JavaScript is not enabled

Without JavaScript enabled forms will not work.

The Joint Audit Committee scrutinises internal processes, spending and risk management policies. It also has the power to review finance issues referred by the Police and Crime Commissioner and the Chief Constable and monitor internal control processes, audit reports and the annual statements of accounts.

The Joint Audit Committee has been established to meet the requirements of the Home Office Financial Management Code of Practice (FMCoP), the Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) Audit Committee guidance and the HM Treasury Audit Committee handbook.

The current membership of the Joint Audit Committee:

Jagtar Singh OBE – Chair

Wayne Brads

Neil Randall

Dale Phillipson

Laura Bell

Attending Joint Audit Committee

Joint Audit Committee meetings are held quarterly and are usually held at Kempston Police Headquarters, but they can sometimes be held virtually too. Meetings are approx. 2hrs long.

Members of the public or media are welcome to attend these meetings but should notify the OPCC in advance, by calling 01234 842064 or by emailing our office. Prior notice of attendance is required.

You will need to provide your details, including:

Name
Email address
Organisation
Contact telephone number

You will also need to pre-register at least five working days before the scheduled meeting.

Conditions of attendance

You must confirm your identity before entry will be allowed. Please produce photographic identification to allow verification of your identity.
You must sign in and out of Force Headquarters and wear a visitor badge; please do not leave the premises without signing out.
Toilet facilities and a water machine will be made available for you. There are no refreshment facilities on site.
No recording equipment; including photographic or audio.
Mobile telephones/devices must be turned off.

Joint Audit Committee minutes

Joint Audit Committee of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire and Bedfordshire Police

Meeting of 21 June 2024 - Held between 13:00 – 15:30

Agenda

Minutes

Present:

Jagtar Singh – Chair (JS) Chair, Independent Committee Member
Wayne Brads (IM WB) Independent Committee Member
Judit Seymour (IM JSM) Independent Committee Member
Laura Bell (IM LB) Independent Committee Member
Katie Henry (KPMG KH) KMPG External Auditor
Mark Jones (RSM MJ) RSM Internal Auditor
Phil Wells (ACO PW) Assistant Chief Officer and Chief Finance Officer
Hannah Broadbank (HB) Principal Accountant (Invitee)
Dan Vajzovic (DCC DV) Deputy Chief Constable
John Tizard (PCC JT) Police and Crime Commissioner
Katie Beaumont (HGT KB) Head of Governance and Transparency – OPCC
Bethany Coles (CO BC) Compliance Officer – OPCC (Minute Taker)

Part One – Not Restricted

22/JAC/30 Introduction

WB welcomed the committee, OPCC and Police Service representatives to the meeting and advised that he will be temporarily chairing the meeting today on behalf of Chair JS.

22/JAC/31 Apologies

IM Gita Raja has submitted her apologies.

22/JAC/32 Minutes of the meeting held on 22.03.2024 (Restricted in part)

No substantial changes noted. WB advised that there are some
typos, however he has gone through these with KB and will amend.

LB stated regarding her declaration of interest, to check that it has come off, as not minuted from last time. The process of minutes and whether the committee could provide feedback on whether they would like the minutes to be continued as are, or whether they’d like to be changed with any improvements.

Action (All Members): To provide feedback on the style of the minutes of the JAC.

22/JAC/33 Actions log

ACTION - It was agreed that the referencing for the action log needs to be amended.

1. 22/JAC/38 – covered later on the agenda and therefore marked as complete.
2. 22/JAC/39 – 2: Latest paper has been amended to reflect points raised by Members - Complete 22/JAC/41 – 3: Marked as complete
3. 22/JAC/38 – Members were requested to complete skills document circulated.
4. 22/JAC/38 – to be incorporated into JAC development day - Complete

22/JAC/34 Matters Arising

There were no matters arising.

22/JAC/35 Declarations of Interest (verbal)

All declaration of interests were updated and recorded.

22/JAC/36 Terms of Reference – Annual Review

Members were informed that there were some minor changes with the Terms of Reference (ToR). The ToR remain aligned to the CIPFA code on audit committees and include the committee’s comments with regards to equal opportunities, human rights, accountability statements and the annual governance statement. It was also noted that with the PCC elections back on a four-year cycle, following COVID that the terms for independent members has been changed back to 4 years. The amended Terms of Reference was approved.

22/JAC/37 - PCC Introduction

The PCC, as it was his first meeting following his successful election campaign, provided an overview of his role, the timelines for the publication of his Police and Crime Plan and how he saw the JAC operating, in line with the approved Terms of Reference to provide him with assurance around good governance.

He explained that the key elements of the plan will be to set out clear strategic objectives which are measurable and that he would have key missions focused on: serious crime, local policing, violence against women and children, ensuring that victims are at the heart of policing and the wider criminal justice system, ensuring that we have an excellent and continually improving Police Service and managing risk effectively as well as engaging with the public.

Final Accounts – The draft accounts for approval were presented to the Committee. The full sets of accounts for the ‘Group’ and the ‘Chief Constable’ were presented. Members asked questions in relation to IFRS16, Assets for Disposal and Grant Income for which explanations were provided and additional assurance provided by the external auditors. The Members also asked to ensure that the documents were made accessible for all and it was agreed that a summary accounts document would be published to fulfil this requirement.

The Committee approved the accounts, subject to receiving the Auditors findings post their Audit and in doing so thanked the Finance department for their work in the completion of very detailed documents.

External Audit Verbal Update

The Auditors, KPMG, thanked the Committee for the approval of the Accounts and explained that their audit of them would commence towards the back end of the summer and their findings reported back to this Committee.

22/JAC/38 Internal Audit

a) Internal Audit Progress Report

The Head of Internal Audit explained that Members would receive the final 2023/24 audit opinions at the next Committee but that as these are in draft it was highly unlikely that the annual opinion would change.
For 2024/25 the Governance Audit had been completed and the assurance from that Audit was positive. Members noted the report and took assurance that the 23/24 audit
plan had been completed.

b) RSM Annual Report

The Head of Internal Audit walked Members through his Annual Report explaining that the overall assurance was positive but with recommendations for improvement, based upon the audits during 2023/24.

Members thanked the Head of Internal Audit for the report, which was noted and in doing so congratulated both the OPCC, Police Service for the level of assurance provided through the internal audit reports this year.

Finally, members asked if the Head of Internal Audit could continue to send his Emergency Services updates. Action RSM: To circulate the RSM Emergency Services Update (as
part of progress papers) to the committee.

22/JAC/39 Police Service Overview

The DCC introduced the report that had been circulated to Members drawing out some specific themes:
• Vision events had been run over the last couple of months and more next month for the Chief Constable and his Executive Tea, to present to the whole workforce on the delivery of the police services vision.
• The use of Artificial Intelligence had been piloted in Bedfordshire to determine how this could be used to enhance the productivity of officers and staff and this was now being
considered by other Forces and potentially nationally.
• That the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) had recently reviewed the data protection arrangements of the Force and provided very good assurance with some
recommendations that will be in place by January 2025.
• Confirmation that the HMICFRS will be visiting in September 2024 as their final part of the PEEL process and review.
• That all supervisors at first line and middle managers have been or are going through a development programme to assist with them undertaking their roles. Members thanked the DCC for his report and in noting requested that they had an input on what the Force were doing to prevent Cybercrime.

Action: ERSOU provide an input on cybercrime prevention at the next development day.

Part Two – Restricted

22/JAC/40 HMICFRS Update

The DCC provided an overview of HMICFRS.

Members noted the report.

22/JAC/41 - a) Strategic Risk Register of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire

CFO presented the SRR.

OPCC 22/JAC/42 Strategic Risk Register of Bedfordshire Police

Members noted on the SRR.

22/JAC/43 AOB

Reflections of meeting by JAC members

Members took assurance from the detailed papers and expressed their thanks again to the Finance team

Joint Audit Committee of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire and Bedfordshire Police

Meeting of 22 March 2024 - Held between 13:00 – 15:30

Agenda

Minutes

Present:

Jagtar Singh – Chair (JS) Chair, Independent Committee Member
Wayne Brads (IM WB) Independent Committee Member
Judit Seymour (IM JSM) Independent Committee Member
Laura Bell (IM LB) Independent Committee Member
Gita Raja (IM GR) Independent Committee Member
Katie Henry (KPMG KH) KMPG External Auditor
Dominic Sutherland (RSM
DS) RSM Internal Auditor
Mark Jones (RSM MJ) RSM Internal Auditor
Dan Vajzovic (DCC DV) Deputy Chief Constable
Michelle Leggetter (PWM
ML) People and Workforce Manager
Katie Beaumont (HGT KB) Head of Governance and Transparency - OPCC
Anna Villette (CE AV) Chief Executive - OPCC
Anesu Banda (CO AM) Compliance Officer – OPCC (Minute Taker)

22/JAC/30 Introduction

The chair welcomed the committee, OPCC and Force representatives to the meeting.

22/JAC/31 Apologies

● Phil Wells (CFO PW)
● Rachel Brittain (BDO RB)

22/JAC/32 Minutes of the meeting held on 22.12.2023 (Restricted in part).

No substantial changes noted.

22/JAC/33 Actions log

1. Accuracy of minutes and reports – Completed.
2. Skills Audit – Outstanding
3. Tri-Force OPCC request papers – Completed.
4. KB linking in with Tri-Force OPCC – Completed
5. Cyber report – Completed.

22/JAC/34 Matters Arising

There were no matters arising.

22/JAC/35 Declarations of Interest (verbal)

All declaration of interests has been recorded.

22/JAC/37

KH, director at KPMG introduced herself to the committee. KH is responsible for Beds, Cambs and Herts therefore there will be a consistent team across all three Forces.
KH has taken the paper as read and gave a summary of the report. Discussions were had between KPMG and members.

22/JAC/38 Internal Audit

a) Internal Audit Progress Report
b) Internal Audit Plan 2024/25
RSM presented the papers and had discussions with the JAC members.
c) Progress of recommendations

Paper has been noted as read.
JS asked, what level of assurance can be given that the action plans will be met and what is the rationale is for the slippages? AV answered, on behalf of the OPCC, we work closely with RSM to ensure that any planned improvements or responses to recommendations are within time frames that we can meet, and we often meet them ahead of what we have set out, however, RSM are very realistic about what they request from us and we can provide the committee with the assurance that the OPCC remain on top of everything.

The DCC added, there is nothing that causes any significant concern and the reason the paper was for noting is because if there was something that we thought that we wanted to bring to your attention because we had concerns in relation to it, we would have prepared a
detailed briefing to explain why there were concerns.

22/JAC/39 Force Overview

The DCC took the paper as read and asked the committee to ask any questions they may have. Discussions took place surrounding this paper. Due to time constraints the DCC asked the committee to send their questions after the meeting to be addressed next time.

Training Presentation/paper

ML informed the committee the presentation is going to focus on key operational skills and governance because training force wide is massive and will differ between teams. ML shared the dashboard with the committee.

Cyber presentation – update paper

Discussions took place surrounding this update paper.

Vetting Update

Discussions took place surrounding this update paper.

22/JAC/40 HMICFRS Update

The DCC gave an update regarding HMICFRS.
Discussions took place surrounding this update paper.

22/JAC/41 - a) Strategic Risk Register of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire

Report taken as read.
Members felt assured by the presentation.

22/JAC/42 Strategic Risk Register of Bedfordshire Police Report taken as read.

Members felt assured by the presentation.

22/JAC/43 AOB

KB informed the committee if there are any questions or any comments that they need to forward, to ensure they receive a written response to, this must be sent after the meeting along with expenses.

Feedback to be raised with the CC/PCC

None

a) Reflections of meeting by JAC members

KH said this was a very useful meeting and it was a good challenge. MJ said it’s always been the case that the level of challenge is high, probably higher than I see in a lot of other audit
committee meetings that I attend, but it's done in the right way. GR said, there were a lot of papers to go through, and the committee saw good presentations. GR thanked KB for ensuring the papers were sent to the committee on time which allowed ample time to digest
everything prior to the meeting. WB said this was one of the widest agendas the committee has had on a joint audit committee and the presentations really added to it which is worth considering going forward. It kept the pace going. The operational elements were well represented and provided lots of answers. JSM added, the papers were sent out with plenty of time and for the inclusion of the internal audit reports from the Tri Party which is something JSM has been asking for and it has been delivered. JSM asked for the slides to be shared because she did not see ML’s slides.

POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER FOR BEDFORDSHIRE and BEDFORDSHIRE POLICE

JOINT AUDIT COMMITTEE

Meeting of 20 September 2023

Held between 12:30 – 15:00

Agenda

Minutes

Present:

Jagtar Singh – Chair (JS) - Chair, Independent Committee Member

Wayne Brads (IM WB) - Independent Committee Member

Judit Seymour (IM JSM) - Independent Committee Member

Gita Raja (IM GR) - Independent Committee Member

Phil Wells (CFO PW) - Chief Finance Officer – Bedfordshire Police

Dan Vajzovic (DCC DV) - Deputy Chief Constable – Bedfordshire Police

Katie Henry (KPMG KH) - KMPG External Auditor

Dominic Sutherland (RSM DS) - RSM Internal Auditor

Katie Beaumont (HGT KB) - Head of Governance and Transparency - OPCC

Tarushi De Cruze (CO TDC) - Compliance Officer – OPCC (Minute Taker)

22/JAC/30 -Introduction

JS welcomed the committee, OPCC and Police Service representatives to the meeting.

All members introduced themselves.

22/JAC/31 -Apologies

Wayne Humberstone

Laura Bell

22/JAC/32 -Minutes of the meeting held on 21.06.2024

No edits or accuracy changes needed.

22/JAC/33 -Action Log

22/JAC/38 – Development Day still to be finalised.
22/JAC/32 – Feedback on the minutes given, action complete.
22/JAC/37 – Final account is now fully accessible; can be removed as an outstanding action.
22/JAC/39 – Still to be considered
22/JAC/40 – DCC has circulated the report to JAC surrounding recruiting detectives. Members assured this had been received.
22/JAC/43 – Mutley the wellbeing dog will try to attend the JAC development day if he is available.

Action: IM requested on the development day workshop if issues surrounding people within the workforce such as recruitment, retention, promotions, leavers as well as any updates could be discussed.

Part One

22/JAC/34 -Matters Arising

There were no matters arising.

22/JAC/35 -Declaration of Interest (verbal)

Action: JS requested KB to remove Coventry Warwick Partnership Trust where he has now left.

No other changes to declarations of interests.

22/JAC/36 -JAC Annual Report

As discussed during the pre-meet, IM will create the first draft for this year. HGT will add this to the calendar of planned events to have this completed early for next year, potentially just after the end of the financial year.

It was also suggested, to finalise the Annual report outside of the committee and circulate it to the members rather than wait till the next meeting, which would be in December.

Members agreed on a deadline for the annual report to be circulated to all members within two weeks, with the aim to be signed off in four weeks.

Part One – Not Restricted

22/JAC/37 - External Audit

a) Auditor’s Update – Verbal

KPMG explained the audit is currently undergoing, and the progress is going well. However, the aim to be signed off by the end of the year has now been pushed back to early in the new year.

Members asked if there were any issues at this stage within the external audit. KPMG state that there are no issues at this stage that needs to be brought to attention.

22/JAC/38 -Internal Audit

a) Internal Audit Progress Report

RSM presented the progress report, using the final two reports from the 2023/24 Beds only and BCH plans. In addition, the three from the 2024/25 Beds only plan.

RSM requested one change within the progress report which is for the Police and Crime Plan review to be replaced with the review of commissioning instead. Members approved this change.

Members asked whether the commissioning audit will include the new Procurement Act or if it was focusing purely on commissioning. The CFO assured that training had been completed on the Procurement Act and information had been shared with the individual forces.

RSM presented two reports, one from 2023/24 and the other from 2024/25 from the Violence and Exploitation Reduction Unit. An initial review was conducted as part of the 2023/24 plan and was given a partial assurance with three high, two medium and two low priority actions. A follow up was then done as part of the 2024/25 plan which was given good progress, and all seven actions were implemented.

It was also mentioned previously that there were issues with the VERU and the Home Office around 18 months ago. These issues have now been rectified and are the ones mentioned in the 2023/24 report above. These weaknesses have now been addressed.

RSM talked through the follow up report from 2023/24. As part of the internal audit plan, it provides a follow up of the actions from the previous audit. They found 33 actions of which 23 had been implemented, 6 mediums were ongoing, 2 mediums had not been implemented and one medium had been rejected due to a lack of resources to implement it. Overall, because of the high level of implementation of the actions, it was given reasonable progress.

Regarding BCH 2023/24, two were presented: the Seven-Force Procurement, which was given reasonable assurance and the Cyber Risk Assessment, which was given minimal assurance.

Members asked if they should be concerned about the BCH audits as Bedfordshire often outperform in internal audit ratings. The CFO responded more information should be gathered to answer that question; however, it should not be a concern.

Action: To provide feedback on the difference in internal audit ratings between local and BCH audits.

Members were also concerned about the outcomes that were issued for the BCH report and questioned the value for money in terms of the quality of service that is delivered against the cost savings that is generated from collaborative activities. The CFO assured members that the level of service provided could not be achieved at the same price if it were to be split up.

Action: Provide the outcomes of the Business Planning Process within the BCH unit to show what has been done in terms of addressing the concern around value for money.

Members were disappointed that two audits have a partial and minimal assurance. They did not understand why areas which were known to be risks were not addressed internally first, especially those where procedures and policies were not being followed. The CFO explained that the role for internal audit service is to review the whole internal control framework in order that the exact issues can be identified and a full picture of the weaknesses before tackling the problem. This ensures all issues have been captured before addressing the problem.

Actions: To provide an update on the cyber security in the area of the recommendations including the progress and if it is still on track.

RSM presented two more plans from the 2024/25 report: the Governance Plan and Medium-term Financial Plan. Both plans received substantial assurance. The Governance Report included three low priority actions and the Medium-term Financial Plan had no actions.

b) RSM Annual Report

Members received a draft version of the Annual Report at the previous meeting. The report has not changed since and has been finalised. The overall opinion has remained positive.

c) Benchmarking Report

RSM explained benchmarking reports are provided each year. They benchmark the assurance levels, management actions and annual opinions across other clients in the same sector. In terms of assurance levels, Bedfordshire police remained above the average with 38% substantial assurance. Bedfordshire Police was below average in terms of parcel assurance opinions which is good. Similarly, 16.7% management actions with a sector average of 21.8%.

IM questioned the numbers of recruitment and if that is a concern for the force. In addition, if modelling had been done to see the effect on experience across the average return of service.

The CFO assured that in terms of leavers, Bedfordshire’s attrition level is decreasing whereas nationally the average is increasing.

IM raised an issue with the lack of a cybersecurity strategy within the report and whether it aligns with the national strategy.

Action: To circulate the Cyber Security Strategy.

22/JAC/39 -Force Overview

The DCC noted an error as 3.4 contradicts to 3.5 in the paper. 3.4 is wrong and should be redacted.

The DCC introduced the report that had been circulated to members drawing out some specific themes:

Section 4.3 provides an indication on force performance. Regarding the solved crime rate and detection rate, although it appears to be deteriorating, it has improved throughout 2024.
Section 6.5 states the CQ training went live on the 23 June 2023. This has been successful and well received by staff.

The DCC stated that regarding the recruitment process and attrition rate, the force has reached the end of the financial year target for the police uplift recruitment programme. The midyear target point which is approaching in the next couple of days, will also be met.

Probation numbers have decreased as it is now closer to the 300 mark. The DCC also explained that if attrition levels remain on the current trajectory, the probation numbers will hopefully be in the 200 mark.

The force is also investing significantly more in training and upscaling the workforce, as well as being clear on their vetting processes. A quarterly summary of colleagues who have left the organisation following conduct cases will also be published on the website.

The DCC discussed the changes to the operating environment, including the growth in population, the arrival of Universal Studios, the move of Luton Town football club from the premiership down to the championships and explained the impact on the workload and demands.

The DCC explained some of the significant operational challenges this summer, including the Luton Carnival, which passed without any significant disorder; The hosting of BBC 1 Big Weekend, which provided positive media and news for Luton and Bedfordshire; The River Festival which attracted a lot of attention and did not have any significant disorder; and lastly, the riots witnessed across the country. Bedfordshire police were significantly involved in supporting the national effort to bring peace and stability back to the streets. Reports were received of far-right activists and protesters within Bedford. However, the force put in place good policing and operations which was plauded by members of the community and resulted in no disorder in Bedfordshire during that period.

The DCC also addressed the triple murder in Luton which occurred in the previous week. The DCC assured all members that the BCH Major Crimes team and BCH Armed Policing team who have responded to two triple homicides within the last quarter, have been able to manage all these demands by working collaboratively.

IM asked for an update on the Sergeant and Inspector promotion process and the progression on developing the teams. The DCC explained that over the recent period this has not dramatically changed, however there is many qualified individuals and significant interest for the promotion of Inspector.

IM asked how the force is celebrating the achievements of people who diffused the situation in Bedfordshire, in reference to the riots. The DCC answered stating 200 letters were written to people thanking them for their involvement in the riots. Therefore, this is being done internally.

IM asked where the assumptions come from for the medium-term plans. In addition, as the force is forecasting a deficit, IM wanted to understand the forces position in relation to covering that, whether this would be covered through savings or seeking additional grants?

The CFO explained LGPS pension actuarial valuations and pay award will be local assumptions. Grant assumptions, precept assumptions are all national. In terms of the deficit forecasted for 2024/25, the CFO explained that this was unusual to be predicting an overspend and that the PBB process will pick this up for 2025/26 whilst trying to retain or improve service levels in priority areas and considering impact on service delivery from reducing where non-priority areas.

Part Two – Restricted

22/JAC/40 -HMICFRS Update

The DCC gave an update regarding HMICFRS

22/JAC/41 -Strategic Risk Register of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire (OPCC)

HGT explained that the Police and Crime Panel meeting was held on Tuesday, where the Police and Crime Plan was signed off.

A deep dive review has been completed with the management team within the OPCC to present the new Strategic Risk Register for Decembers meeting.

Action: To circulate the Police and Crime Plan to the committee.

22/JAC/42 -Strategic Risk Register of Bedfordshire Police

CFO presented the SRR.

Action: To review if there are any changes to the risk appetite currently.

22/JAC/43 -AOB

POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER FOR BEDFORDSHIRE and BEDFORDSHIRE POLICE

JOINT AUDIT COMMITTEE

Meeting of 20 December 2024

Held between 13:00 – 15:00

Agenda

Minutes

Present:

Jagtar Singh – Chair (JS) - Chair, Independent Committee Member

Wayne Brads (IM WB) - Independent Committee Member

Judit Seymour (IM JSM) - Independent Committee Member

Gita Raja (IM GR) - Independent Committee Member

Laura Bell (IM LB) - Independent Committee Member

Phil Wells (CFO PW) - Chief Finance Officer – OPCC

Dan Vajzovic (DCC DV) - Deputy Chief Constable – Bedfordshire Police

Mark Jones (RSM MJ) - RSM Internal Auditor

Nicole, Guo (KPMG, NG) - KMPG External Auditor

Sharn Basra (CE SB) - Chief Executive – OPCC

Katie Beaumont (HGT KB) - Head of Governance and Transparency - OPCC

22/JAC/29 - AOB

The Chair started the meeting discussing AOB.

The committee discussed the terms of JAC members, raising points regarding governance, experience and covid. The Chair suggested running a process whereby JAC members help promote the role of JAC and invite potential candidates, prior to advertising, to the meeting to see whether they are interested.

22/JAC/30 -Introduction

The Chair welcomed the committee, OPCC and Police Service representatives to the meeting.

All members introduced themselves.

The Chair questioned whether the force would recommend using copilot to create the minutes and actions in order to save time. In addition, questioned whether those minutes would sit within the Forces server or Microsoft server, as the latter may be more available to the public.

The CFO explained the force is currently running a trial across Cambridgeshire, Hertfordshire and Bedfordshire to better understand if and when they will use copilot, and the implications surrounding its use.

22/JAC/31 -Apologies

No apologies were received.

22/JAC/32 -Minutes of the meeting held on 21.06.2024

No edits or accuracy changes needed.

22/JAC/33 -Action Log

CFO explained that there are currently two action logs, one with the actions of the committee and the other with actions following the development day.

CFO started with the action log from the committee.

22/JAC/38 – Closed
22/JAC/32 – Feedback on the minutes given, action complete.
22/JAC/37 – Final account is now fully accessible, action complete.
22/JAC/39 – Director of ERSOU attended the development day, action complete.
22/JAC/40 – DCC has circulated the report to JAC members surrounding the recruitment of detectives, action complete.
22/JAC/43 – HGT arranged for Mutley the wellbeing dog to attend the JAC development day. However, as the development day was changed to an online team’s meeting, this could no longer go ahead. Therefore, this action will be carried over.
22/JAC/33 – Discussed at Development Day, action complete.
22/JAC/35 – Action complete
22/JAC/38 14 – BCH CFO meeting earlier in the new year. Internal audit will be picked up at their next meeting.
22/JAC/38 15 – Action complete.
22/JAC/38 16 – Discussed at development day, action complete.
22/JAC/38 17 – The CFO stated that all members should have received a copy of the Security and Assurance Vision Statement. IM was unsure whether this had been received, therefore, CFO will circulate this again.
22/JAC/41 – Action complete.
22/JAC/42 – The risk appetite will be reviewed alongside the settlement and budget which will all link into the police and crime plans. Therefore, the CFO will come back to this action in the March committee meeting.

The CFO explained that majority of the development day actions will be covered within today’s meeting. Any actions missed will be discussed between the CFO and the Chair afterwards.

IM stated that the JAC Annual report has not been completed within the given timescale. IM explained this should be finalised within the next day or two.

Action: WB to complete JAC Annual Report and to disseminate the report to members.

22/JAC/34 -Matters Arising

There were no matters arising.

22/JAC/35 -Declaration of Interest (verbal)

The Chair reminded the committee that his interest has changed as he is no longer chair of a Mental Health Trust.

No other changes to declarations of interests.

22/JAC/36 -JAC Annual Report

No comments or views from committee members.

Terms of Reference approved as published.

22/JAC/37 -External Audit

a) Auditor’s Update – Verbal

KPMG informed the committee that the audit is currently at a good stage and progressing well. There are a few inquiries to be conducted within January. However, they are expecting to present the audit report in February and is currently not anticipating any delays.

The CFO asked if KPMG could inform the committee on the opinion likely to be provided for 2023/2024.

KPMG stated that the substantial audit for 2023/2024 will still take place as normal. However, there were some issues surrounding the opening balances and the audit is likely to be a disclaimed audit. KPMG will be back on track in 24/25 and will be able to provide audit opinions.

KPMG wanted to also give her appreciation to the CFO and his team, as they have been extremely responsive to all audit inquiries which has in turn allowed KPMG to remain on track with the audit

22/JAC/38 -Internal Audit

a) Internal Audit Progress Report

RSM updated that in terms of the Bedfordshire only plan, they have issued 2 reports in a final form.

The General Ledger Report has now been issued in draft and is sitting at a substantial assurance.

RSM stated that they have the follow up planned for March and another audit scheduled in February based on commissioning, which is replacing the audit on the police and crime plan.

RSM explained they are confident this work will be completed within the year and based on the previous audits, there will be a clear positive opinion in their annual report for the beds only element of the plan.

When looking at the BCH element, RSM confirmed they have issued one report. There is another piece of work in draught and is currently with management for comment. Payroll and expenses are currently underway at the moment. As well as two other pieces of work, which are planned for January.

RSM presented two reports from the Beds only progress report. One for recruitment and retention, which was given a reasonable assurance opinion with a couple of medium priority actions, around leavers and retention of recruitment records, and a couple of low priority actions.

IM asked in relation to movers, joiners and leavers, what is the process regarding their access being revoked, amended or changed? IM wanted to know whether this was investigated as part of the audit.

RSM clarified that although it was not investigated in this audit, it does regularly get examined when looking at individual systems to see who has access or not.

ACTION: RSM to follow up with JSM either by email or verbally at the next meeting, on the most recent audit which investigated access control.

Within the positive audit themes, it states a newly appointed lead for the race action plan is drafting a strategic plan. IM asked clarification from DCC on whether they are drafting a strategic plan, updating an existing one or operating without one?

The CFO answered that there is a national race action plan which is viewed differently depending on the force area. Within Bedfordshire, due to the diverse community we serve, the race action plan is fully complied with. Therefore, it is crucial to have a local strategic plan which takes key components of the national plan, to ensure the force is policing by consent in all communities. In addition, utilising all communities to help coproduce the policing service provided.

IM followed up by asking what activity is seen by diversity support groups via the intranet. The CFO explained that the Diversity Support group is comprised of various protected characteristics groups, who meet up regularly. The DSG is currently looking into alternative ways of communication and accessibility and the Intranet is one of those methods.

The Chair clarified that the Race Action Plan is no more than a tool to provide assurance that Bedfordshire Police meets its public sector equality duty and carries out its duties under the Equality Act. He questioned when the last time the committee saw the Equality and Diversity Annual report? In addition, inquired if the force has ever carried out an audit on equality impact assessments.

ACTION: Within the next development day, the CFO will provide a deep dive into how Bedfordshire Police meets the public sector equality duty, what are the supporting strategies and the work done around the race action plan, legitimacy and public sector. Furthermore, depending on if there is an annual report published in 2024, the CFO to circulate this to the committee.

The DCC wanted to add to the discussion surrounding the removal of access when people leave the organisation. The DCC assured the committee that there is a good relationship between the IT team and HR regarding the removal of access. The DCCs only concern, that may be worth looking at within future audits, is the physical recovery of identification cards.

RSM continued his discussion regarding the progress report for Beds only. The other report was for complaints, which was given reasonable assurance, two medium priority and one low priority actions. The medium priority action was based on compliance issues, including providing reference numbers back to the complainant and ensuring the complainant is kept up to date with the progress of the complaint.

IM questioned why processes were not being followed despite there being procedures and policies in place. Secondly, IM asked in relation to recruitment, retention and complaints, have we received any FOI requests to the force?

The CFO was unable to provide the amount of FOI requests the force receive regarding complaints relating to recruitment and retention. However, the CFO did explain that the force normally receives around 100 FOIs a month, and they currently have just below a 90% rate in terms of answering them on time.

ACTION: CFO to provide the committee with a table showing the type of FOIs received by the force and any themes.

In relation to the policies and procedures question, the CFO responded that the purpose of an internal audit is to ensure the policies and procedures are being complied with. The force is content in the way they communicate their policies and procedures. However, there may be instances whereby communication methods have not worked; therefore, with internal audits, the force is able to identify them.

The Chair asked if there was a triage once complaints go over the time they should have been answered? The CFO confirmed that there is and highlighted that the report showed a slight weakness within complaints. As a result, the force and PCC, are currently looking into taking the handling of complaints away from the force and dealing with them under the OPCC instead. This way there is a complete level of independence.

In relation to the FOI question previously, the Chair wanted to add that the members would like to know if there are specific themes within FOIs. The CFO responded that he would forward the FOI table and if the committee wanted to explore any further, to reach out to him.

IM noticed that in the summary and conclusion of the report, it states that there has been a reduction in numbers of dissatisfaction of complaints, from 107 to 79. IM wanted to know whether this was within the year or period, and if there is a trend line for IOPC referrals and how fast IOPC respond?

The CFO stated there is currently an issue in relation to referrals to IOPC and the time taken to investigate. He explained cases are being drawn out which causes concern to the victims and impacts the trust and confidence of policing.

The DCC broadly explained that the timeliness of IOPC investigations is improving. He agreed there are delays in some cases, however, the force is seeing a better performance than previously.

IM wanted to understand the available routes within the force, to complain or raise an issue. In addition, how are lessons learned, and change initiated from the themes that arise from complaints.

The DCC stated that this topic may be worthy of a more substantive agenda item in a future meeting. In addition, it may be beneficial for the committee to encompass conduct as well as complaints.

The CE agreed with the DCC, suggesting within the next development day, a session on complaints and conduct should be arranged. This can then also coincide with the desire of the PCC to take Model 2 complaints. The CE also added that in relation to the question regarding policies not being adhered to, this forms part of the PCCs discussion when holding the Chief Constable to account.

ACTION: To organise a development day to discuss the different routes to complain, how are lessons learned, and change initiated from the themes that arise from complaints. Furthermore, how these overlaps with conduct. This can then coincide with the desire of the PCC to take Model 2 complaints.

RSM moved on to the final BCH audit to discuss; this looked at the collaborated planning process and the accounting support. This was a follow up to a previous advisory review of the planning process. RSM explained they provided two opinions, partial assurance opinion on the planning process and substantial assurance opinion on the accounting support.

RSM stated that there is one high priority action and a couple medium priority actions within the planning area. The high priority action was around the data analysis. The second area was around the effectiveness of the challenge panel, and the third area was around the lack of input from the finance departments to the Joint Strategic Transformation (JST) team.

IM asked the CFO the reasoning as to why there was no involvement from the finance department and assurance going forward that they will be involved.

The CFO did not think it was fair to say that there was no involvement at all from the finance department, instead he explained JST were indicating that the finance department did not engage properly when working with department heads. The CFO agreed this is a fundamental weakness when coordinating a budget planning process, however with a better approach, he hopes this will improve for 2025/26.

IM asked if the savings are still on target. The CFO confirmed that they will deliver the savings needed for 2025/26, however, there are challenges when dealing with 3 organisations with three different crime plans and ensuring three chief constables and three PCCs agree on the exact same savings.

IM asked the CFO why he believes the situation will improve next year when there will still be three commissioners with different political backgrounds? The CFO explained he believes the process will be better next year in terms of identifying the savings. However, the agreement on those savings will still be challenging. He does consider there to be a general agreement around the impact on the core duties of policing, aligned to the Beds PBB process.

IM thanked RSM for circulating the news briefing.

ACTION: IM requested a quick summary in the following JAC of the items raised within the news briefing.

b) Progress on recommendations

Looking at section two of the report, the CFO stated there were two areas, victims code of practise and attrition. The force had reported these to be complete, however the auditors felt it was not sufficient and reinstated the actions.

The CFO is confident that this will be completed by the March deadline as a Chief Superintendent is now taking responsibility for that VCOP recommendation.

In relation to the other recommendations, the CFO stated 4 out of 12 have been completed, one that has previously been completed and 7 that have not been reached.

22/JAC/39 - Force Overview

The DCC brought the committees attention to the Annual Delivery Plan and discussed each theme whilst answering the questions arisen from the development day.

Regarding culture, the DCC explained he is currently tracking those who leave the organisation. The DCC stated 51 people have left the organisation other than by their own choice. This was highlighted to show how the force is trying to improve the culture, ethics and standards in policing.

The DCC acknowledged the committees’ interest in disproportionality in the complaint system and historically the disproportionality in PSD investigations. The DCC states within BCH, this has been largely eliminated through independent scrutiny panels looking at PSD investigations and assuring the force is treating individuals equitably.

The DCC explained Operation Hendrickson is the next step to having a more representative organisation. The DCC acknowledges disproportionality in vetting outcomes, and therefore Operation Hendrickson, will provide support to potential recruits to help them understand the vetting process. The DCC will circulate a PowerPoint that has been produced by Professional Standards that relates to Operation Hendrickson.

The DCC discussed the second area in the Annual Delivery Plan, leadership. The Chief Constable has re-engaged for a further period, which provides significant stability, and the force has appointed 3 new ACCs, one locally and 2 for collaborative areas of operations. The force is currently investing in leaders through frontline leadership programmes for all sergeants and staff equivalent and recently a senior leader which incorporates chief officers, superintendents and chief inspectors.

The third area discussed by the DCC was Performance Edge. The DCC explained that previous audits were conducted on the forces ability to respond to calls from the public. Two years ago, 72.1% of 999 calls were answered within 10 seconds, this year the force is nearly at 92%. Last year, the average time an individual had to wait before their emergency call was answered was 27 seconds, this year it is 6 seconds. The DCC expressed how the force performance has improved positively over the year.

The DCC discussed the fourth area which is service, product, system productivity and working with partner organisation, which has resulted in the ‘right care, right person’ programme. This has seen a significant reduction in calls for police support and an alleviation of pressure on frontline officers, allowing them to attend incidents quicker.

Lastly, Innovation. The DCC briefly explained the CFO has been conducting work through their Dragons Den Initiative and through ICT initiatives.

IM asked what was not achievable this year which will be rolled onto next year? The DCC responded, stating that due to resource constrictions, there are areas within the innovation section which will be carried forward into the next year. The DCC also explained that there are current pressures on their budget for ICT. He discussed the implementation of the voice box tool within the force control room as well as the improvement of customer interactions with the force as areas that will move into future years.

IM wanted to discuss the issue of solved crime as it has been an ongoing issue for a while. IM wanted to know what was driving the complexity and how the force intends to approach this.

The DCC explained, there is more humanity, care and support to victims, witnesses and offenders as well as rehabilitating them. In addition, due to extra protections and measures put in place for front line officers, means processes are longer and as a result the system is less productive in terms of pure outcomes.

The DCC went on to discuss the nationwide backlog in Crown Court cases and the pressures within the prison system, which does not benefit the force. However, the force is developing their detective pathway, which will in turn increase the number of investigators and provide stability. The DCC stated currently, performance is improving and the number of detections the force is achieving is increasing, which is hopeful.

The DCC brought to attention the report, which evidenced a stability in crime rates in particular areas, better retention rate of staff and a lack of requirement to significantly grow. He stated that this year, the force will not be running an Inspector’s promotion process as they currently have enough staff. This will in turn build the experience of Sergeants.

The DCC announced the force are currently looking at replacing the current case management system, Athena. The new system is anticipated to be available for the financial year 2028/29.

Part Two – Restricted

22/JAC/40 - HMICFRS Update

The DCC gave an update regarding HMICFRS

22/JAC/41 -Strategic Risk Register of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire (OPCC)

The CE explained one of his roles and responsibilities was to refresh the risk register. Changes were made as to where the risks sit and the wording.

ACTION: SB to reword risk 2 and 6. In addition, to provide clarification as to which risks were outside of risk appetite.

22/JAC/42 -Strategic Risk Register of Bedfordshire Police

CFO presented the SRR.

22/JAC/43 - Feedback to be raised with the CC/PCC

a) Reflections of meeting by JAC members and Evaluation of JAC members

RSM and KMPG commended the committee on their challenging and sensible questions.

The CFO thanked the committee members for their challenging questions, as they assured him that the force is being open and transparent with the information they are providing to the members. In addition, expressed the importance of the length of service and experience of committee members to be able to challenge.

Members took assurance from the detailed papers and thanked the committee for being open to positive feedback and constructive criticism.

POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER FOR BEDFORDSHIRE and BEDFORDSHIRE POLICE

JOINT AUDIT COMMITTEE

Meeting of 20 December 2024 Held between 13:00 – 15:00 Minutes

Present:

Jagtar Singh – Chair (JS)	Chair, Independent Committee Member
Wayne Brads (IM WB)	Independent Committee Member
Judit Seymour (IM JSM)	Independent Committee Member
Gita Raja (IM GR)	Independent Committee Member
Laura Bell (IM LB)	Independent Committee Member
Phil Wells (CFO PW)	Chief Finance Officer – OPCC Assistant Chief Officer – Bedfordshire Police
Dan Vajzovic (DCC DV)	Deputy Chief Constable – Bedfordshire Police
Mark Jones (RSM MJ)	RSM Internal Auditor
Nicole, Guo (KPMG, NG)	KMPG External Auditor
Sharn Basra (CE SB)	Chief Executive – OPCC
Katie Beaumont (HGT KB)	Head of Governance and Transparency - OPCC

Part One

22/JAC/29 - Chair - AOB

The Chair started the meeting discussing AOB.

22/JAC/30 - Chair - Introduction

The Chair welcomed the committee, OPCC and Police Service representatives to the meeting.

All members introduced themselves.

22/JAC/31 - Chair - Apologies

No apologies were received.

22/JAC/32 - Chair - Minutes of the meeting held on 21.06.2024

No edits or accuracy changes needed.

22/JAC/33 - Chair - Action Log

CFO explained that there are currently two action logs, one with the actions of the committee and the other with actions following the development day.

CFO started with the action log from the committee.

1. 22/JAC/38 – Closed

2. 22/JAC/32 – Feedback on the minutes given, action complete.

3. 22/JAC/37 – Final account is now fully accessible, action complete.

4. 22/JAC/39 – Director of ERSOU attended the development day, action complete.

5. 22/JAC/40 – DCC has circulated the report to JAC members surrounding the recruitment of detectives, action complete.

6. 22/JAC/43 – HGT arranged for Mutley the wellbeing dog to attend the JAC development day. However, as the development day was changed to an online team’s meeting, this could no longer go ahead. Therefore, this action will be carried over.

7. 22/JAC/33 – Discussed at Development Day, action complete.

8. 22/JAC/35 – Action complete

9. 22/JAC/38 14 – BCH CFO meeting earlier in the new year. Internal audit will be picked up at their next meeting.

10. 22/JAC/38 15 – Action complete.

11. 22/JAC/38 16 – Discussed at development day, action complete.

12. 22/JAC/38 17 – The CFO stated that all members should have received a copy of the Security and Assurance Vision Statement. IM was unsure whether this had been received, therefore, CFO will circulate this again.

13. 22/JAC/41 – Action complete.

14. 22/JAC/42 – The risk appetite will be reviewed alongside the settlement and budget which will all link into the police and crime plans. Therefore, the CFO will come back to this action in the March committee meeting.

The CFO explained that majority of the development day actions will be covered within today’s meeting. Any actions missed will be discussed between the CFO and the Chair afterwards.

IM stated that the JAC Annual report has not been completed within the given timescale. IM explained this should be finalised within the next day or two.

Action: WB to complete JAC Annual Report and to disseminate the report to members.

22/JAC/34 - Chair - Matters Arising

There were no matters arising.

22/JAC/35 - Chair - Declaration of Interest (verbal)

The Chair reminded the committee that his interest has changed as he is no longer chair of a Mental Health Trust.

No other changes to declarations of interests.

22/JAC/36 - Chair - JAC Annual Report

No comments or views from committee members.

Terms of Reference approved as published.

Part One – Not Restricted

22/JAC/37 - External Audit - KPMG

a) Auditor’s Update – Verbal

The CFO asked if KPMG could inform the committee on the opinion likely to be provided for 2023/2024.

KPMG wanted to also give her appreciation to the CFO and his team, as they have been extremely responsive to all audit inquiries which has in turn allowed KPMG to remain on track with the audit.

22/JAC/38 - RSM - Internal Audit

a) Internal Audit Progress Report

RSM updated that in terms of the Bedfordshire only plan, they have issued 2 reports in a final form.

The General Ledger Report has now been issued in draft and is sitting at a substantial assurance.

RSM stated that they have the follow up planned for March and another audit scheduled in February based on commissioning, which is replacing the audit on the police and crime plan.

RSM clarified that although it was not investigated in this audit, it does regularly get examined when looking at individual systems to see who has access or not.

ACTION: RSM to follow up with JSM either by email or verbally at the next meeting, on the most recent audit which investigated access control.

The CFO was unable to provide the amount of FOI requests the force receive regarding complaints, recruitment and retention. However, the CFO did explain that the force normally receives around 100 FOIs a month, and they currently have just below a 90% rate in terms of answering them on time.

ACTION: CFO to provide the committee with a table showing the type of FOIs received by the force and any themes.

ACTION: CFO to send the trend line for IOPC referrals to JAC members.

The DCC broadly explained that the timeliness of IOPC investigations is improving. He agreed there are delays in some cases, however, the force is seeing a better performance than previously.

IM wanted to understand the available routes within the force, to complain or raise an issue. In addition, how are lessons learned, and change initiated from the themes that arise from complaints.

The DCC stated that this topic may be worthy of a more substantive agenda item in a future meeting. In addition, it may be beneficial for the committee to encompass conduct as well as complaints.

The Chair added that another element worth considering for Development Day is the Just Culture approach and the possibility of having someone from the NHS come along to discuss the added value.

IM asked the CFO the reasoning as to why there was no involvement from the finance department and assurance going forward that they will be involved.

IM thanked RSM for circulating the news briefing.

ACTION: IM requested a quick summary in the following JAC of the items raised within the news briefing.

a) Progress on recommendations

The CFO is confident that this will be completed by the March deadline as a Chief Superintendent is now taking responsibility for that VCOP recommendation.

In relation to the other recommendations, the CFO stated 4 out of 12 have been completed, one that has previously been completed and 7 that have not been reached.

22/JAC/39 -DCC - Force Overview

The DCC brought the committees attention to the Annual Delivery Plan and discussed each theme whilst answering the questions arisen from the development day.

The DCC discussed the second area in the Annual Delivery Plan, leadership. The Chief Constable has reengaged for a further period, which provides significant stability, and the force has appointed 3 new ACCs. The force is currently investing in leaders through frontline leadership programmes for all sergeants and staff equivalent and recently a senior leader which incorporates chief officers, superintendents and chief inspectors.

The DCC explained in relation to performance edge, the crime investigation area needs more focus on. The DCC pointed out the improvements within shop lifting, as the recording of shop lifting has increased by 44% in the last year. This is due to the force working alongside businesses and building that trust and confidence. The forces detection rate has increased from 11% to 19%.
The DCC discussed the fourth area which is service, product, system productivity and working with partner organisation, which has resulted in the ‘right care, right person’ programme. This has seen a significant reduction in calls for police support and an alleviation of pressure on frontline officers, allowing them to attend incidents quicker.

Lastly, Innovation. The DCC briefly explained the CFO has been conducting work through their Dragons Den Initiative and through ICT initiatives.

IM asked what was not achievable this year which will be rolled onto next year? The DCC responded, stating that due to resource constrictions, there are areas within the innovation section which will be carried forward into the next year. The DCC explained the current pressures on their budget for ICT which is affecting the progression of JST. He discussed the implementation of the voice box tool within the force control room as well as the improvement of customer interactions with the force.

IM wanted to discuss the issue of solved crime as it has been an ongoing issue for a while. IM wanted to know what was driving the complexity and how the force intends to approach this.

The DCC announced the force are currently looking at replacing the current case management system, Athena. The new system is anticipated to be available for the financial year 2028/29.

The Chair asked the DCC and the CFO about the approval of business cases and whether they are evaluated within a reasonable time to ensure they are being achieved.

22/JAC/40 - DCC - HMICFRS Update
The DCC explained that the force has had their HMIC inspection and gave an update.

22/JAC/41 - Chief Exec / Head of Governance and Transparency - Strategic Risk Register of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire (OPCC)

The CEO gave an update on the OPCC SRR.

22/JAC/42 - ACO - Strategic Risk Register of Bedfordshire Police

PW gave an update on the Police SRR.

POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER FOR BEDFORDSHIRE and BEDFORDSHIRE POLICE

JOINT AUDIT COMMITTEE

Meeting of 28 March 2025

Held between 13:00 – 15:00

Agenda

Minutes

Present:

Jagtar Singh – Chair (JS)	Chair, Independent Committee Member
Judit Seymour (IM JSM)	Independent Committee Member
Gita Raja (IM GR)	Independent Committee Member
Laura Bell (IM LB)	Independent Committee Member
Phil Wells (CFO PW)	Chief Finance Officer – OPCC Assistant Chief Officer – Bedfordshire Police
Dan Vajzovic (DCC DV)	Deputy Chief Constable – Bedfordshire Police
Mark Jones (RSM MJ)	RSM Internal Auditor
Katie Henry (KMPG KH)	KMPG External Auditor
Sharn Basra (CE SB)	Chief Executive – OPCC
Edward Major (ED SBA)	Strategic Business Analyst – Bedfordshire Police
Katie Beaumont (HGT KB)	Head of Governance and Transparency - OPCC
Tarushi De Cruze (CO TDC)	Compliance Officer – OPCC (Minute Taking)

22/JAC/30 - Introduction

The Chair welcomed the committee, OPCC and Police Service representatives to the meeting.

All members introduced themselves.

22/JAC/31 -Apologies

One apology received from Wayne Brad.

22/JAC/32 -Minutes of the meeting held on 21.06.2024

No edits or accuracy changes needed.

22/JAC/33 -Action Log

Action 1: CFO to meet with RSM to understand their perspective. CFO explained the delay as they are currently diverging with the internal audit contract. Hence, there will be no audit plan for 25/26 discussed at this meeting. The 25/26 audit therefore be presented at the next meeting.

Action 2: Completed – has been circulated by CFO.

Action 3: Completed - will be included on agenda as a policy update.

Action 4, 5 & 6: Will be discussed at development day which will be organised for May 2025.

Action 7: Completed – slides from development day have been shared.

Action 8, 9 & 10: Will be included in development day agenda.

Action 11: Completed.

Action 12: Completed - on the agenda.

Action 13: Completed. RSM stated the two most recent audits where access control was investigated were conducted in 23/24. One was on predators and payments and the other was on cybersecurity. Since then, they have issued a general ledger which covers access control and will be discussed later in the meeting.

Action 14: In relation to development day.

Action 15: The CFO provided a breakdown of the FOIs received by the force. In the last 12 months, there has been a total of 1142 Freedom of Information requests. The key themes include rural crime, knife crime, artificial intelligence, facial recognition, and police conduct.

Action 16 & 17: Will be discussed at development day.

Action 18: Completed.

Action 19, 20 & 21: Completed.

Action 22: Will be discussed at development day.

Action 23: Discussions have been had regarding the recruitment process by the Chief constable and the PCC.

The chair requested if there could be a review of the actions. He suggested all actions related to development day to be compiled into one action. Therefore, panel members will be able to see the agenda points for development day and decide which agenda items can be changed to a briefing page instead.

The CFO agreed and wanted to clarify that two development days should be carried out within the year.

IM asked if the actions and updates can be sent out prior to the meeting so these can be reviewed, and therefore questions can be raised at the meeting.

22/JAC/34 -Matters Arising

JAC annual report has been drafted. Members all agreed on sign off.

Thanks was given to WB for creating the annual report.

22/JAC/35 -Declaration of Interest (verbal)

No other changes to declarations of interests.

22/JAC/36 -Risk Management Policy

The SBA shared the updated risk policy and highlighted a few changes.

Elements have been added to the procedure to be more reflective. Changes include Force Vision, THRIVE+, governance RAID logs, the Code of Ethics, the National Decision-Making Model and SARA Problem Solving.

Within the ‘people and culture’ risk category, the force has replaced the ‘culture board’ with the ‘legitimacy board’.

The Chair asked why this had been changed as the culture board is important and the legitimacy board sounds like the force is just ensuring they are legally compliant.

The CFO answered, explaining that the Force Executive Board, which is chaired by the Chief Constable is where the force deals with culture. The legitimacy board will feed into this as it covers the public services. The legitimacy board will therefore cover EDI, the race action plan and the force support groups.

Action: CFO to provide details of this work at the Development Day

The SBA explained the list of decision-making tools has been extended to include THRIVE+, governance RAID logs, the National Decision-Making Model, the College of Policing Code of Ethics and SARA problem solving

The force has also added learning, demand and futures board to the list of responsibilities.

Head of Governance and Compliance role title has been changed in the policy.

The SBA stated there were some considerations of risk appetite when conducting this review. This section in the policy is reflective of national good practice. At this review no changes have been made.

IM raised concerns about the definition of risk appetite and risk tolerance. She mentioned that risk appetite is a separate concept from risk tolerance. In addition, risk tolerance is not defined in the policy, therefore she suggested removing the reference to risk tolerance or providing a separate definition for the two.

The chair stated that an answer should not be given immediately, instead the force should consider this and come back with a decision.

IM asked why the risk management policy is only reviewed every two years as she feels it should be reviewed more regularly than two years.

The SBA brought the panels attention to the risk table. He stated that if the overall risk rating falls around 12-13, the force would place their risk tolerant level. Anything above 13 would be concerning whereas anything below this, the force would be content with. The force agreed to this understanding of risk tolerance, however, this may be something to revisit. The CFO agreed.

The CFO stated that the risk management policy is reviewed every two years as this is the framework which the force looks to manage their risks within. Therefore, to change it regularly would cause more misunderstanding of risk management.

IM added that the NHS also reviews their risk management policy every two years.

22/JAC/37 -OPCC Restructure Update

The CE presented the new structure of the office as of the 1^st April.

The Association of Police and Crime Commissioners, states that there is no best practise in terms of structures of office’s that support the PCC.

The CE informed the committee the function of the OPCC is to support the PCC in his statutory requirements, including the Police and Crime Plan. The only two roles that the PCC must appoint is the Chief Executive and the CFO. All other roles are dependent on what the PCC is trying to achieve.

The CE explained that statutory requirements fall under the responsibility of Head of Governance and Compliance. The head of Policy and Missions is responsible for the thematic areas that deliver against the police and crime plan.

The PCC has access to in excess of four million pounds worth of funding to deliver against national initiatives and those for the specific force.

The commissioning function will manage, facilitate, monitor and evaluate all the providers of those services.

The Head of Comms and Engagement will ensure that the PCC is the voice of the public; they are there to listen, understand and to provide feedback to the PCC.

The Chair asked why the Head of Governance is not underneath the CEO in the chart. The CE explained that the head of governance does sit below himself and there is no one in between. The chart also includes the office manager and VERU who also reports into the CEO.

The Chair expressed the importance of a comms team to deliver on the missions. He asked how the communications department within the force collaborates with the communications department in the OPCC. The CE agreed it is crucial for them to work together; however, the narrative will differentiate which is the reason for two teams. He explained the OPCC head of communications officer began employment on Monday and has met with the head of communications from the force twice in four days, which shows how keen they are to build that relationship.

The Chair asked what the financial difference is between the two structures. The CE answered that from 2024 to 2025, there was an increase of just over 2 full time equivalents and an increase in budget of £174,000. However, due to the secondment going into VERU, the net increase is 1.37 and an increase of staff budget of £84,000. This in turn provides more functionality which the old structure did not provide, such as communications team, data team and complaints team. The CE further explained that in 2024/2025, the OPCC spent £160,000 in that year alone to fill in the gaps caused by a poor structure.

The chair stated that the committee would like to ensure that the increase in spend is providing a benefit in delivering the functions of the office. He would like to see the benefits evidenced to the committee in 12 months’ time.

IM requested if the roles on the hierarchy chart could be marked indicating which roles are part time, full time or seconded and for this to be circulated to the committee members.

22/JAC/38 -External Audit

Auditor’s Update – Verbal

KPMG wanted to inform members that the backstop dates for the 2024 accounts have been met and the planning for the 2025 accounts is well underway. Progression is going well so far.

She mentioned the recent discussion in the previous JAC meeting. It was stated that March 2027 was the earliest the force would be able to receive a clean opinion. Whilst in theory this is what the guidance states, KPMG explained it is more likely for a clean audit to be seen in March 2028.

KPMG will bring an audit plan to the next JAC meeting.

IM stated, without an unqualified opinion, it is unsure whether the organisation is fit for purpose. In addition, local authorities and organisations could be trading whilst insolvent. The chair mentioned that this topic has been discussed previously on several occasions. For assurance, the chair asked if the force is trading whilst insolvent. The CFO responded no.

The chair went on to explain that the purpose of the committee is to ensure director duties and executive duties are carried out honestly and faithfully and to guarantee all that can be done, has been done in the circumstances and with the resources they have. The CFO agreed and added that the questions asked should be related to his level of assurance that they are complying with the codes of practise. KPMG’s audit will highlight any issues and provide her assurance.

The CFO reiterated the point made by KPMG at the previous audit, in that they started from a poor position in terms of the backstop. However, they are now in a better position, where the KMPG audit will be more extensive and will therefore provide the committee with more assurance.

KPMG also mentioned that the commentary that goes into the annual audit and IC260 are all public. She states that if a member of the public was to review this, they would understand that the disclaimed opinions is a result of the wider sector and not specific to the force.

KPMG will be recruiting a new director, and introductions will be made in due course.

22/JAC/39 -Internal Audit

a) Internal Audit Progress Report

RSM highlighted the key points within the progress Report. The Beds only report stated commissioning was at a debrief stage, however, this has now been finalised recently, which has got a positive assurance. In addition, RSM stated the only other work carried out on the Bed only plan is the Follow Up review, which is well underway.

RSM discussed the general ledger audit which received substantial assurance with a couple of low priority actions including a review of the financial regulations and bank reconciliations. Overall RSM stated that the committee should not be concerned, as this is a positive audit.

IM referenced the general ledger report that was issued, as it mentioned ‘the ability of certain staff members to post journals without segregation of duties’. IM asked if RSM could expand on this.

RSM responded that this was an area which was noted, however, they felt it was not necessary to make an action on it. RSM stated that he will investigate and explain the rationale for this at the next meeting.

ACTION: RSM to provide an explanation by email or verbally at the next meeting, on the conclusion made regarding staff members posting journals without segregation of duties.

IM also asked what is the level of unreconciled items in the bank reconciliation? In addition, why was one of them missed on not reviewed?

ACTION: RSM to look into the level of bank unreconciled items and to provide the reason as to why was one missed and not reviewed.

IM stated that according to the general ledger report, there were no concerns in regard to the access of the systems. She asked if anything has been done on privileged user access and the monitoring of those with elevated access can do within the system?

RSM responded that this audit will have investigated privileged user access. More broadly, the cyber audit that was conducted in 23/24, would have looked at system access across a range of systems. In

this case however, RSM was comfortable that the level of access was appropriate and there were no concerns when monitoring privileged access.

RSM moved on to the BCH report, they have issued one final report on the innovation framework which is carried out by Hertfordshire. This has received a minimal assurance which is a negative opinion. RSM explained this piece of work focused on the digital strategy. The conclusion showed a range of issues we needed to make, three high priority and seven medium priority actions. These issues were around the governance of projects, inconsistencies in the change initiative management, changing initiatives against strategic objective, the definition of monitoring of the proposed benefits and the prioritisation of initiatives within the project portfolio.

IM asked as this is an Hert audit, what impact does that have on Beds? Within development days the committee is told about the innovative approaches which Bedfordshire is working on, so does that mean those are not in a good framework?

The CFO explained this is a BCH audit, so it relates to Bedfordshire, Cambridgeshire and Hertfordshire and it relates to the BCH digital strategy, therefore the overall findings are linked to Bedfordshire. Although this is Hertfordshire projects it is related to beds ICT.

IM followed up by asking what the reason is behind the gaps? The CFO responded that it is to do with capability in that unit. It has been agreed change has to be managed locally rather than across the three forces.

IM requested if this could continue to be high profile within the committee as it impacts Bedfordshire. In addition, she asked if the cybersecurity strategy would be impacted by these findings. The CFO responded that there is a correlation however, it is not overly impacted.

b) Internal Audit Plan/Strategy

RSM went through the planning document prepared last year which evidenced what may be looked at in 25/26. He added that this will vary slightly as it was written 12 months ago. RSM explained that there is a meeting in the diary set to go through this in detail, however, in the meantime, he asked for the committees’ early input of what may be missing from the previous document.

The chair stated that if any of the committee members have any input following the meeting, to contact the CFO or RSM.

IM wanted to know what the force was doing to understand the responsibilities of the new Procurement Act and how the force is going to be compliant. RSM assured that the Procurement act would naturally be part of the scope

c) Progress on recommendations

The CFO explained there are 12 outstanding recommendations, 5 complete, 4 where the date had not been reached and 3 which were previously completed. RSM is currently going through their overview report, therefore, this would be better discussed at the next committee meeting.

22/JAC/40 -Force Overview

The DCC brought the panels attention to section 8 of the paper. There are 2 programmes identified as red on the RAG risk. The first is in relation to the Right Care Right Person programme due to insufficient evidence of progress from the health system about mental health capacity. Their aim is to ensure the right partners are delivering the right services. The DCC stated the second area which has changed from green to red is the Blackberry Adhoc programme, as they are awaiting a specification from the supplier, which is therefore out of force control.

The DCC shared the 25/26 annual delivery plan. The chief constable and police and crime commissioner set out the vision for the force. This includes system productivity, people, performance edge and innovation, all with the under pinning of setting the right culture.

The DCC explained, one area that brings concern and the force would like to drive forward is performance, in respect of attending incidents and the investigation there of. 18 months ago, the force was concerned about their call handling and now that has significantly improved. According to the DCC, their focus now is on attendance and would like the force to attend incidences 15 minutes after the call is received, if it is an immediate job. Currently, this is only being achieved in 50% of cases.

The annual delivery plan is committed to improving force performance. Regarding system productivity, the DCC explained that they are attempting to make the system more efficient. They have invested in a superintendent with responsibility for prevention activity. This will hopefully improve the way in which society operates and reduce the likelihood of crime occurring in the first instance.

Work is also currently carried out with the support of the police and crime commissioner and the criminal justice board to try and improve the productivity of the wider criminal justice system.

Another area the force is trying to focus on is their leadership capability. The DCC explained front line policing is becoming more and more difficult with more demands, more complexity in the system, greater threat, risks, oversight as well as more volumes of work. Therefore, they have invested in their frontline and midline leaders to develop their capability and capacity. In terms of recruitment of leaders, the DCC explained they are in a good place with large numbers of interest from qualified individuals.

In relation to the fourth pillar, innovation, the DCC stated that the Dragons Den initiative was well received and brought new innovative ideas. The DCC confirmed the winning idea from this year’s Dragons Den programme was from the crime team, who recognised the significant resources spent on guarding crime scenes and suggested this could be done with technology.

The chair previously asked about the legitimacy board within culture, the DCC addressed this by expressing the importance of the publics trust and confidence in policing, and how this is only achieved through holding a good reputation. 55 people have left the organisation in the last 2 years due to their conduct which has been identified by their colleagues.

The DCC mentioned that all historic review of data and vetting process have been completed. They are currently working through some legacy cases.

The DCC moved onto the control strategy which supports and underpins the performance pillar of the annual delivery plan. He stated that the areas of crime investigation and resolution are set out within the control strategy.

IM asked what leaders the force have on the Right Care Right Person initiative. The DCC explained that the force does not have a direct command and control over partner organisations. Therefore, they need to have a strong partnership approach. They have deployed a highly experienced and effective leader, Chief Superintendent Jackie Whittred who will be taking this forward.

The chair stated that the NHS is reconfiguring, ICBs are combining, meaning their capacity to support the force will be less, and the funding arrangements for mental health is robust. The chair stated that the force is doing the right thing, however the risk is going to get worse. As a result, the chair does not have enough assurance that the force has the ability to manage and maintain this position.

The chair suggested the police and crime commissioner to review and consult with the government to ensure that the situation does not get worse.

The DCC previously mentioned other forces have different policies and approaches, to which the chair stated that there should be an optimum way of dealing with these types of incidences. The DCC clarified that this policy the same across the country, however there are different methods of implementing this strategy across forces.

The chair agreed and understood; however, he explained that one of these methods must be working better than other methods.

IM asked in relation to the increased crime records around child sexual exploitation and child sexual abuse, is this an increase in crime or is the force just more accurate in data capturing. The DCC explained there is a significant number of unrecorded offences, as not all cases are reported back to the force. The more the force builds that trust and confidence, the more crimes are reported. The same can be said for serious sexual offences, rape or domestic abuse. The DCC stated the force is also better at recording these crimes and trying to positively resolve it.

IM asked when will the tide turn in regard to the detection rate? The DCC responded that there are signs of better detection rates in crimes that matter most to the community. Every homicide that takes place within the county is solved and there is a better understanding of serious sexual offences. The DCC clarified in some areas there is improvement, however other areas are not improving fast enough. The DCC provided an example of volume crime such as shoplifting. There has been criticism by partners around Bedford Town Centre recently. The DCC states that a better solution is required for these offences, such as working alongside retail units to prevent the likelihood of shoplifting taking place.

The CE added for reassurance that the PCC has been engaged with this throughout and is satisfied that it shows due regard of the police and crime plan as required.

The chair stated that it would be good to have bench marking data against all force objectives to measure success though a clear dashboard. The chair, CE and DCC to meet to discuss this further.

Part Two – Restricted

22/JAC/41 - HMICFRS Update

The DCC gave an update regarding HMICFRS.

22/JAC/42 -Strategic Risk Register of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire (OPCC)

The CE went through the following the current strategic risks.

22/JAC/43 -Strategic Risk Register of Bedfordshire Police

CFO presented the SRR.

22/JAC/43 - Feedback to be raised with the CC/PCC

a) Reflections of meeting by JAC members and Evaluation of JAC members

IM RG found the meeting useful. IM liked that she was able to receive clarity around the papers received and able to ask questions. IM second the idea of rearranging the agenda at different meetings.

The DCC found the meeting useful. The CFO added that IM members should keep asking question until they have that assurance.

The CFO asked if the HGT can continue to create the agenda in the same format in case a member of the public attends the meeting. The committee can change this around at the meeting.

POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER FOR BEDFORDSHIRE and BEDFORDSHIRE POLICE

JOINT AUDIT COMMITTEE

Meeting of 20 June 2025

Held between 13:00 – 15:00

Minutes

Present:

Jagtar Singh – Chair (JS) - Chair, Independent Committee Member

Wayne Brads (IM WB) - Independent Committee Member

Judit Seymour (IM JSM) - Independent Committee Member

Gita Raja (IM GR) - Independent Committee Member

Hannah Broadbank – Bedfordshire Police

Dan Vajzovic (DCC DV) - Deputy Chief Constable – Bedfordshire Police

Suzanne Rowlett (RSM SR) - RSM Internal Auditor

Katie Henry (KPMG, KH) - KPMG External Auditor

Sharn Basra (CE SB) - Chief Executive – OPCC

Katie Beaumont (HGT KB) - Head of Governance and Transparency – OPCC

22/JAC/30 – Apologies

Apologies received from Phil Wells and Laura Bell.

22/JAC/31 – Action Log

Action 1: To be discussed at development day. Chair also asked for an update at the Development Day on the cultural change programme.

Action 2: The recruitment process has started. HGT stated this has not been finalised, however the CFO is currently reviewing this. HGT stated that the recruitment process will start before the next JAC meeting and she will update the committee once finalised.

Action 3: Will be presented at the development day.

Action 4: Completed. RSM have sent these updates via email.

Action 5: Completed. RSM have sent these updates via email.

Action 6: Completed.

22/JAC/32 – Declarations of Interest (verbal)

No changes to declarations of interests were mentioned. The chair advised if there are any changes to be made, to request a declarations of interests form from HGT.

22/JAC/33 - Minutes from the last meeting 20.03.2025

WB mentioned within the Internal Audit Process (page 7), it mentions:

‘RSM to look into the level of bank unreconciled items and to provide the reason as to why was one missed and not reviewed.’

He asked if this action was completed. RSM responded that this action is completed and should have been included within the email.

The chair requested that this email be resent for clarity.

ACTION: RSM to resend the email relating to the actions.

In addition, WB brought to attention page 10 which states:

‘IM asked what leaders the force have on the Right Care Right Person initiative’

WB wanted to add that he attended a brief which Superintendent Jackie Whittred provided, which he found very comprehensive and answered a lot of questions. WB wanted to pass on his thanks to her. The DCC added that there was a force awards night where the team that implemented the right care, right person initiative was recognised.

22/JAC/34 – Matters Arising

In regard to the actions, JSM wanted to also query the error in the general Ledger report that was discussed at the previous meeting. She asked if RSM could provide more clarity on the root cause of this error.

ACTION: RSM to provide details.

Part One – Non-Restricted

22/JAC/35 – Terms of Reference

An updated terms of reference was presented which was aligned to the CIPFA guidance and previous feedback from the Committee.

WB asked whether a maximum term should be included for the Chairperson and whether the Committee could invite additional attendees from OPCC or Force as required. He also queried some of the wording on the risk management part of the ToR.

The chair requested the changes will be added to the term of reference for final sign off at the next meeting. This will ensure members have time to consider it and ensure the CFO does not have any counter arguments. WB volunteered to add changes and make annotations, then share this with the rest of the committee.

ACTION: HGT and WB to note/action any amendments to the terms of reference. This should then be circulated to the committee and brought back to the meeting as an agenda item.

22/JAC/36 – Final Accounts

HB provided an overview of the Group and Chief Constable’s Final Accounts and in doing so brought the committees attention to usable reserves, which the force has used considerably during 24/25. HB explained the force has had many budget pressures within this year which has resulted in the reserves depleting. This includes one off costs and extraordinary policing events throughout the year. For example, the Cleat Hill explosion, funding the operation Nevet, the restructure within the OPCC and operation Longacre.

In addition, HB stated the force had over recruited on officers in ensuring that it met the criteria to maximise the ring-fenced grant related to officer number.

Furthermore, the force was above its vacancy factor level on Police Staff resulting in an overspend.

However, HB stated they are currently implementing stringent controls and processes to get 25/26 into an underspend position.

In terms of higher-level changes to the balance sheet, HB stated the police for leases had been changed to reflect the latest CIPFA guidance and that the debtors and creditors figures had increased in 24/25 compared to the previous year.

Members asked how feasible it would be to replenish the reserves and whether this is feasible given the pressures. The DCC stated that the replenishment may not happen in one go but instead over the lifetime of the Medium Term but the important short term requirement was to minimise any overspend in 2025/26, whilst ensuring that there wasn’t a significant impact on performance.

The chair questioned whether the potential change in Bank of England bank rates had been factored into the plans. HB explained that good rates had been secured for longer term borrowing but has a mixed portfolio of internal, short term and long term borrowing to maximise changes in rates.

The chair asked if the committee could recall seeing the forces borrowing policy and investment policy and whether the committee support or challenge these policies.

ACTION: HB to raise with the CFO how often the Treasury Management Strategy was considered at this Committee.

WB asked for some details on the OPCC restructure, and the CE provided some information with regard to changes and costs associated with restructure and agreed to provide the Committee minutes of the recent Panel meeting where this was discussed.

22/JAC/37 – External Audit

Audit Plan

KPMG stated that majority of their planning is complete. She explained that there are two significant risks within this year’s audit. The first one is management override and controls, and the second one is regarding the valuation of pension liabilities. These were both present in last years audit and has had no significant changes since.

There have been some slight changes in relation to materiality.

The value for money work has not started yet; KPMG predicts this will be coming up in the next few weeks. She will update the committee on this at the next meeting.

KPMG updated the panel that another director will be stepping into her role, while she goes on maternity leave. However, she will still oversee the work and will ensure she does introductions before.

The backstop is February 26^th. Due to the nuances of the local government and PSA, it may be that KPMG may not be able to sign any formal opinion till closer to the backstop date. However, they are keen to ensure the audit is completed.

KPMG brought the panel’s attention to the audit fees. There may be some further fee variations similar to last year around group reporting and group accounts.

WB asked a question regarding the confirmation of audit independence. He asked if there was any crossing of that boundary, KPMG would be obliged to let the committee know as the audits proceed. KPMG agreed, and mentioned there are a lot of restrictions within the firm, in terms of what the firm could offer you. Any decisions would have to come through KPMG to decide on its appropriateness.

GR asked about the misstatements. As the prior year accounts have not been audited, would there nothing will be brought forward in terms of errors? KPMG responded no.

22/JAC/28 – Internal Audit

a) Progress Report

RSM have finalised two Bedfordshire annual reports since the last meeting in the area of commissioning with reasonable assurance and follow up with reasonable progress made. RSM has finalised three BCH reports, which was Bedfordshire leading on the corporate review value for money, which was substantial assurance. Then two others led by Cambridgeshire of reasonable assurance. This completes the internal audit plan for 24/25.

First report is the Bedfordshire only commissioning, which focused on the commissioning approach to commissioning compliance with requirements. RSMs work mainly covered the 24/25 commissioning process. They found there was a clear working framework in place, within strategy, guidance, transparency all working well. There was clear evidence of due diligence, approvals and regular monitoring of requirements. However, the areas identified for improvement was the declarations of interest to ensure there is impartiality throughout the process.

GR asked why the declaration of interest is not recorded and has that had any bearing on the basis of selection? The CE explained at the start of those meetings there is a part of the agenda and introduction is the declaration of interest. However, it was more housekeeping as opposed to anything else. Since then, they have gone through the commission cycle and the CE can assure the committee that this was completed without any concerns.

GR asked if the CE was aware of any declarations that had just not been documented. The CE responded yes.

Looking at the follow ups, overall RSM found reasonable progress had been made with 14 actions either implemented or superseded. There were two actions that remained outstanding. One was downgraded as a result of the action that had been taken, the other remained a medium with implementation being pushed back to July.

RSM moved on to the collaborative reports; the payroll and expenses which was led by Cambridgeshire. This was reasonable assurance with 5 medium actions, one being Hertfordshire only and the remaining across each BCH. The actions related to covering policies and procedures as well as record keeping around payroll and expenses.

WB asked if we are receiving minimal assurance on the innovation, how are we being better than Hertfordshire? The DCC explained that there was a view across BCH that the audit did not reflect the totality of the innovation that was taking place and was centred on Hertfordshire. He mentioned the ICT team have therefore presented some of the work carried on the innovation projects to provide greater assurance. The DCC stated that in order for the committee to also receive greater assurance, the head of ICT would be happy to provide a presentation for them on development day.

RSM discussed the collaboration corporate review - value for money on page 19. She explained this is looking at the project management framework operated by the Joint Strategic Transformation team to look at the suitability of the processes being followed. RSM found that there was a defined process in place that was operating effectively. Overall, a substantial assurance report with no actions.

Lastly, she commented on the collaborative learning needs analysis and accreditation, which focused on the collaborative training requirements. RSM found that there was a clear structuring process in place, however there was some improvements that could be made surrounding the data quality, iLearn dashboard and the budgeting costing model. Overall, there is reasonable assurance with two medium and two lower actions.

b) Internal Audit Plan/Strategy

RSM explained this has been developed in collaboration with the commissioner’s office and the force, as well as the Chief Finance Officers across Beds, Herts and Cambs. The level of resources is similar to last year, Core activity - risk management, income and debtors, capital accounting and fixed assets are areas they are planning on looking into this year. In addition, the risk based internal audit activity which includes Procurement under £60K, victim satisfaction and budgetary control. Moving onto BCH, Bedfordshire leads on corporate review, Easton region special operations unit financial management. The wider ones include business continuity, fraud controls and cyber security.

GR asked if there was any work being done around personnel? For example, if a key member of staff is unable to work, what plans are there to mitigate any risks? RSM responded that the audit normally looks at the wider business continuity, when something significant occurs. It would normally be at a BCH level rather than an individual level.

The chair also questioned whether there was a risk in adopting AI technology and digital answers if the force does not have the infrastructure to meet it. WB pointed out that page five stated the procurement under £60K states that it is not taking place until 2025/26 quarter 4, he asked if this is a risk-based audit activity, are they tolerating a potential risk for 9 months and not auditing that earlier?

HB stated that there is a process of dip sampling which checks the contract and ensures everything is attached and easily found. They are also implementing a system on the 1^st of July which will capture quotes in a fairer and more open way.

JSM mentioned that one of the requirements under the procurement Act is that the force will have to show social value and use its ability to connect with local suppliers. JSM wanted to know how that information is going to be captured and how procurement contracts are going to be managed.

RSM explained that the procurement act will not take place till the end of the year as it allows the force time to implement the system and work through any issues.

c) RSM Annual Report

RSM outline the key parts of the opinion for the PCC and Bedfordshire Police. The second line opinion states the organisation has adequate and effective framework for a risk management, governance and internal control and RSM has identified some areas for further enhancement. Within the report it evidences how RSM have come to that opinion.

JSM wanted to reflect on the number of positive internal reports this year. She recognised all the hard work that has been conducted, especially in this current environment.

When the emergency services news briefing is circulated, JSM asked if this could be added to the agenda to go through the report and note anything specific in relation to Bedfordshire police. WB agreed.

22/JAC/29 – Force Overview

The DCC explained earlier this year the force ran their annualised briefing which they call the Force Vision event. The Chiefs vision has 5 broad pillars: system productivity, culture, leadership, innovation and performance of the organisation.

The DCC highlighted the work conducted around system productivity and expressed how well it is going. There is a new regional director of CPS who is creating stronger links and in turn making our criminal justice partnerships really strong. The ‘Right Care, Right Person’ initiative has the force working with other organisations. The DCC explained there are strong operational links across the county and there is work currently conducted within Luton, by working alongside the Luton Council in implementing a Safer Streets initiative and neighbourhood policing teams.

In relation to culture, the DCC explained they have a strong stand-up culture which calls out inappropriate behaviour and reporting anything that is of concern. This is evident in the spike of professional standards department cases and the number of officers that were leaving in the first two years after being handed a Regulation 13 Notice. The DCC stated that they are trying to drive forward this culture in the organisation.

The DCC stated that the force is currently at the lowest number of suspended officers; at one point they had 20 officers and now they are at 7 suspended officers.

The DCC was surprised at the audit around innovation as Bedfordshire Police is highlighted nationally and internationally for being cutting edge of innovation in policing. The forces’ Dragon’s Den event has resulted in new ideas being pitched and some ideas being funded. The current idea which is being pushed is a scene guard capability. Implementing the ability to scene guard without having to deploy lots of officers.

The DCC addressed the question mentioned earlier in the meeting regarding what would happen if a vital member of staff left the organisation. The DCC answered that the force would have the resilience and the skills to bring people through to fill that gap. There are some niche areas where they are retaining people with skills such as detectives and leadership roles. However, the DCC is confident that they can retain their employees.

In regard to the last pillar, performance, the force is doing better than they were a year ago, however, nowhere near what they would like to be. They would like to see more crime being detected and reducing crime.

The DCC has some concerns, which is linked to last Mays HMIC report and HMIC revisit next May, is around three areas. Firstly, is the force consistently problem solving in the community to reduce crime. The DCC explained they are currently investing in their policing neighbour teams to do more of this. However, they cannot demonstrate that they are systematically doing this.

Secondly, the ability to answer 999 calls. The DCC explained this will be discussed further in the strategic risk register section. He explained that there is currently a lot of pressures on the organisation, and they need to manage their resources against their risk. The force has made the decision to withdraw resources out of the force control room and manage overtime more tightly. This has resulted in the grade of service of 999 calls dropping down to 93% this year and 90.2% this month. 101 call handling is also not where the DCC would like it to be. There is currently an action plan in place to improve this.

The final area of performance is investigative capability. HMIC noted that the force requires improvement around investigating crime. The DCC explained this was due to their investigative capacity and capability, having enough detectives, the right skills, training and leadership. This was also linked to the outcome that they were achieving for victims of crime, ensuring there is positive results throughout the criminal justice system. The DCC updated that their detection rate has improved. All detective posts have been filled.

The DCC also updated the committee on Nimbus, which is the case management system for forensic submissions. The force has just gone live with this and has received positive feedback.

The DCC mentioned they have had the comprehensive spending review headline figure. The chair stated that this is a big corporate risk. He stated the public have been told misinformation that the force is going to receive an increase in funding. However, pay rises are assumed to be self-funded rather than added on after an inflation increase. The chair asked if this means the force is receiving a cut in budget?

The DCC stated that if you read the paper in detail then you can understand the consequences of this.

The chair asked if the funding increase is going to be able to meet the potential pay rises and inflation costs or if the force is going to cut head count.

The DCC stated that they will have to cut head count as there is less money than there was previously. The DCC explained that this can be looked at through different lenses and different assumptions can be gathered.

The chair requested for this to be a conversation at the development day.

The DCC updated the committee on what this means for the force operationally. The DCC is now the SRO across Bedfordshire, Hertfordshire and Cambridgeshire. He is now responsible for a programme of work referred to as programme Blenheim. There is a consultation ongoing which will conclude in the summer. They are also looking to significantly change their JST which is their service transformation team in the centre who provide business governance, change methodology and performance monitoring. The force has decided that they can do this more efficiently in a slightly different way. They are also conducting a fundamental review of ICT target operating model which will be presented next month. They are also planning to conduct a similar business case for HR and their administration of justice team. The DCC believed the force will save around 2 to 3 million pounds.

The DCC also stated they are going to put a freeze on recruitment on filling staff posts as they would like to give as many people redeployment opportunities as possible within the organisation.

JSM thanked the DCC for providing a comprehensive update.

JSM asked for the cyber security mitigations to be looked at to ensure that these were sufficient in the light of the NHS issues and she also asked why the 101 performance regime was based on time taken to answer rather than quality of outcome.

The DCC agreed to re-look at Cyber Security risk and stated they are responding to their 101 calls within 1 minute and 45 seconds. They are not too concerned with this, however, there is room for improvement and that the quality of calls are dip sampled to assist in ongoing training for call handlers.

Part Two – Restricted

22/JAC/30 – HMICFRS Update

The DCC provided an update.

22/JAC/31 – Strategic Risk Register of Bedfordshire Police

The DCC discussed the Risk Register.

22/JAC/32 – Strategic Risk Register of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire (OPCC)

The CE presented the SRR.

22/JAC/33 – AOB

Recruitment

HGT informed the committee that all documentation has been drafted and sent to the CFO. An update can be provided outside of the meeting.

22/JAC/34 – Feedback to be raised with the CC/PCC

WB appreciated the briefings provided at the meeting. It provided more information; more awareness of the current issues and approaches being taken. WB thought there was good questioning by committee members.

GR stated there was lots of information which they were able to challenge and a lot of clarity.

JSM thanked everyone for their input.

The chair added that the papers went out on time, minutes were accurate and correct, risk assessments are alive and working. He stated there was good challenge from independent members and good, honest responses from the officers.

POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER FOR BEDFORDSHIRE and BEDFORDSHIRE POLICE

JOINT AUDIT COMMITTEE

Meeting of 26 September 2025

Held between 13:00 – 15:00

Minutes

Present:

Jagtar Singh – Chair (JS) - Chair, Independent Committee Member

Wayne Brads (IM WB) - Independent Committee Member

Laura Bell (IM LB) - Independent Committee Member

Gita Raja (IM GR) - Independent Committee Member

Phil Wells (CFO PW) – Chief Finance Officer – OPCC / Assistant Chief Officer – Bedfordshire Police

Dan Vajzovic (DCC DV) - Deputy Chief Constable – Bedfordshire Police

Richard Lee (KPMG, RL) - KPMG External Auditor

Mark Jones (RSM MJ) – RSM Internal Auditor

Sharn Basra (CE SB) - Chief Executive – OPCC

Katie Beaumont (HGT KB) - Head of Governance and Transparency – OPCC

22/JAC/30 – Introduction

The Chair welcomed all attendees to the meeting.
All members introduced themselves.

22/JAC/31 – Apologies

Apologies were received from Judit Seymour.

22/JAC/32 – Minutes from the previous meeting 20.06.2025

One correction was made via email.

WB asked which other organisations KPMG manages. KPMG responded that he currently oversees Hertfordshire and Cambridgeshire police authorities, as well as a range of councils, pension funds, and district authorities.

GR pointed out an error on page 3: the word “police” should be “policy.” HGT will review and amend accordingly.

Referring to the minutes, WB asked whether the value for money work had commenced and if KPMG had an update. KPMG confirmed that the work is complete and included in his papers for discussion at this meeting.

22/JAC/33 – Action Log

PW reviewed the outstanding actions.

Action 1: This was briefly discussed during the development day. PW will ensure it is included in his overview at the next meeting.

Action 6: The Treasury Management Strategy is considered annually by this committee, as part of the budget and capital programme.

22/JAC/34 – Matters Arising

There were no matters arising.

22/JAC/35 – Declarations of Interest (verbal)

No changes to declarations of interests were mentioned.

Part One – Non-Restricted

22/JAC/36 – Terms of Reference – Sign Off

There were no objections to signing off the Terms of Reference.
The Chair noted that once the new committee is formed, they will have the opportunity to review the Terms of Reference and propose any changes.

22/JAC/37 – External Audit

KPMG provided a brief summary of the progress of the external audit.
Work has been ongoing throughout August and September, focusing on significant risk areas; specifically, management override and pensions. Progress is going well, with substantive work on journals completed, pending review.

Additional work is being carried out on pension assumptions, with some elements still to be completed.

In October, KPMG will focus on the financial statements. They confirmed that progress is on track and in line with expectations.

KPMG stated that they aim to present a finalisation report to the committee in November.

In regard to value for money, KPMG presented this report which included a risk assessment. This assessment covers three key areas: financial sustainability, governance, and securing economy, efficiency, and effectiveness in the use of resources.

To conduct this assessment, KPMG issues a questionnaire to management requesting supporting evidence. This is combined with their understanding of the organisation, a review of minutes, policies, forecasts, and other relevant documents. The assessment focuses on the period from 1 April to 31 March. While future risks may exist, the emphasis is on how these are managed.

Based on the outcomes, KPMG identifies any significant risks or weaknesses. Where risks are identified, further work is undertaken to ensure that appropriate arrangements are in place to mitigate and address them.

KPMG referred to a significant risk highlighted on page five of the report, relating to financial sustainability. This conclusion was reached after reviewing governance arrangements, risk registers, the financial strategy, and commentary provided by the committee.

The next step is for KPMG to issue the Annual Report by the end of November. They are exploring options for sharing the report with the committee prior to its public release.

WB questioned when assessing value for money and improvements in efficiency and effectiveness, is any consideration given to the organisation’s responsiveness to innovation? KPMG responded that while innovation is not assessed directly, they do review forecasts and the accompanying commentary. Their reports are factual and reflect the organisation’s actual position. As part of the next steps, KPMG will engage in discussions to understand what measures are being taken within the force to ensure future sustainability.

The CFO noted that the identification of significant risks was expected, given the overspend in 2024/25 and the substantial use of reserves by the force. He emphasised the need for a discussion around the Medium-Term Financial Plan, particularly in relation to correcting the position of the capital strategy. This includes addressing how the current approach prevents the force from relying on long-term borrowing for capital expenditure, and how this is being reflected upon.

The chair requested future report to be provided to the committee outlining the capital plan, the policy on reserves, and the associated risks of using reserves, particularly in light of the force currently operating below the recommended reserve levels.

In response, the CFO emphasised the importance of the committee reviewing audit reports prior to their public release, as previously mentioned by KPMG. He proposed that an extraordinary meeting be scheduled to consider this report. However, due to ongoing recruitment, the timing of the meeting will need to align with both the completion of the report and the onboarding of new committee members.

The CFO also noted that external auditors will have a broader perspective on how to address and correct the current financial position.

The Chair requested a copy of the Reserves Policy. The CFO confirmed that the policy was shared via the meeting chat.

The CFO commented on the current capital position for 2023/24 and 2024/25, noting that one contributing factor was the investment made in innovation to support delivery of the Medium-Term Financial Plan.

He acknowledged the challenges anticipated over the next three years and emphasised that the innovation strategy is aimed at increasing productivity and enabling the release of savings.

The CFO stated that savings resulting from this investment in technology are expected to emerge in 2026/27 and 2027/28. These savings will support the replenishment of the Police Fund and general reserves and will also enable the allocation of revenue contributions to capital outlay (RCCO).

The CE mentioned that the report suggests that without restructuring, the OPCC may struggle to adequately support the PCC in fulfilling their duties. The definition of a significant risk within the document implies that appropriate arrangements are not in place. However, between December 2024 and 31 March 2025, the restructure was actively ongoing, indicating that arrangements were in place to address the issue.

The CE also noted that the risk assessment conclusion refers to a risk that the OPCC may not restructure its operations. However, during the reporting period, progress was being made toward that restructure.

As the new structure went live on 1 April 2025, just after the reporting period ended, the CE emphasised that while the current presentation may appear as a “red” risk when viewed in isolation, in reality, it is transitioning from “amber” to “green.”

KPMG understood the CE’s views and responded that ideally this money risk assessment should have been completed earlier within the year. He expects that within the commentary, it will clarify the points raised.

GR agreed, stating that commentary on the matter discussed should be included to avoid concerns around the absence of value for money.

22/JAC/38 – Internal Audit

Internal Audit Progress Report

RSM have issued one final report for Bedfordshire and a draft report on risk management, which is currently being finalised. The risk management report is currently rated as providing substantial assurance, with no indication that this rating will be downgraded.

Bedfordshire now has two reports with substantial assurance. For BCH, RSM are preparing four to five audit reports scheduled to begin in Q3. As discussed previously, there will be a slight delay in the audit programme due to recent contractual arrangements. However, RSM remain confident that all planned work will be completed within the year.

Within the Income and Debtors report, a substantial assurance rating was given, along with two low-priority actions. Both actions relate to compliance issues. One involved delays in raising invoices and credit notes, which were not processed within ten working days of the request, as required by procedure. The other concerned an aged debt that was not chased within the timeframe specified by procedure. Low-priority actions have been agreed, with a completion date set for 31 October.

WB requested context regarding the number of invoices. RSM clarified that there were 20 invoices in total, with one raised late. Of the 10 credit notes reviewed, three were raised outside the required timeframe.

22/JAC/39 – Force Overview

The DCC explained that, in terms of efficiency processes, further savings are expected to be made both locally and within collaborated teams.

The Priority-Based Budgeting (PBB) process will begin on Tuesday next week. This will be a programme of work running through to Christmas, during which all local operational teams will be reviewed. Although custody is currently a collaborated team, it will be included in the PBB process as it will become a local team by the next financial year. An update on PBB will be provided at the next meeting.

The DCC outlined two change processes within the collaborated space. One is considered business as usual, with no exceptional requests being made of departments. The other is a fundamental review of the service delivery model, encapsulated in a programme called Programme Blenheim. There are currently five areas of work being reviewed under this programme.

More of an update will be provided at the next meeting.

WB asked whether the savings being made are intended to balance the books or if they will be reinvested elsewhere. The DCC responded that the approach varies across the five teams.

In addition, for other collaborated areas, including JPS, PSD, and IMB, a business redesign process is underway. Department heads have been asked to develop business cases for three budget scenarios:

A standstill budget (0% change)
A 3% efficiency saving beyond flat cash
A 5% efficiency saving beyond flat cash

The DCC noted that some of these options are undesirable, and therefore, in response to WB’s question, these decisions are being made to balance the books rather than as a matter of choice.

The Chair noted that pay rises have been offered and are self-funded, meaning that a 4% pay rise effectively results in a 4% reduction in the overall budget.
Given this, what scenarios have been built into financial planning, and is the DCC anticipating further redundancies as a result?

The CFO responded to the Chair’s earlier question, explaining that units are currently being asked to model scenarios for 3% and 5% reductions, excluding pay awards.
This is because the Medium-Term Financial Plan already includes assumptions about pay increases. For example, this year the force budgeted for a 2.8% pay award, but the actual award was 4.2%. The government has indicated that sufficient funding has been provided to cover this gap, with no additional funding expected in future years.

The CFO added that the savings required are dictated by what is included in the Medium-Term Financial Plan, which is why departments have been asked to develop these reduction cases.

WB asked how the process looks for the units tasked with identifying budget reductions. The DCC responded that the views presented by department heads are realistic. They are confident that, although the steps required are undesirable, they are necessary to achieve a balanced budget.

The DCC then moved on to performance updates. Specific grant funding has enabled the force to implement Live Facial Recognition (LFR) technology to enhance policing capabilities.

Looking ahead, the CFO recommended that future performance reports include trend analysis over the past 12 months, rather than comparing July 2025 to July 2024.

The CFO also noted an improvement in the crime solve rate, which currently stands at 13.3%, exceeding the target of 13%, indicating positive progress.

The DCC highlighted the significant operational demands placed on policing over the summer. Given the diverse communities across Luton and Bedfordshire, and their historical context, the force remains mindful of the importance of providing community reassurance. Fortunately, there has been no significant disorder, which the DCC attributed to the effective operational work of community and local policing teams.

Finally, the DCC announced that a new episode of 24 Hours in Police Custody will air at the end of the month, focusing on Operation Long Acre, the triple murder case in Luton. The DCC noted that this may be of interest to the committee and expressed hope for legislative changes on firearms licencing stemming from the case.

Part Two – Restricted

22/JAC/30 – HMICFRS Update

The DCC provided an update.

22/JAC/31 – Strategic Risk Register of Bedfordshire Police

The DCC discussed the Risk Register.

22/JAC/32 – Strategic Risk Register of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire (OPCC)

The CE presented the SRR.

22/JAC/43 – AOB

The CFO noted that for some committee members, including Judit (who was unable to attend), this would be their final meeting. On behalf of the force and the OPCC, the CFO expressed gratitude for their contributions over the years. He thanked members providing both support and scrutiny, which has added significant value to the work of the Chief Constable and the PCC.

The Chair echoed these sentiments.

LB asked whether many applications had been received. The CFO confirmed that there were three applicants for the Chair position and six applicants to join the committee.

LB then asked when a decision would be made regarding the successful candidates. The CFO responded that the final round of interviews would take place on Monday, and they are hopeful to notify all applicants of the outcome by 30th September.

The Chair thanked everyone for a very effective and efficient meeting, noting the appropriate level of challenge provided to both officers and internal/external auditors.

POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER FOR BEDFORDSHIRE and BEDFORDSHIRE POLICE

JOINT AUDIT COMMITTEE

Meeting of 12 December 2025

Held between 13:00 – 15:00

Minutes

Present:

Jagtar Singh – Chair (JS) - Chair, Independent Committee Member

Laura Bell (IM LB) - Independent Committee Member

Neil Randall (IM NR) - Independent Committee Member

Dale Philipson (IM DP) - Independent Committee Member

Phil Wells (CFO PW) – Chief Finance Officer – OPCC / Deputy Chief Constable – Bedfordshire Police

Nicola Guo (KPMG, NG) - KPMG External Auditor

Suzanne Rowlett (RSM SR) – RSM Internal Auditor

Katie Beaumont (HGT KB) - Head of Governance and Transparency – OPCC

Tarushi De Cruze (CO TD) – Compliance Officer – OPCC

22/JAC/30 – Introduction

The Chair welcomed all attendees to the meeting.
All members introduced themselves.

22/JAC/31 – Apologies

Apologies were received from Sharn Basra and Wayne Brads.

22/JAC/32 – Minutes from the previous meeting 20.06.2025

RSM identified an accuracy issue on page one of the previous minutes. The Chair approved the minutes subject to this minor amendment.

22/JAC/33 – Action Log

CFO reviewed the outstanding actions.

Action 1: Completed.

Action 2: CFO explained that this action had been addressed during the development day. However, with two new members joining, it will be incorporated into the overview report going forward.

IM asked whether this action requires a revised due date or should be marked as complete. The HGT confirmed that it will be recorded as completed.

22/JAC/34 – Matters Arising

Terms of Reference Review – Formal Agreement

Terms of Reference approved with no objections from committee members.

22/JAC/35 – Declarations of Interest (verbal)

The Chair asked whether the new members had signed their declarations of interest. The HGT confirmed that these were in hand.
No changes to existing declarations of interest were reported.

Part One – Non-Restricted

22/JAC/37 – External Audit

KPMG introduced themselves and provided an update. They reported good progress, with a few follow-ups to be completed in the new year and expect to conclude another set of accounts for sign-off in January or February, subject to committee dates.

In addition, as agreed with the Finance Team, KPMG will begin planning for the 2026 audit and undertake build-back assurance testing.
KPMG requested that a JAC meeting be scheduled for late January or early February to approve the 2025 financial year accounts.

Action: HGT to arrange a meeting at the beginning of next year.

22/JAC/38 – Internal Audit

Internal Audit Progress Report

RSM presented two benchmarking reports.

The first reviewed assurance opinions received over the past three years, providing a comparison with other emergency services. The organisation is slightly higher on assurance opinions and lower on the number of actions, which is positive. The second part of the report focused on thematic areas, summarising high-priority actions raised across RSM’s emergency services clients. These include data and digital risks, as well as issues related to estates, health and safety, firearms and seized property, and people and finance risks.

The second report outlined sector updates and guidance.

When reviewing the progress report, RSM noted that two reports have been finalised since the last meeting: Risk Management and Capital Accounting & Fixed Assets. Both received substantial assurance, with a few low-priority actions for each.

Regarding the remainder of the audit plan, RSM reported that three audits are currently in progress, with the rest scheduled for completion by year-end. There have been minor timing adjustments, but nothing significant to raise with the committee.

IM referred to the benchmarking report and noted a point regarding mandatory training and escalation routes for non-compliance. IM asked whether the organisation has procedures in place to support this. The DCC responded that there is uncertainty around the classification of mandatory versus discretionary training. The DCC added that a recent discussion identified 43 online training packages currently classed as mandatory, which is unrealistic for officers and staff to complete. There is therefore a need to review these packages to determine which are truly mandatory and role specific.

For assurance, the CFO confirmed that crucial training such as firearms and personal safety training is mandatory and monitored regularly, with non-compliance tracked and managed through the Futures and Learning Development Board. In addition, this is assessed as part of the PEEL inspection.

The Chair noted that a previous Chief Constable had introduced a policy requiring mandatory training to be completed before staff could access their laptops. He asked whether this policy is still in place. The CFO confirmed that it remains in place.

The Chair asked whether a risk assessment has been conducted across all mandatory training to identify low-risk and low-impact areas. The CFO stated that the 43 mandatory training packages need to be reviewed and assessed. At the June committee meeting, members will review any comments relating to mandatory training from the PEEL inspection. The CFO will also consider whether this should form part of setting next year’s internal audit plan.

IM asked about the organisation’s progress in embedding cyber resilience into operational planning. The CFO responded that access to certain systems and functions is restricted unless mandatory training is completed. The CFO also suggested adding cyber risk to the agenda for the 2026 development day.

RSM informed the committee that the current Head of Internal Audit will retire at the end of March. Suzanne will assume the role from 1 April.
The Chair and committee thanked Mark for his years of support and noted that he will be greatly missed.

Progress on recommendations

The CFO reported that two recommendations remain outstanding,

The first relates to the Victims SOP, with some work still required around the victims strategy. This is planned for completion by the end of the financial year.

The second recommendation concerns the complaints audit, as responsibility for complaints will transfer from the force to the Commissioner in January. Once this change has been embedded, the CFO with the CEO will revisit the action to ensure it is fully addressed. The CFO expressed confidence that the matter is being managed appropriately.

22/JAC/39 – Force Overview

The CFO explained that the performance update has been revised to show year-on-year comparisons, to provide the committee with sufficient information on recorded and solved crime.

The CFO noted that for certain crime types, such as violence against women and girls and other serious sexual offences, the force aims to increase crime recording by building trust and confidence.

Regarding solved crimes, the CFO reported a steady increase, which is important given historically low solve rates. While some crime types, such as sexual offences, remain below desired performance levels, others, such as homicide, are performing strongly. Burglary, residential, and possession of drugs are in the high national quartile, keeping the overall solve rate moving in the right direction.

The CFO emphasised the need to improve solve rates for sexual offences and broader cases such as stalking and harassment, which will be a focus for the next six months.

IM asked for clarification on what constitutes a solved crime. The CFO confirmed it refers to any crime that has received an outcome whether this be a charge or a community resolution. The CFO agreed to share the Control Strategy which outlines the priority crime types and the cross cutting themes that the Force focuses on during the financial year

In terms of culture, there has been a change regarding the use of artificial intelligence. The CFO explained that two ethics committees have been introduced: one is a force-led committee that reviews the use of technology and professional standards cases, and the other is established by the PCC to oversee how the Chief Constable uses AI and where and when it can be deployed.

The Chair asked who will sit on the ethics committees.

The CFO explained that the force ethics committee comprises a mix of independents, academics, and national officials. The HGT added that the PCC ethics committee will include professionals, subject matter experts in AI, and independent community members. Both the HGT and CFO confirmed that one of the IAG chairs sits on the force’s ethics committee.
The Chair recommended cascading either minutes or discussion items from all IAGs.

In terms of the budget update, the settlement is expected next week. The force has made several assumptions, but it will be difficult to confirm their accuracy until the settlement is received. One assumption the force is confident about is a £14 limit on the council tax band.

Action: The CFO to provide a briefing on the settlement and the risks it creates, then circulate this to members.

IM asked whether the anticipated savings from Nectar are built into the forward-looking budget. The CFO explained that the current figures show the gap before savings. Now that savings for 2026/2027 have been identified, the next step is to determine savings for 2027/2028.

The CFO noted that the current Terms of Reference contain limited reference to performance. While the committee is not responsible for holding officers to account for performance, it is a fundamental aspect of policing. The CFO suggested that, given the committee’s role in managing risk and engaging with HMIC matters, members should develop an understanding of performance data. He recommended applying greater focus to performance in future reports as members become familiar with the figures.

The Chair asked what concerns the PCC has raised with the Chief Constable regarding performance. The CFO stated that the PCC’s current areas of focus are patrol and response times to incidents, solved crime rates and Domestic Abuse.
The Chair asked how this response times was benchmarked. The CFO explained that there is no national target, and different forces have varying immediate response timeframes.

The Chair queried whether there is national benchmarking for other performance measures that could be referenced. The CFO confirmed that, where possible, this will be included in the overview report, particularly showing where solved crime rates sit nationally.

The HGT added that the PCC holds the Chief Constable to account through monthly performance and governance meetings, and all minutes from these meetings are published on the OPCC website.

Action: HGT to circulate a set of performance and governance meeting minutes to committee members.

IM asked who determined that 15 minutes is a reasonable target for attending an immediate response. The CFO clarified that this, is an average, and was decided internally by the force, based on the belief that public expectation, on average, is for an immediate response within 15 minutes and whilst different targets across England and Wales, 15 minutes is aligned to the average.

IM expressed concern about whether the force is choosing the right priorities and suggested it would be useful to understand community priorities. The CFO confirmed that the force holds quarterly community priority meetings, where they engage with the public to identify priorities for neighbourhood policing.

Part Two – Restricted

22/JAC/40 – HMICFRS Update

The CFO provided an update on the HMICFRS Report.

22/JAC/41 – Strategic Risk Register of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire (OPCC)

The HGT reported that all risks had been reviewed and confirmed there were no major updates.

22/JAC/42 – Strategic Risk Register of Bedfordshire Police

The CFO gave an overview of the Force SRR.

22/JAC/43 – AOB

All members provided their reflections on the meeting.

The Chair thanked all.

POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER FOR BEDFORDSHIRE and BEDFORDSHIRE POLICE

JOINT AUDIT COMMITTEE

Meeting of 23 January 2026

Held between 12:30 – 14:00

Minutes

Present:

Jagtar Singh – Chair (JS) - Chair, Independent Committee Member

Wayne Brads (IM WB) - Independent Committee Member

Laura Bell (IM LB) - Independent Committee Member

Neil Randall (IM NR) - Independent Committee Member

Dale Philipson (IM DP) - Independent Committee Member

Hannah Broadbank (HB) - Principle Accountant – Bedfordshire Police

Phil Wells (CFO / DCO PW) – Chief Finance Officer – OPCC / Deputy Chief Officer – Bedfordshire Police

Richard Lee (KPMG, RL) - KMPG External Auditor

Natalie Reid (KPMG, NR) – KPMG External Auditor

Katie Beaumont (HGT, KB) – Head of Governance and Compliance

Tarushi De Cruze (CO, TDC) - Compliance Officer – OPCC

Introduction

The Chair welcomed all attendees to the meeting.

External Audit

KPMG introduced Natalie, a member of their team who works closely with Bedfordshire Police to produce the reports.

ISA 260 Report

KPMG explained that the paper sets out their findings against the risks identified at the beginning of the process and provides both a summary and a status update. They also noted that the paper includes the standard communications KPMG is required to present at the end of an audit.

Page 4 discusses the backstop arrangements and provides commentary on the work carried out on the financial statements that led to a disclaimed opinion. At the bottom of page 5, the paper summarises three areas of work that KPMG have been unable to complete, including the split of reserves (due to the absence of a brought‑forward position) and the disclosure checklist.

KPMG outlined that the next step is to conduct the “build back assurance” risk assessment work. This will allow them to determine whether any risks exist within the brought‑forward balances and reserve splits. If risks are identified, KPMG will carry out additional work to address the gaps. This work is scheduled to be completed over the coming months.

KPMG confirmed that these procedures can form part of the 2025/26 audit. This means that the Force is expected to move out of the backstop arrangement completely and return to a normal audit opinion in 2025/26, unless any issues lead to qualifications that may take slightly longer to resolve.

KPMG also provided assurance that, compared with other bodies they audit, having only three outstanding items is a relatively small number.

Page 7 sets out a number of disclosure points, which have been summarised and corrected in the final version of the accounts. The following pages summarise the risks identified. This includes management override of controls, which is a standard risk in all audits. For Bedfordshire Police, the focus is on the use of journals, ensuring they are not used inappropriately and that appropriate backup and supporting evidence accompanies these postings.

The second risk area relates to retirement benefits and pension balances within the accounts, which are subject to estimation and uncertainty. Even small changes in the underlying assumptions or percentage movements can have significant effects on the accounts.

KPMG confirmed that there are no specific issues in respect of journals. However, they have again highlighted the point regarding segregation of duties. In relation to pensions, KPMG are satisfied that the assumptions used are in line with their expectations.

KPMG moved forward to the appendixes on page 21, which outlines the required communications. He highlighted the point surrounding modified opinion, as KPMG will be issuing a disclaimer opinion. KPMG also explained they can’t certify that the accounts are complete until they have received confirmation from the National Audit Office that their audit of the Whole of Government Accounts is complete.

Page 22 covers the audit fees, which have varied due to an increase arising from the Public Sector Audit Appointment process. There is also an increase in the value‑for‑money work due to additional work being completed. The reference to IFRS 16 relates to the implementation of a new standard on leases.

Pages 23 and 24 outline KPMG’s independence. The following sections confirm that there were no audit adjustments, either corrected or uncorrected, above the posting threshold that KPMG is required to report to the committee.

Page 27 sets out the identified control deficiencies, including issues relating to journal reviews and segregation of duties. The second point concerns related parties, for which management will be considering the appropriate way forward.

IM asked for the CFO’s views on the paper from a management perspective. The CFO explained that the force has had time to read through the report and has been working closely with KPMG. They are comfortable with KPMG’s approach and have not encountered any issues during the process. Regarding segregation of duties, this is an area the force will need to work through with KPMG in order to identify a way forward and address the concern.

Following this, IM asked whether there is a requirement to review the internal audit plan to reflect the points raised by the external audit. The CFO stated that internal audit could assess and conclude on this; however, KPMG would likely still need to carry out their work from an external audit perspective regardless.

Referring to page 22, IM asked for clarity on the entities to which the table relates. KPMG confirmed that this will be clarified in the final version of the report.

IM then asked, in relation to the start of the next audit cycle, how confident is KPMG that they will be starting from a secure baseline, and whether Bedfordshire Police appear as a risk within the KPMG risk register.

IM also sought assurance regarding the backstop assurance process, specifically, whether there is minimal risk of misstatement and whether there will be any regrets about actions that could have been taken earlier. He also asked for an update on the formal saving plan recommendation. In addition, he noted an administrative error on page 19, point 2, where “police” should read “policy.”

KPMG explained that although the audits are being concluded via the backstop process, they consider their position to be positive. They are confident that the outstanding work previously mentioned will be addressed through the build‑back assurance risk assessment work.

KPMG also noted that they expect to raise a recommendation regarding segregation of duties, as they believe every journal entry line should be subject to such controls. They acknowledged that many organisations consider this impractical and time‑consuming; however, auditing standards, particularly ISA 315, require them to identify controls within the journal posting process. If those controls are absent or not applied consistently to every journal posting, KPMG is required to report this.

KPMG responded to IM’s earlier question, clarifying that the backstop process represents a compromise to allow them to conclude the outstanding audits. The PSAA and regulators are keen for the sector to return to a stable position, and their view is that KPMG should be downing tools on 2024/25 in order to focus on 2025/26. However, KPMG reassured IM that the force is not far from meeting expectations and that they aim for Bedfordshire Police to be in a position where the 2025/26 audit is business as usual.

KPMG added that the saving plans will be covered in the next paper, and any errors will be corrected in the final version.

Auditors Annual Report

KPMG explained that this is the report that enters the public domain. The first section covers the financial statements, which had been discussed previously, and the second section provides the value‑for‑money commentary beginning on page 11.

KPMG reminded the committee that three areas are assessed: Financial Sustainability, Governance and improving economy, efficiency and effectiveness.

Their assessment involves identifying any risks and, where risks are found, carrying out further work to determine whether they constitute a weakness.

KPMG identified a weakness within financial sustainability relating to the force’s use of its general fund reserves, which have fallen below minimum levels. They assess how this affects future years and whether the trend is likely to continue. Their conclusion is that the position is well understood, and there is appropriate awareness of the implications of using reserves.

KPMG also emphasised the importance of continuing to identify potential savings across all operational areas at a granular level, quantifying them wherever possible, and then monitoring, prioritising and delivering them to mitigate the further reduction of reserve balances. They advise that the force should continue to document and prioritise these savings to minimise impacts on general reserves.

Within the Governance domain, KPMG have not identified any risks. As mentioned in the previous meeting, KPMG reviewed the succession planning arrangements for committees and concluded that a succession plan and appropriate arrangements were in place. As part of their next review, KPMG stated that they will look at how this plan has been implemented.

The third domain relates to securing economy, efficiency, and effectiveness. KPMG explained that they had been informed about the Police Foundation review and the associated restructure arrangements, and therefore wished to review the documentation and the standard positioning. KPMG have concluded that they are satisfied that this has been dealt with appropriately.

Overall, across the three domains, no weaknesses were identified; however, three recommendations have been made.

IM asked whether we are satisfied with the management response to the savings plan recommendation. The CFO responded that the recommendation is asking the Force how they are monitoring their savings throughout the year, as well as requesting a detailed breakdown of all savings. The CFO explained that the information provided to KPMG was generic, and therefore the management response states that, if the same question is asked in 2025/26, a post‑by‑post analysis of all identified savings will be available to meet the requirements.

IM also asked whether the savings implemented will monitor and report on the impact on police activity and the community. The CFO explained that this assessment is carried out before any savings are agreed, ensuring there is minimal impact on the Force’s service delivery to the public. Once the savings have been implemented, a review will be undertaken as part of the annual budgetary process. The Chair added that he would expect Audit Committee members to challenge this as well, particularly where there is any impact on the community or on policing.

The HGC noted a typo on page 3, where it states, ‘police and crime plan’ instead of ‘Police and Crime Panel’.

IM asked, in relation to reserves and reserve levels, whether, based on other organisations KPMG work with, there is a typical level of reserves they would recommend. KPMG explained that when considering whether reserve levels are low, they compare with nearest-neighbour forces. They emphasised that they look for a risk‑based approach to determining reserve levels. The CFO added that each organisation should determine its level of the police fund and reserves based on the level of risk it anticipates, meaning each force will have a different requirement. Bedfordshire Police have maintained a 3% level for several years; however, over the last five years, the Force has not needed the full 3%. They have therefore agreed that 2.5% is a reasonable level moving forward. Currently, reserves are below this figure, and the Medium-Term Financial Plan sets out how this will be built back up to 2.5%.

The Chair concluded the discussion and sought formal approval of the reports, noting the need for minor amendments to correct the errors identified.

The Chair and the CFO expressed their thanks to Natalie, Hannah, and their teams for their hard work in compiling these reports.

IM questioned a part of the report which states: “Audit Committee Members confirm that the financial statements, taken as a whole, are balanced and understandable and provide the information necessary for regulators.” IM asked for assurance that we do in fact meet the regulators’ requirements. KPMG explained that this wording refers to the narrative report within the financial statements and confirms that it contains all of the information it is required to include.

Cookies

Joint Audit Committee

Attending Joint Audit Committee

Conditions of attendance

Joint Audit Committee minutes

21.06.2024 - JAC meeting

Joint Audit Committee of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire and Bedfordshire PoliceMeeting of 21 June 2024 - Held between 13:00 – 15:30

Minutes

Present:

Part One – Not Restricted

22/JAC/30 Introduction

22/JAC/31 Apologies

22/JAC/32 Minutes of the meeting held on 22.03.2024 (Restricted in part)

22/JAC/33 Actions log

22/JAC/34 Matters Arising

22/JAC/35 Declarations of Interest (verbal)

22/JAC/36 Terms of Reference – Annual Review

22/JAC/37 - PCC Introduction

External Audit Verbal Update

22/JAC/38 Internal Audit

a) Internal Audit Progress Report

b) RSM Annual Report

22/JAC/39 Police Service Overview

Action: ERSOU provide an input on cybercrime prevention at the next development day.

Part Two – Restricted

22/JAC/40 HMICFRS Update

22/JAC/41 - a) Strategic Risk Register of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire

OPCC 22/JAC/42 Strategic Risk Register of Bedfordshire Police

22/JAC/43 AOB

Reflections of meeting by JAC members

22.03.2024 - JAC minutes

Joint Audit Committee of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire and Bedfordshire Police

Meeting of 22 March 2024 - Held between 13:00 – 15:30

Minutes

Present:

22/JAC/30 Introduction

22/JAC/31 Apologies

22/JAC/32 Minutes of the meeting held on 22.12.2023 (Restricted in part).

22/JAC/33 Actions log

22/JAC/34 Matters Arising

22/JAC/35 Declarations of Interest (verbal)

22/JAC/37

22/JAC/38 Internal Audit

22/JAC/39 Force Overview

Training Presentation/paper

Cyber presentation – update paper

Vetting Update

22/JAC/40 HMICFRS Update

22/JAC/41 - a) Strategic Risk Register of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire

22/JAC/42 Strategic Risk Register of Bedfordshire Police Report taken as read.

22/JAC/43 AOB

Feedback to be raised with the CC/PCC

a) Reflections of meeting by JAC members

20.09.2024 - JAC minutes

POLICE AND CRIME COMMISSIONER FOR BEDFORDSHIRE and BEDFORDSHIRE POLICE

JOINT AUDIT COMMITTEE

Meeting of 20 September 2023

Held between 12:30 – 15:00

Minutes

Present:

22/JAC/30 -Introduction

22/JAC/31 -Apologies

22/JAC/32 -Minutes of the meeting held on 21.06.2024

22/JAC/33 -Action Log

Part One

22/JAC/34 -Matters Arising

22/JAC/35 -Declaration of Interest (verbal)

22/JAC/36 -JAC Annual Report

Part One – Not Restricted

22/JAC/37 - External Audit

a) Auditor’s Update – Verbal

22/JAC/38 -Internal Audit

a) Internal Audit Progress Report

b) RSM Annual Report

c) Benchmarking Report

22/JAC/39 -Force Overview

Part Two – Restricted

22/JAC/40 -HMICFRS Update

22/JAC/41 -Strategic Risk Register of the Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire (OPCC)

22/JAC/42 -Strategic Risk Register of Bedfordshire Police

Joint Audit Committee of the Police and Crime Commissioner for Bedfordshire and Bedfordshire Police

Meeting of 21 June 2024 - Held between 13:00 – 15:30

22/JAC/40 - DCC - HMICFRS Update
The DCC explained that the force has had their HMIC inspection and gave an update.