FOI 836/24 Promotion Process

Dear Sir/Madam, 

Enquiry Reference:  836 - 24                                                                        

I write in connection with regards to your Freedom of Information request. Below is your request and our response.

1. What reasonable adjustment do you offer for officers that might suffer cognitive impairment through disability, who would be disadvantaged in comparison with their peers in assessment or test formats, be it through ability to retain or process information?

• Extended Time: Officers may be provided with additional time to complete assessments or tests to account for any difficulties in processing or retaining information.
• Alternative Formats: Assessment materials may be provided in alternative formats, such as large print, audio, or electronic versions, to accommodate specific cognitive needs.
• Rest Breaks: Officers may be allowed to take breaks during assessments to help manage cognitive fatigue.
• Use of Assistive Technology: Officers may be permitted to use assistive technology, such as speech-to-text software, screen readers, or other tools that can help mitigate the impact of cognitive impairments.
• Modified Assessment Environment: Adjustments to the assessment environment, such as a quieter room or reduced distractions, may be provided to help officers focus and perform to the best of their ability.
• Tailored Instructions: Instructions for the assessments may be provided in a simplified or more detailed format, depending on the needs of the officer, to ensure they fully understand the tasks required.

1. It is noted that preparation for interviews and assessments within the Police is highly competitive with much preparatory work at home often required. What reasonable adjustments do you offer for those officers that might be incapable to prepare for tests outside of working hours, either due to health or caring responsibilities?

• Provision of Preparation Time During Working Hours: Where Officers are unable to prepare outside of work due to health conditions or caring responsibilities, arrangements may be made to allow preparation during working hours. This may include allocating specific periods during the officers regular work schedule for study, practice, or review of materials.
• Access to Study Leave: Officers may be granted study leave, allowing them time away from regular duties to focus on preparation for interviews and assessments. This leave can be tailored to accommodate the officers needs and circumstances, however, this leave would need to be agreed and authorised between the Recruitment Team and the Chief Officer Team/Process SPoC.
• One-to-one Support or Coaching: Where appropriate, officers may be offered one-to-one support or coaching during work hours. This could include sessions with a mentor, supervisor or member of the Learning and Development Team who can help guide their preparation and provide advice.
• Later Interview/Assessment Date: In certain circumstances, Officers may be offered the option to attend an interview at a later date in the process, still within the pre-set interview time frames, but perhaps on the last day of interviews. This will allow as much preparation time as possible.

1. Do you offer a bespoke reasonable adjustment where candidates exhibiting the issues detailed in point 2 are given a reduced area to have to prepare/research for, i.e. provided a more restrictive scope of questions prior to the assessment or given an approximate of crime types, if a crime scenario is reviewed – being told a question relates to Group 2 Crimes, rather than the officer have to try and revise all crime areas (the result being the candidate has less areas to revise in comparison with peers without the disadvantage faced)?

1. a) As above, we do offer Reasonable Adjustments, however, we do not group crimes in terms of “Group 2 Crimes”.

1. Do you offer assessment of ability through observation in role, i.e. a candidate acts or temps within a rank and a judgement is made on whether they are competent to be promoted?

• Temporary Promotion or Acting Up: Officers may be given the opportunity to act or temporarily serve at a higher rank known as “acting up” or being placed in a temporary promotion. This allows the officer to gain experience in the role to gain experience in the role and demonstrate their capabilities in a real-world setting. However, it is important to note that acting in a role does not automatically lead to promotion and that acting up generally happens due to operational demand or covering short falls in staffing.
• NPPF Stage 4: If an officer is going through the process for promotion from the rank of Constable to Sergeant, or from Sergeant to Inspector and they are part of the NPPF process, rather than OSPRE, then candidates will complete a 12-month work-based assessment which will factor in to their suitability for a substantive promotion to either of those two ranks.
• Case by Case basis: Requests for bespoke reasonable adjustments, including observation in role as an assessment method (NPPF4) are considered on a case-by-case basis. These can be agreed between HR and the Learning and Development Team

1. Would you consider use of the above (promotion through assessment of ability through observation in role) as a bespoke reasonable adjustment?

1. a) Everybody who is successful at NPPF3 goes on to NPPF4 (subject to satisfactory HR/ER/CCU checks).

1. Does your Force utilise the NPPF, whereby officers who pass a selection sift have a temporary promotion (12 months) and a work-based assessment leading to a professional qualification in police management – with promotion taking place after this 4^th step?

1. a)  NPPF Stage 4: If an officer is going through the process for promotion from the rank of Constable to Sergeant, or from Sergeant to Inspector and they are part of the NPPF process, rather than OSPRE, then candidates will complete a 12 month work based assessment which will factor in to their suitability for a substantive promotion to either of those two ranks.

1. Where you have an Assessment Centre as part of your Promotion Process, what criteria governs scenarios or question setting?

• Alignment with the Competency and Values Framework (CVF): All questions are designed to align with the CVF relevant to the rank that they are applying to be promoted to. This ensures that the questions are directly related to the skills, behaviours and values expected of the rank they are being considered for.
• Relevance to the role: Questions may be crafted to reflect real world situations and challenges that officers are likely to encounter in the higher rank. Examples might include managing critical incidents, leading teams or making complex decisions under pressure.
• Consistency and fairness: In order to ensure fairness, all candidates are presented with scenarios and questions that are consistent in terms of scope and complexity. This means that even those who may not have had an acting or temp opportunity are not disadvantaged when it comes to assessment. The development of questions undergoes rigorous scrutiny from both HR and the Chief Officer Team to ensure that they do not inadvertently favour or disadvantage and particular group of candidates. 

1. Would you set a question within an Assessment Centre where a course would be required to answer it to a competent standard, i.e. a question on Public Order Tactics or Child Interviewing? If not, please confirm the reasons why, i.e. lack of fairness to other candidates or financial implications on training workforce in the course, etc. If yes, please explain under what circumstances this would be deemed proportionate, i.e. majority of staff would have undertaken the course, etc.

1. a) Fairness and accessibility: Generally, we would avoid setting questions that require candidates to have completed a specific course/training to answer completely, unless of course it is reasonable to assume that the majority of candidates have had an opportunity to complete said course. This approach ensures that no candidate is unfairly disadvantaged.

Having made enquiries within the Force above is all the information we hold.

The Cleveland Police response to your request is unique and it should be noted that Police Forces do not use generic systems or identical procedures to capture and record data therefore responses from Cleveland Police should not be used as a comparison with any other force response you receive.

If you are not satisfied with this response or any actions taken in dealing with your request, you have the right to request an independent internal review of your case under our review procedure. The Freedom of Information Code of Practice (see below link) states that a request for internal review should be made within 20 working days of the date on this response or 40 working days if extenuating circumstances to account for the delay can be evidenced. Public authorities are not obliged to accept internal reviews after this date.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/freedom-of-information-code-of-practice

Yours sincerely

Information Rights Decision Maker