A group of local authority CCTV managers has suggested ways for a public space system to bench-mark itself.
A group of local authority CCTV managers has suggested ways for a public space system to bench-mark itself – opening up the possibilities of comparing performance with private sector schemes. The nine performance indicators were unveiled at the CCTV User Group annual conference in Bournemouth in July. In a joint project between the User Group and the 50-strong TAG (Technical Advisory Group) of local authority CCTV users, a dozen CCTV managers are behind the bench-marking, part of a wide-ranging drive for Best Value as required under the Local Government Act 1999. The 12 are: Simon Walters (Lincoln), Roy Slater (Mansfield), Martin Lazell (Kingston upon Thames), Laurie Williams (King?s Lynn), Ian Harrison (Newark), Phil Holmes (Bradford Metropolitan), Roy Wildman (Peterborough), martin Beaumont (Cambridge), Alan Dobson (Wakefield) and Terry Jepson (Kirklees). Simon Walters told Professional Security: ?We are very much in favour of bench-marking. We see this as the future for continuous improvement – we have done it in an ad hoc way for many years. CCTV managers are always exchanging information – this formalises that relationship.? The nine indicators are, in no order:
1) average number of productive activities per operator hour – that is, work-rate.
2) total annual cost of CCTV scheme per camera per hour.
3) percentage of total annual cost generated from external contributions (not including internal charges to other council sections) – a topical issue, where public space CCTV systems are seeking to sell their service to the private sector for revenue, Simon Walters comments.
4) annual cost per productive activity.
5) number of tapes in library unaccounted for.
6) use of recordings. There are two sides to any CCTV scheme, Simon Walters points out: the pro-active work as operators see incidents and deal with them in real time, and incidents missed but investigated through the historical tape. This indicator asks how often enforcement authorities such as HM Customs and Excise are coming to the CCTV system – and if they are not, is it because cameras are in the wrong place or recordings are of poor quality?
7) percentage of down time per year.
8) average rectification time per minor system failure.
9) a system assessment matrix, to rate a scheme.
Outside factors such as police arrests have been deliberately left out of the equations, because police responses may depend on resources quite beyond the CCTV system?s control. Such indicators, made public, should prompt CCTV managers to ask why (for example) their scheme is dearer than a similar authority?s, the working group hopes. If shopping centres and university campuses agree to bench-mark their CCTV in the same way, public and private sectors alike could gain from gauging their performance, Simon Walters adds.
