Adequacy

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.

Recommendation 13 of A Call for Change states:
"Within six (6) months, the Queensland Police Service develop and implement a requirement that Officers in Charge must appoint Field Training Officers who possess appropriate skills and experience and standards of integrity, including having:
1.  At least two years of operational experience,
2.  No pending, current or previous domestic and family violence order history,
3.  No complaints history of concern,
4.  A demonstrated capacity to respond effectively to domestic and family violence, and
5.  A proven ability to develop suitable training skills."

Background

The primary function of a Field Training Officer (FTO) is to provide supervision for the First Year Constable (FYC) program.

Throughout the program, the FYC is required to attend training days, complete workplace competencies and is guided at incidents by the FTO. Eventually the FYC becomes able to work more independently, until they in turn may apply to become an FTO.

The selection criteria for suitable FTOs are essential in developing an FYC’s knowledge and capability of their duties and are vital to establishing appropriate standards within the organisation that determine behaviours around how those duties are approached.

Throughout January to March 2024 the OIIS undertook consultation across several metropolitan and regionally based policing districts across Queensland. The OIIS consulted with various ranks in the QPS involved in the FTO process, including FYCs, FTOs, Education and Training Officers (ETO), Officers-in-Charge (OIC), District Officers (DO) and central coordination units for both FTO and FYC programs.

Adherence

The IIS found there was strong evidence that the QPS has adhered to the Government Response to develop and implement a requirement for FTO selection criteria meeting the requirements under Recommendation 13 of A Call for Change.

The QPS has produced FTO guideline 19, available to all QPS staff via the QPS Intranet SharePoint as part of the First Year Constables’ Training Program portal. This guideline specifies the FTO selection criteria outlined by A Call for Change and provides additional explanatory notes.

Quality

The IIS found there is limited evidence regarding the quality of implementation of this recommendation.

Of the criteria listed in the recommendation, officers consulted found the first two objective and easy to understand and apply consistently, but identified criteria three to five as requiring further clarification.

The authorisation status of the guideline is currently unclear as it is undated and the version’s status unknown. This means the guideline may be the subject of change, amended versions not clearly communicated, and the reasons for any changes are not evident to users or upon review.

To support decision-making and consistency in the application of the criteria and elevate awareness of the guideline, the IIS suggests:

• a documented process with a flow chart providing key accountability officers for assessing and vetting eligibility and delegated decisions-makers,
• inclusive development of guidelines during drafting to include input from DOs, ETOs and OICs in multiple districts to ensure clarity and coverage of key operational and strategic issues,
• further supporting guidance on the application of three of the criteria including advice on an appeals process,
• the QPS clearly communicate the guidelines to all staff, and
• the QPS address the authorisation status of the guideline.

Sustainability

The IIS found there is satisfactory evidence to support the maintenance of a process within QPS to assess the sustainability of FTOs.

There is an opportunity to elevate the awareness of this recommendation and its importance in shaping police culture. Minor amendments may benefit implementation through consideration of the guideline sitting as a new policy, or umbrellaed by an existing relevant policy within the Operational Procedures Manual (OPM).

Some sustainability-related issues were raised including workforce management, training serviceability, scale and efficiency under the current arrangements with the First Year Constable Program unit. Given the current focus of the recommendation, it may be timely to consider the management and efficiency of FTO development and maintenance into the future.

Recommendation 17 of A Call for Change states:
"Within three months, the QPS develop and implement a procedure which requires members in the following designated roles to undertake the specialist five-day domestic and family violence training:
-­High Risk Teams  
­- Police Communications Centre  
- District Duty Officers  
- Officers in Charge  
- ­Shift Supervisors  
- Domestic and Family Violence Coordinators and Officers  
- Domestic Violence Liaison Officers  
-  Members of the Domestic, Family Violence and Vulnerable Persons Command.  

The procedure should stipulate that persons already in those roles (in a permanent or acting capacity) complete the training within 24 months and persons appointed to those roles after the procedure is operational complete the training within six months of appointment."

Background

In response to Recommendation 17 of A Call for Change, the QPS undertook an extensive, innovative co-design and codelivery approach to DFV training, partnering with a range of DFV research and service provision experts from across Australia.  This is the first time the QPS had approached training in this way; and the size, scale and complexity of the training design and delivery undertaken is something rarely seen in industry or higher education environments. The QPS is to be commended for this effort.

Throughout January to March 2024 the OIIS undertook a review of QPS DFV specialist training documentation and records for Course 1: QC1914, followed by a series of consultations with officers based in metropolitan and regional districts across Queensland.

The OIIS consulted with a range of officers from various ranks who had completed the training performing the specialist roles designated under Recommendation 17.

Adherence

The IIS found that there is strong evidence that the QPS has sufficiently adhered to the Government Response to develop a procedure for mandatory DFV Specialist Five-day Training meeting the Government Response to Recommendation 17 of A Call for Change.

The QPS developed OPM 9.15.6 Domestic and Family Violence Specialist Training, which identifies three categories of DFV courses offered to suit different types of policing roles.

The OPM lists the timeframes for mandatory completion of the training.

Quality

The IIS found strong evidence that QPS has developed the mandatory DFV Specialist Five-day Training to sufficient quality for metropolitan implementation.

It is important learners understand the reason for the training, the goals sought by the organisation, and the changes expected from the training.

Review of the training outline demonstrated clear and detailed instructor guidance has been provided, along with a detailed training manual and activity workbook provided to officers attending the training.

It is noted that further adjustment of the DFV Specialist Five-day Training is required to support officers on the specific challenges faced in regional, rural and remote policing for a satisfactory implementation quality to be reached for those districts.

Of further note, the closure of the feedback loop in the implementation of Recommendation 17 of A Call for Change needs to be developed by QPS to increase the likelihood that quality feedback continues to be provided from learners in future training.

Sustainability

The IIS found that there is strong evidence the QPS has commenced implementation of a DFV training procedure as required by Recommendation 17 of A Call for Change. However, the impact for the delivery of on-ground changes in DFV response is not yet known and adequate measures need to be in place to evidence these in the future.

The QPS has commenced embedding the training by establishing its importance and relevance to core operations. The next step is to strategically embed the OPM into other organisational structures and undergo further work to support broader endorsement of the training from leadership to line managers.

A course redesign to mixed mode with asynchronous delivery may also be effective for a more sustainable resourcing maintenance for the training and allow tailoring of modules for regional service provision.

Ongoing effort and attention to continuous improvement will also be required to address resourcing barriers to attending training, as new officers move through the system, and as new legislation and procedures arise that impact DFV reform.