including crime, social exclusion, neighbourhood decline and drug supply . The key performance indicator in this area is the level of repeat offending amongst drug misusing offenders. CDRPs will wish to judge how successful their funded activities have been, and should consider what simple methods of benchmarking progress they could use (such as regular surveys of key workers/voluntary organisations or communities on perceptions of the level of the problems and the degree of change over time) as well as using other statistics Information about monitoring and evaluation can be found in the Communities Against Drugs Toolkit (www.crimereduction.gov.uk).
39. The Research, Development and Statistics Directorate of the Home Office will be evaluating a small number of projects under this programme. The focus of the evaluation is still being discussed but the objective is to commission research which will look at the impact of certain activities and which expands the evidence base on dealing with drugs markets.
40. Further information about this circular can be obtained from:
Stephen Brookes
Crime Reduction Director
The Belgrave Centre
Stanley Place
Talbot Street
NOTTINGHAM
NG1 5CG
Tel: 0115 971 2760
email: stephen.brookes@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
Robin Burgess
Drugs Prevention Advisory Service
Horseferry House
Dean Ryle Street
LONDON
SWIP 2AW
Tel: 020 7217 8435
email: robin.burgess@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
Colin Pethick (general enquiries)
Crime Reduction Programme Unit
Home Office
Clive House
Petty France
LONDON
SW1H 9HD
Tel: 020 7271 8331
email: colin.pethick@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
Appendices
A ‘Communities Against Drugs – Getting Started’
C Grant Conditions
Last update: Tuesday, October 03, 2006