Agenda and minutes

The minutes of the meeting held on 21 November 2025 were taken as read and confirmed as a correct record.

There were no matters arising from the minutes of the previous meeting.

The Board considered the LRSCSB Action Log, a copy of which, marked ‘Agenda Item 4’, is filed with these minutes.

It was noted that most of the actions were on the agenda for the day’s meeting.

RESOLVED:

That the status of the Actions in the Log be noted.

The Chairman invited members who wished to do so to declare any interests in respect of items on the agenda for the meeting.

No declarations were made. 

Bob Bearne, LLR Probation Delivery Unit Head, will give a verbal update in follow-up to the report considered by the Board on 21 November 2025: https://democracy.leics.gov.uk/documents/s193107/Probation%20report.pdf

The Board received a verbal update from Bob Bearne, LLR Probation Delivery Unit Head, which had been requested in follow-up to the report considered at the Board meeting on 21 November 2025 regarding His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Probation inspection of the Unit.

The Board was reminded that at the meeting on 21 November 2025 a member had asked for data regarding the number of prisoners that had been released under the Early Release Scheme that had reoffended. Bob Bearne informed that unfortunately this data was not available for Leicestershire and Rutland because reoffending rates were collated nationally and only in relation to whether the reoffending took place within 12 months or 2 years of release. It was too early for the data relating to prisoners released under the Early Release Scheme. However, it was known that the Early Release Scheme had resulted in an increase to the amount of recalls to prisons.

Bob Bearne offered to give a presentation at the next meeting of the Board regarding relevant issues arising from the Independent Sentencing Review and the Sentencing Act 2026 which would result in changes for Courts and the Probation Service.

RESOLVED:

(a)        That the contents of the verbal update be noted;

(b)        That officers be requested provide a presentation on the Sentencing Act 2026 at the Board meeting on 25 June 2026.

Ben Bee, Assistant Chief Fire Officer, will present this report.

The Board considered a report of Ben Bee, Assistant Chief Fire Officer, Leicestershire Fire and Rescue Service (LFRS), which provided an update on the Community Safety work being carried out by the Service. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 7’, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussions the following points were noted:

(i)           Fire Protection activity was delivered through a Risk-Based Inspection Programme focused on higher-risk premises. Between April and December 2025 11 prohibition notices had been issued to premises. These were often where residential flats sat above commercial premises.

(ii)         There had been an increase in the number of Houses in multiple occupation (HMOs). LFRS received regular notifications regarding these and worked with partner agencies to monitor those properties.

(iii)        In response to a question as to whether there was still the ability to report vulnerable adults to the fire service to enable officers to access properties in the event of a fire, it was recommended that a Home Safety Check be booked via the LFRS website evaluation. Whilst the Home Safety Check was carried out there would be an opportunity to share information about vulnerable residents.

(iv)       In response to a request from Cllr. Kevin Loydall (Oadby and Wigston CSP Chair) for a meeting with the new station manager in the Oadby and Wigston area, Ben Bee offered to arrange meetings for all the CSP Chairs with their relevant station managers.

RESOLVED:

(a)        That the contents of the report be noted;

(b)        That the opportunities for closer partnership working be noted.

Holly Wells, Domestic Abuse Related Death Review Support Officer, will present this report.

The Board considered a report of Holly Wells, Domestic Abuse Related Death Review (DArDR) Support Officer, regarding the current DArDRs taking place in Leicestershire. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 8’, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussions the following points were noted:

(i)           Of the 11 DArDRs taking place in Leicestershire 9 of the victims were female. Therefore, conversations were taking place regarding creating a Violence against Women and Girls Toolkit and it was proposed that a group be set up to develop the toolkit further.

(ii)         Once the DArDRS were complete they were submitted to the Home Office, and the Home Office Quality Assurance Panel reviewed the work. However, there was a problem of delays before the Panel completed its work. Therefore, the processes were being reviewed, and the Quality Assurance Panel was being replaced by a Quality Assurance Board which would hopefully provide feedback to CSPs in a shorter timeframe.

(iii)        There had also been delays with signing off the DArDRs before they were submitted to the Home Office. Guidance for the signing process was being developed to help speed up the process.

(iv)       Some of the actions arising from DArDRs needed to be implemented on a national basis and required Home Office or government intervention. To instigate the national action the Chair of the CSP would write to the Home Office to make them aware of the action for them. However, implementing these actions on a national basis could take some time and therefore long deadlines were put in place. Whilst CSPs were the main body with responsibility for ensuring actions were completed, with some national actions local MPs could play a role. 

(v)         Reassurance was given that key themes arising from DArDRs were being addressed and learning was being fed into future processes. One of the themes emerging from DArDRs was multi-generational abuse and adult child to parent violence. Guidance in relation this was being developed and the Safeguarding Children’s Partnership was involved. Another theme arising from DArDRs was rural isolation. The Survivors Subgroup was being liaised with about this theme along with other partner agencies.

(vi)       Going forward the DHR work would be presented to the Domestic Abuse Local Partnership Board as part of the governance process. The Domestic Abuse Reduction Strategy was also being launched in 2026 and underneath the Strategy sat an action plan would address some of the learning from DHRs.

RESOLVED:

That the contents of the report be noted.

Gurjit Samra-Rai, Community Safety Team Manager, Leicestershire County Council will present this report.

The Board considered a report of Gurjit Samra-Rai, Community Safety Team Manager, Leicestershire County Council, which proposed an increase in funding contributions to the Domestic Homicide Review (DHR) management process provided by Leicestershire County Council Safeguarding Partnership Board Office and other officers across the authority. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 9’, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussions the following points were noted:

(i)           The number and complexity of DHRs was increasing. Leicestershire County Council contributed a significant amount of resources to the DHR process. The Domestic Abuse Related Death Review Support Officer post was now a permanent part of Leicestershire County Council staff. A large amount of Leicestershire County Council officer time was spent on DHRs and attendance at meetings included the Director of Children and Families, Assistant Directors, Heads of Service and other officers. Therefore, it was not proposed that the Leicestershire County Council funding contribution to DHRs be increased.

(ii)         A member raised concerns about the lack of detail provided to the Board around costs and salaries in relation to the DHR process in order to help the Board make the decision on funding contributions. Concerns were also raised about the impact of the funding increase on the budgets of District Councils, especially given the other funding contributions District Councils were required to make in relation to Community Safety.

(iii)        A member suggested that the amount of funding contribution for each District Council should depend on the number of DHRs required to be carried out in that particular District. Other members disagreed with this proposal on the basis that even if the victim resided in a particular district, the DHR work could take place across several districts or even in Leicester City, therefore it was argued the cost of the DHRs ought to be shared. It was emphasised that offenders were not restricted by council borders and Domestic Homicides could occur anywhere and at any time without warning.

(iv)       An alternative to Leicestershire County Council leading on the DHR process was for District Councils and Rutland County Council to carry out their own DHRs.

RESOLVED:

(a)    That the Board notes the content of the report;

(b)    That each District partner and Rutland County Council be invoiced £5,000 per annum to fund Domestic Homicide Reviews.

(3 members voted for the motion and 1 member voted against)

Gurjit Samra-Rai, Community Safety Team Manager, Leicestershire County Council, will present this report.

The Board considered a report of Gurjit Samra-Rai, Community Safety Team Manager, Leicestershire County Council, regarding the Anti-social Behaviour Case Management System known as ECINS which was in use in Leicestershire. A copy of the report, marked ‘Agenda Item 10’, is filed with these minutes.

Arising from discussions the following points were noted:

(i)           The ECINS Case Management System had been in use in Leicestershire for approximately one year. During that period issues with the system had arisen which required the involvement of the ECINS company to resolve them. Issues continued to arise on a regular basis and weekly meetings were taking place with ECINS and Leicestershire Police to troubleshoot problems. Partners had a good relationship with ECINS who were approaching the problems in a positive manner.

(ii)         In answer to a question from a member as to whether there were any penalty clauses in the contract with ECINS, it was explained that ECINS were fundamentally fulfilling the contract therefore there were no grounds to penalise them or argue that they had breached the contract. However, reassurance was given that the situation would be kept under review and evaluation would take place of whether ECINS was still the best system for Leicestershire and whether anything could be done to improve the system further. A one-year-on review meeting was taking place in May 2026 with ECINS and Leicestershire Police to assess the progress that had been made and what steps to take going forward. There were no guarantees that the system would improve. If ECINS requested additional funding for the service they were providing this would have to be challenged based on current performance.

(iii)        The contract for ECINS was held by Leicestershire County Council and whilst the contract covered 3 years, this was on a plus 1 plus 1 rolling basis. Therefore, there was no requirement to wait until the 3 years were up before terminating the contract.

(iv)       One of the main reasons for moving to the ECINS system was the ability to map hotspot areas for ASB, however this was not yet working as well as desired and more developmental work was required with ECINS to fully utilise this function.

(v)         Discussion took place about whether the way ECINS was being used in Leicestershire was too bespoke and whether ECINS should be used in the more basic way that other police forces and local authorities were using elsewhere in the country which had been more successful.

(vi)       A member noted that one of the problems was the way ECINS linked in with existing case management systems used by partners and queried whether there was a system that would better interface with existing systems.

(vii)      The Anti-social Behaviour System Governance & Co-ordination Officer who had worked on ECINS up until now was leaving and a new officer would be in place next month. The new officer would be required to continue the development of the system in Leicestershire

RESOLVED:

That the contents of the report be noted.

Gurjit Samra-Rai, Community Safety Team Manager, Leicestershire County Council, will present this report.

The Board considered a report regarding Safer Communities performance for 2025/26 Quarter 3, a copy of which, marked ‘Agenda Item 11’, is filed with these minutes. The report was presented by Gurjit Samra-Rai, Community Safety Team Manager, Leicestershire County Council.

There had been a rise in the rate of ‘personal’ Anti-social Behaviour (ASB) over the quarter. It was not known for sure why this was, but it was suggested that it could be due to the amount of work that was taking place to raise awareness of how to report ASB, and the Government action plan on ASB which had been publicised. A similar trend had been noted with regards to Domestic Abuse reports increasing following publicity campaigns.

A pilot was taking place in relation to Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC) referrals and Joint Action Groups (JAGS). Whilst JAGS were felt to be working well on the whole, consideration needed to be given to the procedures in place and it was felt that a set of minimum standards would be beneficial. A new process was being put in place with regards to how MARACS and JAGs linked together. A key issue was ensuring the appropriate representatives from partner organisations were present at JAG meetings. It was proposed to have a single point of contact within each local authority for MARACs. Alternatively, it was suggested that the single point of contact should be the Neighbourhood Policing Officer. Further consideration would be given to the single point of contact after the meeting.

There was currently no data available for the ‘number of hospital admissions due to violence’. It was clarified that this metric related to violence against the patient before they visited the hospital, not violence against staff from patients. In response to concerns raised about increasing incidences of violence against staff by patients, it was clarified that individual hospitals would capture incidents of violence against staff and it would be reviewed through NHS internal governance processes.

There were currently separate metrics for environmental crime and nuisance, and it was proposed to merge them into a single metric for community crime. In response to concerns raised about this and the need for a separate metric for environmental crime, it was agreed that further consideration would be given to it after the meeting.

RESOLVED:

That the contents of the report be noted.

The next meeting of the Board will take place on Thursday 25 June 2026 at 10.00 am via Microsoft Teams.

RESOLVED:

That the next meeting of the Board take place on Thursday 25 June 2026 at 10.00 am via Microsoft Teams.