Progress snapshots

Recommendation 15 of A Call for Change states:
"Within three months, the Queensland Police Service develop and implement a procedure which requires Officers in Charge to ensure that all frontline officers who attend domestic and family violence (DFV) occurrences meet with a designated senior officer to receive feedback in relation to a sample of their body worn camera footage at least every six months."

The Office of the Independent Implementation Supervisor (OIIS) spoke with a range of stakeholders to assess the adequacy of this recommendation within various ranks and locations of the Queensland Police Service (QPS). This included QPS commissioned ranks and officers responsible for developing and delivering the policy within the organisation; as well as officers-in-charge in four different Queensland districts who are responsible for conducting the body worn camera footage review; and frontline officers required to use body worn cameras at incidents.

Adherence

The IIS found there was strong evidence that the Government Response has been followed at all levels of the QPS.

A new procedure for the review of body worn camera footage of officers attending DFV incidents commenced from 21 February 2023. The procedure requires that all Officers-In-Charge, frontline supervisors and frontline officers must have a designated senior officer (a review officer) review their body worn camera footage every six months for different DFV categories. The review must also be included in the frontline officers’ Development and Performance Plans.

A DFV Body Worn Camera Review User Guide was developed to support and guide the reviews. The guide includes a review checklist that is aligned with QPS’s holistic DFV training principles.

Quality

The IIS found there was satisfactory evidence that the work completed met the expected level of quality of the Government Response.

Since the procedure commenced, the IIS found that body worn camera footage is being reviewed in line with the requirements of the procedure and within appropriate timeframes.

Although reviewing officers only need to watch a randomly selected sample of footage, the IIS heard mixed feedback as to whether this was happening in practice. While some review officers indicated they were reviewing a sample of each piece of footage in line with the review requirements, a majority of review officers reported reviewing entire pieces of DFV incident footage. These review officers believed reviewing the entire footage was necessary to ensure they got a clear picture of the frontline officer's response, ensure all elements of the checklist were being met and reduce the risk of missing important parts of the incident.

Stakeholders highlighted the advantages of the review procedure, including providing senior officers the opportunity to sit down with frontline officers and provide face-to-face feedback. They advised a vast majority of reviews showed positive responses by frontline officers when responding to DFV incidents.

However, there was consistent feedback that the review process has significantly increased the workload of reviewing officers. In some Districts, review officers are spending entire eight-hour shifts reviewing footage or are using overtime to complete the reviews. Occasionally, to manage competing priorities, body worn camera footage is being reviewed while other work is being conducted.

Sustainability

The IIS found there was limited evidence that the current approach to the body worn camera reviews can be sustained in its current format.

While the implementation of this recommendation is fostering a performance-based culture and supporting more regular performance discussions within the QPS, the overwhelming feedback was that the approach is unsustainable. This was due to the considerable time required of review officers which takes them away from their other duties.

There is significant support for continuing to use body worn camera footage reviews as part of a broader suite of tools. Supervisors and review officers believed that the same benefits could be achieved by using the body worn camera review process with a more targeted cohort of frontline officers, rather than applying it across the entire cohort. For example, many stakeholders supported the review of body worn camera footage for instances where no action was taken to determine whether there was a missed opportunity for QPS intervention.

Overall, the IIS found that the QPS will need to find a more sustainable way of implementing this recommendation without compromising the upskilling opportunities for frontline officers highlighted by the A Call for Change: Commission of Inquiry into Queensland Police Service responses to domestic and family violence. Any change should only occur on the basis that the reviews optimise opportunities to build a performance-driven, continuous improvement culture within the QPS with the fundamental goal of improving responses for victim-survivors.