---
title: "Operation Alabama:Response to Rise of Rough Sleeping and Related Crime and AntiSocial Behaviour withinthe London Borough of Newham"
type: "pdf"
year: "2016"
canonical: "/projects/792"
---

# Operation Alabama 

Response to rise of rough sleeping and related crime and ASB within the London Borough of Newham

Operation Alabama is a problem solving initiative led by the Anti-Social Behaviour \& Investigation Team, Enforcement \& Safety Division in Newham Council in response to an unprecedented increase in anti-social behaviour associated with rough sleeping and encampments across the borough.

The increase was attributed largely to two factors. The first being the 2014 Para \& Olympic Games put Newham and in particular Stratford on the national and international map, this brought significant positive change but with that came some challenges. The second was the growth in the level of migration into London and in particular East London from late in 2013 onwards from Central and Eastern Europe, predominately A8 nationals (CEEA). The eight eastern European States that acceded to the EU in 2004 (Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia) and joined in 2014 by Bulgaria and Romania. A minority of these individuals had difficulties being able to support themselves. This led to rough sleeping, vulnerability to exploitation, increase in substance misuse, crime and associated anti-social behaviour as they maintained a lifestyle on the fringes of the wider community.

- Operation Alabama is an excellent example of problem solving incorporating the use of the new powers provided under the ASB \& Policing Act 2014 incorporated with Immigration Legislation with specific regard to CEEA Nationals linked to asb and crime..
- It is strong demonstration of partnership working across sectors, authorities and national boundaries that delivered measurable solutions to challenging problems.
- It was an intelligence based initiative that by its conclusion established a model of working and good practice that other authorities can benefit from.
This process established a model of Integrated Offender Management as opposed to an location focused approach (Dispersal or Public Space Protection Orders). Therefore individuals were managed as opposed the location. Meaning that displacement no longer became an issue.


# Table of Contents

- [Operation Alabama](#operation-alabama)
- [SCANNAING](#scannaing)
- [What was the harm caused by the problem?](#what-was-the-harm-caused-by-the-problem)
  - [ANALYSIS](#analysis)
  - [Methods and data used for our analysis](#methods-and-data-used-for-our-analysis)
- [2. Pan London comparison of rough sleeping data](#2-pan-london-comparison-of-rough-sleeping-data)
  - [2. Crime and asb analysis](#2-crime-and-asb-analysis)
  - [2. Site investigations](#2-site-investigations)
- [4. Legislation](#4-legislation)
  - [Summary of findings from investigations](#summary-of-findings-from-investigations)
  - [Where and What](#where-and-what)
  - [Who](#who)
- [Why](#why)
  - [Key themes from Scanning \& Analysis which defined our Response](#key-themes-from-scanning-analysis-which-defined-our-response)
- [Our Scanning \& Analysis defined our Objectives.](#our-scanning-analysis-defined-our-objectives)
  - [RESPONSE](#response)
  - [All Rough Sleepers - Initial engagement during joint operations](#all-rough-sleepers-initial-engagement-during-joint-operations)
- [IOM Case Reviews](#iom-case-reviews)
  - [EAA \& UK Nationals refusing offer of support services or reconnection](#eaa-uk-nationals-refusing-offer-of-support-services-or-reconnection)
  - [Non EU with no right to remain](#non-eu-with-no-right-to-remain)
  - [SUPPORT \& INTERVENTION - SAFE JOURNEY FROM STREET](#support-intervention-safe-journey-from-street)
- [International Reconnections to home nations](#international-reconnections-to-home-nations)
  - [Accommodation. Provision of short-term accommodation to offer respite, assessment and referral.](#accommodation-provision-of-short-term-accommodation-to-offer-respite-assessment-and-referral)
  - [Mental Health, Drug \& Alcohol support referral](#mental-health-drug-alcohol-support-referral)
  - [Assessment](#assessment)
- [To reduce rough sleeping numbers in the hotspot locations by $50 \%$ in six months.](#to-reduce-rough-sleeping-numbers-in-the-hotspot-locations-by-50-in-six-months)
  - [To sustain that reduction in the hotspot locations for six months.](#to-sustain-that-reduction-in-the-hotspot-locations-for-six-months)
  - [To reduce the volume of related crime and asb in the hotspot location of Stratford town centre by $30 \%$.](#to-reduce-the-volume-of-related-crime-and-asb-in-the-hotspot-location-of-stratford-town-centre-by-30)
  - [To increase referral to health provision and supported accommodation to street homeless people by $50 \%$.](#to-increase-referral-to-health-provision-and-supported-accommodation-to-street-homeless-people-by-50)
- [To Voluntarily Reconnect 20 international individuals back to home nation.](#to-voluntarily-reconnect-20-international-individuals-back-to-home-nation)
  - [To ensure 70\% or more all rough sleepers located are assessed and enforcement action taken by ASBI Officers.](#to-ensure-70-or-more-all-rough-sleepers-located-are-assessed-and-enforcement-action-taken-by-asbi-officers)
  - [Ensure that 70\% of all rough sleepers details and ID checked by Police teams and action taken on criminal matters](#ensure-that-70-of-all-rough-sleepers-details-and-id-checked-by-police-teams-and-action-taken-on-criminal-matters)
  - [To ensure that $70 \%$ or more of rough sleepers located with suspect immigration and or border queries are brought to the attention of UK Border Agency Officers.](#to-ensure-that-70-or-more-of-rough-sleepers-located-with-suspect-immigration-and-or-border-queries-are-brought-to-the-attention-of-uk-border-agency-officers)
- [Other outcomes - Specialist Support to CEE rough sleepers](#other-outcomes-specialist-support-to-cee-rough-sleepers)
  - [Cost Reduction and savings](#cost-reduction-and-savings)
  - [Additional enforcement actions](#additional-enforcement-actions)
- [Key Partners](#key-partners)

# SCANNAING 

The problem was the discovery of an unprecedented eruption of rough sleeping across the borough and associated asb and crime. External complaints received by Newham Council from residents, visitors and local businesses increased significantly (NB chart below). In 2013 there were 112 reports of rough sleeping reports created on the Councils UNIFORM database, this increased to 215 reports in 2014, an increase of 52\% (Figure 1). This is primarily due to a strong increase in externally generated reports i.e. generated by residents. The complaints reported not just rough sleeping (in council blocks, town centres, parks, garages etc.) but also the asb and crime linked the rough sleepers (defecation, drug use and paraphernalia, theft, violence, street drinking and criminal damage). However a significant proportion also wanted something done to assist these individuals and help them from the street. The majority of these reports were associated with Stratford town centre. An area which had seen vast improvement at real risk of going backwards. Prior to 2013 the rough sleeping population of Newham had been very low. The Official Home Office annual report on rough sleeping put the total number found across the whole of Newham in 2011 at thirty eight. By 2014 this has risen to two hundred and two, an $81 \%$ increase. Newham had moved from the 16th to 8th ranking in terms of volume of rough sleepers across London.

- The increase in numbers and associated asb made local and national press with significant reputational issues for the borough:
(http://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/news/authorities powerless to move on rough sleepers blighting stratford shopping centre 13589325)
(http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/east-european-roughsleepers-invade-stratford-shopping-centre-9309832.html
- Prior to 2013 Newham's rough sleeping population had been very relatively low. The Official Home Office annual report on rough sleeping (GLA Rough sleeping reports from CHAIN http://data.london.gov.uk/dataset/chain-reports) put the total number found across the whole of Newham in 2011 at thirty eight. By 2014 this has risen to two hundred and two, an $81 \%$ increase. Newham had moved from the 16th to 8th ranking in terms of volume of rough sleepers across London.


# What was the harm caused by the problem? 

- The high visibility and number of rough sleeping presented a reputational concern for the borough. In particular in Stratford town centre where footfall of residents and visitors due to the transport hub (DLR, underground, bus, train and Eurostar services), shopping centres and the newly opened Queen Elizabeth Olympic Park could see a daily footfall rise up to 200,000 people. Westfield Stratford alone attracted over 47 million shoppers in 2012 and average of 800,000 per week (data from Retail Gazette).
- The cost to the borough was significant e.g. the cost of resolving and clearing one large encampment could amount to $£ 7,000$ in terms of Officer time and clearance.
- There were the associated increases in crime (in relation to drugs use, alcohol related violence, shoplifting and scrap metal theft) and complaints of asb (large numbers of public space rough sleeping, increase in squats, encampments in open spaces and by highways, increased street activity such as begging and drinking).
- There were concerns that we did not know the background of these people, what their demographics, nationalities, support needs, why they were homeless or how many there actually were. We did as part of the scanning process (i.e. from reports received and information provided by partner agencies) that a significant number were not UK nationals but recent migrants from Central \& Eastern Europe and possibly wider.
- There were safe guarding concerns that many individuals could be vulnerable and needed to be assessed and linked to appropriate services. As a Local Authority Newham had a statutory responsibility to investigate and assist.
- There are potential public health risks with many rough sleepers more prone to health related issues (e.g. TB where new ham has a higher rate perperson than both Rwanda and Iraq). The high volume defecation, urination and the volume of discarded drug related needles had concerns to the wider public as well cost to the borough to maintain these areas.


## ANALYSIS

## Methods and data used for our analysis

We needed develop methods to confirm if the reports being received reflected actual numbers on the ground. We then needed to clarify why and where this was happening, who these people were and when this was taking place to fully understand if we had an unusual short term spike that could be resolved by enforcement or did we have an

emerging complex problem requiring a longer term interventions. We developed a series of timely, cost effective and SMART processes to gather accurate sources of data for our analysis:

1. Snap shot via CCTV - We began by initiating a snap shot covering late evenings for three consecutive weeks in November and December 2013. This was done in the initial hotspot location (Stratford Town Centre) where most of the complaints were centred, A partner organisation (Saville's Security in Stratford shopping centre) who managed a 24 hour CCTV coverage of the inside vicinity of the shopping were asked to make regular counts of numbers and asb incidents witnessed during this period. The numbers were significant and concerning:

- This confirmed that over the three week period 660 individual rough sleeping sightings were confirmed in this location.
- That numbers were ranging from 25 to 40 individuals a night.
- It confirmed 23 public defecations and 16 incidents in which groups or individual rough sleepers were seen using A class drugs in the shopping centre.
- The groups also were witnessed breaching the borough Designated Public Protection Order (street drinking ban) on 86 occasions.


# 2. Pan London comparison of rough sleeping data 

We made reference to the Official Home Office rough sleeping recording system CHAIN produced Annual Reports that defined each boroughs official count. It confirmed that prior to 2013 Newham's rough sleeping population had been very relatively low. However by 2013 Newham had moved from the 16th to 8th ranking in terms of volume of rough sleepers across London..

## 2. Crime and asb analysis

We had prior reference from complaints by residents and this was supported by increased reports from partner agencies witnessing higher volumes of asb and crime linked to the rough sleepers i.e. begging, street drinking, and drug use. There were also allegations of violence between the rough sleepers. However as these went largely unreported and therefore hard to define.

To get a sense of the impact we looked at crime and ASB data (from www.police.uk website) with a focus on crime types most reported to us in that hotspot of Stratford that were most linked to the rough sleepers in Stratford town centre i.e. shoplifting and drug (as it was clear from the Saville snap shot that significant A Class drug use was linked his group). The findings below confirmed a significant increase of which some could be attributed to the increased numbers of rough sleepers.

## 2. Site investigations

We began in December 2012 to January 2014 to follow up on reports received from Savilles (in Stratford town centre) from other locations received from residents. We visited sites reported by other partners (Police and Highways) and other Council Officers (from housing, cleansing, street scene enforcement etc.) who had been tasked in November 2013 to look for and report back rough sleeping sites across the borough. In early December 2014 we then began a series of late night joint patrols by Council

Officers (from the ASB Team) and council funded Police Teams to follow up on these reports. The purpose was to find out who, where and why these individuals were here.

# 4. Legislation 

We undertook research in what authority we had to enforce on this type of problem. The ASB Act 2003 provided a range of powers (Warning Letters, Acceptable Behaviour Contracts, ASBOs etc) if we could verify associated asb. However we felt this need to be accompanied by an offer of support. With the advent of the new ASB, Crime \& Police Act in 2014 the process of using Community Protection Orders made the process more streamlined.

We discussed with UK Border Agency who confirmed any Immigration over stayers could be processed but confirmed that CEEA nationals unable to support themselves, who were homeless, unemployed and identified with asb and or crime could be subject to checks and possible removal back to home nation.

- Those found rough sleeping could be served MTR letters ( a warning letter/request for information to establish subject's immigration status) with a timeline to provide at a specified location.
- If found again they were then served the formal Notice to a Person Liable to Removal (IS151A/EEA) directed by virtue of regulations 19(3)(a) and 24(2) relating to a person in respect of whom removal directions may be given in accordance with section 10 of the Immigration and Asylum Act 1999 as: a person who does not have or has ceased to have a right to reside under the Immigration (European Economic Area) Regulations 2006.
- If not complied with individuals would be detained subject to removal back to home nations.


## Summary of findings from investigations

## Where and What

- Confirmed the significant hotspot in Stratford of numbers up to 50 per night seven days a week.
- We found large established tented encampments in numerous wooded areas and adjacent to large motorways. Hosting up to 15 individual and tents.
- We found numerous garages occupied and converted for domestic use by individuals and groups.
- We Individuals were found in tower blocks, bin sheds and parks
- We found groups in abandoned buildings
- All the sites were unhygienic and dangerous. They were heavily fly tipped, contained drug paraphernalia (needles) and contaminated with human faeces. This had significant health implications as well as cost for clearance.


## Who

- $20 \%$ and less of all rough sleepers found were UK nationals with recourse to public funds. They all had a varying degree of vulnerability(mental health, learning difficulties and substance misuse).
- However the majority (up to 60\%) were recently arrived migrants from Central \& Eastern Europe and most unable to communicate in English and unwilling to engage with Officers.
- Many arrived with aspirations of successful migration and having failed to achieve that had become homeless and destitute. They arrived with or developed an

increasingly chaotic substance dependency (drug and/or alcohol). Many then resorted to asb and criminal activities to support their lifestyles. Significantly there were language barrier issues with most speaking little or no English.

- It was clear also that within this group there were potential breaches of UK border regulations that needed to be investigated, that large numbers of individuals could be using this lifestyle could have outstanding warrants both in the UK and abroad. These individuals could posed possible serious threats to others.
- It was clear that many could be assisted to return voluntarily back to their country of origin but there was recognition that the language barriers, support issues and a lack of knowledge of how to encourage individuals to accept this needed to be overcome.


# Why 

- Newham and in particular Stratford (with its multi transport hub) had a greater nationally and internationally recognition post the 2012 game as such became a destination that attractive both positive and negative communities.
- Most of the CEEA rough sleepers confirmed that they arrived using buses from their host nations that transported people as well as goods from CEEA countries. These buses dropping points were in a number of locations in Newham (Stratford, Plaistow and High Street North).Individuals then tended to remain localised where arrived. They quickly developed links with the existing CEEA nationals in the borough.
- Newham has historically been a first point of arrival for new migrants to the UK. As a result it has become recently one of the focal areas for newly arrived CEEA nationals. While the significant majority establish themselves within the community, find employment and housing a small minority fail and become destitute. Primarily as they have badly planned and resourced their migration. Another minority specifically from Romania come with the implicit intention of working illegally for short periods with the intention of rough sleeping and then return home.
- The rough sleepers are sustained by a thriving employment black market within East London with key locations providing daily pick up in key locations in Newham. Most then provide cash in hand employment. There are significant scrap metal business in the south of the borough and this also provided others with another source of income by finding and sell from scrap metal.
- Their substance misuse (drug and alcohol) is a supported by a significant drug supply and demand in the borough as well as licence premises selling high strength alcohol at low prices (in particular alcohol brands familiar to EAA nationals),


## Key themes from Scanning \& Analysis which defined our Response

- It was clear that we had a significant problem in the borough that was complex and required a multi agency approach.
- It was clear that we needed to be innovative in our approach as enforcement on its own (i.e. moving individuals on, dispersal zone etc.) were not a sustainable solution.
- It was clear that a prevention and support process (which would provide long term solutions by taking people off the streets) needed to be backed up by an escalating enforcement to encourage and push people towards prevention.
- It was clear we need to find a process to identify and intervene early. The longer people remained o the street the more entrenched they became (making them unwilling to accept services) the more acute their support needs became and the cost of clearing sites increased to the increased accumulation (fly tips, sanitation, people etc.).
- It was clear that we did not have the expertise to provide the prevention model and a specialist outreach service was required that did not currently exist in the borough.

- Due to condition of the sites we needed to involve other Council Departments in removal and cleansing of sites
- It was clear from the demographics that street assessment of substance misuse and mental health issues was needed and we needed to involve key agencies
- It was clear we did not have the skills set and resources to engage or understand this CEE group. That we needed approaches both in Newham but perhaps we other boroughs as well as in CEE countries to address this.
- It became apparent that Police teams and UK Border Agency needed to be involved and a key partner in the process.
- It was clear that dealing with black market employment and the transportation of individuals across national borders (i.e. the numerous busses arriving and bring arrivals into the borough) was beyond the scope of this project


# Our Scanning \& Analysis defined our Objectives. 

1. To reduce sleeping numbers in the hotspot locations of Stratford Town Centre by $50 \%$ within six months.
2. To sustain that reduction for a further six months.
3. To reduce the volume of related crime and ASB in the hotspot location of Stratford town centre by $30 \%$.
4. To increase referral to health provision and supported accomdation to street homeless people by $50 \%$.
5. To Voluntarily reconnect 20 individuals back to home nation.
6. To ensure $70 \%$ or more all rough sleepers located are assessed and enforcement action taken by ASBI officers.
7. Ensure that $70 \%$ of all rough sleepers details and ID checked by police teams and action taken on criminal matters.
8. To ensure that $70 \%$ or more of rough sleepers located with suspect immigration and or border queries are brought to the attention of UK Border Agency Officers. 9. Reduce the cost to the borough in managing this problem

To put in place a communication strategy to reduce the negative impact on the borough reputations

## RESPONSE

## All Rough Sleepers - Initial engagement during joint operations

Bi-weekly joint agency night time operations from (22.00). Supplemented by ThamesReach outreach patrols and a weekly early morning (04.00) operation by LBN ASB Team and ThamesReach.

Police Teams to confirm Identification and undertake relevant checks on systems. Details of DOB, prior address, gender and nationality to be confirmed. Police Teams to check for outstanding warrants and to take action on any criminal activity witnessed during operations. Individual to be removed from site

ThamesReach Worker to assess and make aware of services available with regards to support and accommodation. To assist in translation for other services.

CRI Worker to assess and make aware of drug \& alcohol services available

ASB Officers to serve ASB Warning Letter/Community Protection Warning to all rough sleepers on first sighting. Photograph taken. Details entered into Database.

UK Border Agency to be signposted to individuals with possible immigration status or EEA nationality. To be assessed, checks made and relevant action taken dependant on circumstances

If not an encampment or physical structure require notice to dismantle and remove then individual(s) to be removed from location with immediate effect.

# IOM Case Reviews 

Regular bi-weekly multi-agency enforcement operations led by Enforcement Manager ASB Investigations on key locations Individuals refusing offer of services and continuing street lifestyle will be case managed via the two weekly Case Management Meeting. Rough Sleeper Database to be updated

If individual willing to take offer of support (hostel, treatment) or voluntary international reconnection then no further enforcement action taken and individual case managed via the Prevention Route.

## EAA \& UK Nationals refusing offer of support services or reconnection

If initial Warning Letter or Community Protection Warning breached then ABC offered or Community Protection Notice served. If breached then ASBO or Injunctions to be initiated with a focus on area exclusion

UKBA to lead processing. To be served if relevant MTR or IS.151A EEA and possible deportation of individuals in breach. To be supported by Operation Alabama partners by providing evidence of criminal activity, homelessness and lack of means to support.

Locations were then signposted to Council Cleansing Teams and other services to secure and clear the locations

Individual and sites revisited on a regular basis

## Non EU with no right to remain

Police Teams and UK Border Agency to assess and detain. Decision on their immigration status to be determined with probable deportation.

## SUPPORT \& INTERVENTION - SAFE JOURNEY FROM STREET

Prevention services (Outreach worker, Community mental health team, Drug \& alcohol teams, Refugee support) where tasked to undertake street assessments. If the individual has the right to remain, recourse to public funds and/or willing to engage then prevention route will be undertaken.

# International Reconnections to home nations 

Offer of reconnection to home nations with regard to voluntary return to be made by all by Outreach Worker. ID, transportation and provision of support services (substance misuse treatment) and family connection to be made Individual to be hand held back home and handed over to relevant support on arrival...

## Accommodation. Provision of short-term accommodation to offer respite, assessment and referral.

Outreach to verify on CHAIN (Home Office National Rough Sleeper Database) sleeper through other hostel provision in or out of borough
Referred to pan London hostel accommodation (No Second Night Out) Anchor House or assist with rent deposit for private rented.
Referred to Homeless Options unit if meets local homeless criteria for temporary accommodation placement or specialist hostel accommodation

## Mental Health, Drug \& Alcohol support referral

Community Mental Health Teams to assist in street assessments and Sectioning where relevant. Support and provision in hospital and referral to HPU for temporary accommodation and assessment on discharge.
ASL or CRI for assessment and possible provision of treatment.
Allocated worker who will work jointly with Outreach Worker on case management

## Assessment

Operation Alabama has been a success in Newham and continues to do so. The initial project was scheduled to last 12 months from January 2015. However due to its outcomes additional CDRP Funding extended this May 2015. Following a full Evaluation Report in 2015, publicity received locally as well as recognition from other London boroughs and the GLA, Newham Adult Services Commissioners provided funding for the Outreach component to be receive mainstream funding until April 2016. Newham's Homeless Strategy now incorporates and builds on the model developed under Operation Alabama. This perhaps is the key legacy and a significant achievement and recognition in the light of local authority budgetary concerns.

The key element of its success were:

- The right partners fully engaged with the project who were willing to think out of the box, try new innovative processes, work unconventional hours and in difficult locations.
- A clear intelligence led approach that defined the enabled us to define an effective Response that was responsive and flexible to the nature of the problem.
- The innovative bespoke Outreach Service and the recruitment of a CEE national which enable to achieve the significant prevention outcomes.
- The use of the full range of partnership enforcement powers, including the incorporation of new legislation.
- Measureable and SMART targets that were delivered.

# To reduce rough sleeping numbers in the hotspot locations by $50 \%$ in six months. 

## To sustain that reduction in the hotspot locations for six months.

- Between January 2014 and June 2015 Operation Alabama identified, assessed and developed joint interventions for 300 rough sleepers. NB these were not repeat counts of individuals found in different locations but the actual number of individuals located.
- In 2014 bi weekly joint operations were targeted in all locations commencing at 22.00 until 03.00.. In February 2015 an additional weekly early morning operation (04.00) was introduced to target early identification and intervention on sites.
- By August 2014 Operation Alabama had reduced rough sleeping numbers in the hot spot location of Stratford Town Centre by $98 \%$. 145 individuals were located at this locations during this period with up to 50 individuals a night, seven days a week. By August this had been reduced to less than 3 a night on random nights. There have been no complaints received regarding rough sleeping in the locality since June 2014. By June 2015 a further 76 sites and 155 rough sleepers had been located across the borough outside of the Stratford area. All sites were cleared and individuals processed. This included 20 garages; 15 derelict buildings, 30 park and open space locations and 11 large encampments in wooded areas. This included a large underground tunnel/encampment found under Stratford shopping centre and Great Eastern Road.


## To reduce the volume of related crime and asb in the hotspot location of Stratford town centre by $30 \%$.

- Reduction in crime and asb associated to rough sleeping in Stratford town centre in October - Jan comparison to 2013/2014. There was a $37 \%$ decrease in shoplifting and $29 \%$ decrease in drug related arrests in the hotspot location.
The partnership placed this reduction in terms of the corresponding reduction in overall in rough sleeping numbers due to the interventions undertaken since January 2015 supported by the enforcement action taken by agencies.


## To increase referral to health provision and supported accommodation to street homeless people by $50 \%$.

- Prior to Operation Alabama there were no records to referrals from Newham to pan London homeless hostels e.g. No Second Night Out..
- From April 2014 onwards the Commissioned Outreach Service moved a total of 129 individuals ( $43 \%$ ) safety moved from the street into various hostel and other accommodation. Meaning a long term solution to the visible rough sleeping and asb could be achieved. This in reality achieved a 100\% objective delivery.
- 36 were referred to drug \& alcohol services with 15 undertaking treatment; 10 received joint street assessment with the LBN Community Mental Health Team leading to 7 involuntary sectioning under the Mental Health Act 1983 \& 2007. These individuals on discharge were referred to Newham HPU and assisted into accommodation).
- A victim of sexual exploitation was located in a garage and supported into accommodation. Evidence obtained regarding perpetrators.
A victim of trafficking was located in an encampment and assisted to appropriate services and support.

# To Voluntarily Reconnect 20 international individuals back to home nation. 

- 15 individuals have to date accepted and completed a return to home nations and assisted with access to treatment, support and family reconciliation (5 to Poland, 4 Lithuania, 3 Bulgaria, 1 Latvia, 1 Denmark). Key to this is the provision of a bespoke Outreach Service with the linguistic and cultural understanding to build relationships with this client group.
We are engaged with a significant number who are expressing a desire to take up this offer and this work will continue.


## To ensure 70\% or more all rough sleepers located are assessed and enforcement action taken by ASBI Officers.

- All 300 rough sleepers found were interviewed and assessed by ASBI Officers on joint partnership patrols.
- 121 individuals were served ASB Warning letters (under the ASB Act 2003) by the LBN ASB Team
- 64 individuals ( $53 \%$ of the 121) served ASB warning letter by LBN staff were not seen in the area again. The operation focus in Stratford Town Centre confirmed that a proportion if individuals (approx. $25 \%$ were not street homeless but used the location to take drugs, drink and then sleep in the area. Another 10\% were employed and used the location occasionally as way of not paying rent. The Warning Letters and the Community Protection Warnings were an effective way of removing them from the location,
- From October 2014 when the new ASB, Crime \& Policing Act 2014 came into effect 111 were served Community Protection Warnings. 70 Community Protection Notices served for breaches.
One Injunction was achieved banning a rough sleeper who refused all offers of support.


## Ensure that 70\% of all rough sleepers details and ID checked by Police teams and action taken on criminal matters

- 185 (61\%) individuals had relevant checks undertaken by Police Teams during the Alabama joint operations. This was completed predominantly by Police Officers funded by Newham Council. However they were supported by Neighbourhood Policing Officers on occasion.
- The target was not achieved as some of the rough sleepers found and were not part of the joint operations but were located by the Outreach Post undertaking independent patrols at different times.
20 arrests were achieved for a variety of offences during joint operations - breach of bail and outstanding warrant issues.


## To ensure that $70 \%$ or more of rough sleepers located with suspect immigration and or border queries are brought to the attention of UK Border Agency Officers.

- All EEA and non EU nationals located on joint patrols were passed over to UK Border Agency Officers on joint patrols. This enabled us to achieve a 100\% target.
- In total 45 MTR letters served on homeless EEA/A8 nationals providing them a timeline to provide proof of being able to support themselves.

- 41 IS151A/EEA served which is the second stage for individuals who failed to provide proof from previous MTR serving.
- 10 Detentions to individuals either non EU immigration over stayers or failure to meet conditions of IS 151A/EEA
7 Removals (2 Voluntary Departures).

To put in place a communication strategy to reduce the negative impact on the borough reputations

- Regular monthly briefings were provided to local Cllrs, Council Departments and partner agencies to ensure that the work being undertaken to address the problem was known and passed on to communities.
- Newham Council press team ensured that positive reports went into local media. http://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/news/features/mayor sir robin wales tackles the problems of rough sleeping and street drinking on our streets 13286501 http://www.newhamrecorder.co.uk/news/newham council cracks down on stratford ro ugh sleepers 13253388


# Other outcomes - Specialist Support to CEE rough sleepers 

- Of the 300 rough sleepers found 165 were from CEE countries justifying the bespoke Outreach Service. This enabled us to converse as well as develop interventions for this client group.
- This included establishment of referral and access to treatment for Voluntary Reconnections in home CEE nations. Quality of the free treatment in Poland, Latvia and Lithuania are of a very high standard. Project team met with service providers from CEE treatment centres at a Conference organised by ThamesReach and links


## Cost Reduction and savings

Reduction in cost of site clearance. Site clearance of encampments in wooded areas amounted to $£ 7000$ at the start of the operation and reduced to $£ 1000$ at the end. Cost reduced at sites were located earlier reducing the volume of debris to be cleared and Cleansing Services became more operationally effective.

- Huge savings to the public purse - estimated to be in the
- region of a quarter of a million pounds - by reduced admissions to A\&E, use of GP services and
- emergency call outs for ambulance services and the fire brigade. Police call outs are also down
where the reconnection teams operate with accompanying savings for the criminal justice system.


## Additional enforcement actions

ASBI Officers using the ASB, Crime and Policing Act 2014 targeted daytime gatherings of large groups of street drinkers in the borough and begging hotspots who it emerged were predominately CEE nationals. 80 CP Warnings for street drinking and for 5 for begging were achieved re-informing the zero tolerance on street asb.

# Key Partners 

Nick Bracken (London Borough of Newham)
Al Thomas (London Borough of Newham)
David Johnson (London Borough of Newham)
Inspector Philip Stinger Metropolitan Police
John Bernthal Home office immigration enforcement
Marek Plawik (Thames Reach)
Submission by
Andrew Montague
Police Sergeant Enforcement Partnership Team
Forest Gate police station
350-360 Romford Road
Forest Gate
London
England
E7 8BS
07583018544
Andrew.montague@met.pnn.police.uk