Link neighbourhood safety priorities to measured results

The problem and who is affected

Police recorded 24,305 crimes in Portsmouth in the year to June 2026, 113.4 per 1,000 residents, similar to comparable cities but well above England. Some crimes, such as robbery, rose sharply in a year. In the council's 2026 survey, 77% of residents had seen or experienced anti-social behaviour, yet fewer than a quarter of incidents were reported. Partners do not publish which local problems they are working on or whether they improved.

Who is affected: Residents, workers and visitors in the city centre, Somerstown and Buckland, where people most often feel unsafe; women, disabled people, younger adults and ethnic minority residents, who report more fear or victimisation; repeat victims; and businesses facing shop theft.

What this would change

Aim: Tackle the specific local problems that harm residents most, with police, council, partners and residents agreeing what they are trying to change and checking whether it worked.

What success would mean: For each chosen problem, a measured fall in harm on a matched category and place over a sustained period, fewer repeat victims or locations, and residents reporting more confidence that reports lead to action. No numeric target is set until local baselines are agreed.

Use the partnership's existing 4-weekly place-based meeting to run a small number of problem-solving projects each year. For each: define the problem with matched categories and geography; analyse recorded crime, Police.uk data, council ASB records and survey results; choose a response (patrols, design changes, lighting, support or enforcement); set a review date; and publish a short public summary of the problem, actions and results. Add a 'you said, we did' feedback route so residents see what happened after reporting.

Proposed lead: Safer Portsmouth Partnership (proposal; not agreed). Partners: Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary (Portsmouth neighbourhood teams), Portsmouth City Council community safety and Safe, Clean & Tidy teams, Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (until 2028 changes), Portsmouth City Council Public Health Intelligence Team, Residents' groups, businesses and Neighbourhood Watch, Housing providers and support services.

Powers: The council and police, as responsible authorities, must form a partnership strategy to reduce crime, disorder and anti-social behaviour (Crime and Disorder Act 1998 s.6) and must consider crime effects in all their work (s.17). Victims can request an ASB case review (Anti-social Behaviour, Crime and Policing Act 2014 s.104). Police deployment is a matter for the Chief Constable; the PCC sets the police and crime plan until 2028. The partnership cannot direct police operations or publish personal data.

Options

• Current approach: Current approach. The 2025-2028 plan focuses on violence, drug harm, young people and complex needs. Places of concern are reviewed every four weeks but results are not published.
• Proposed response: Published problem-solving projects. A few defined local problems each year, each with matched data, an agreed response, a review date and a public summary of results.
• Alternative: Visibility-led approach. Concentrate extra patrols and named officers in places where people feel unsafe. Supports reassurance but may not reduce harm without problem analysis.
• Alternative: Public dashboard only. Publish matched crime, ASB and survey data by area without changing how problems are chosen. Low cost but does not ensure action.

The choice depends on partner capacity, data sharing and what the problem analysis shows. Evidence summarised by the Home Office supports combining visible presence, engagement and problem-solving, but the right mix for each Portsmouth problem is unknown.

Delivery plan

A first practical step: The partnership's analysts could set out, for one place already discussed at the 4-weekly meeting, the matched crime categories, Police.uk data and survey findings side by side, with their limits. This uses existing data and commits no agency to new action.

Costs and funding

One-off costs

Not costed. Analyst time to set up matched data and privacy rules.

Recurring costs

Not costed. Analyst and officer time per project; any extra patrols, lighting or design work.

Capital or revenue

Mainly revenue; physical changes such as lighting would be capital.

Funding status

No funding identified. Existing police deployment and council services are funded separately; this plan does not assume new money.

Affordability

Unknown. Depends on spare analytical and officer capacity, which is not published.

Costing still needed

Estimate analyst days per project; record officer and council time spent; price any physical changes; separate existing deployment from new spending.

Benefits, risks and trade-offs

Possible benefits: Clearer focus on the problems residents care about, better use of existing staff, and public evidence of what works. Benefits are not quantified.

Risks:

• More patrols or reporting raise recorded crime and ASB, which could be misread as failure.
• Problems move to nearby streets.
• Published local data could identify victims or suspects.
• Enforcement-led responses fall unevenly on young people or minority groups.
• Partners lack capacity to sustain the work.
• Police governance changes in 2028 disrupt arrangements.

Who could gain or lose: Residents in the areas where people feel least safe, women, disabled people and repeat victims could gain most. Young people and people with complex needs could lose if responses rely on enforcement rather than support. Residents of quieter areas may see less attention.

Capacity: Depends on the Public Health Intelligence Team, police analysts and neighbourhood officers. Their capacity is not published. The partnership already runs several statutory reviews and panels.

How to judge progress

Reassess when: Reassess after the first project reviews, when the next strategic assessment is published, or when police governance changes in 2028.

Where things stand

What is known:

• Police recorded 24,305 crimes in the year to June 2026, a rate similar to comparable cities.
• Residents report high exposure to ASB and low reporting.
• The partnership plan runs from 2025 to 2028.
• PCCs are due to be abolished in 2028.

What is not known:

• Local repeat-victimisation rates.
• What the 4-weekly place meeting has achieved.
• Local tool and van theft levels.
• Whether outcomes data exist at Portsmouth level.
• Whether a strategic assessment newer than 2023/24 exists.

Decisions needed:

• Whether the partnership will publish project summaries.
• Which problems to tackle first.
• What data police and council will share and publish.

Existing work:

• Safer Portsmouth Partnership Community Safety Plan 2025-2028: Current (as of 2026-11-02).
• 4-weekly Community Tactical Coordination Group (places of concern): Operating, per partnership page (as of 2026-11-02).
• Portsmouth Community Safety Survey 2026: Published May 2026 (as of 2026-11-02).
• Police and Crime Plan 2024-28 (More Police, Safer Streets 2): Current (as of 2026-11-02).
• Neighbourhood Policing Guarantee: National programme; force ASB plans published by April 2026 (as of 2026-11-02).

UK Facts context: Antisocial behaviour: experience, perception, response (National page; local action is set by Portsmouth partners.) · Crime by type, area by area (National comparison page.)

Next review: When ONS publishes crime data for the year to September 2026, or when the partnership publishes a new strategic assessment.. Evidence last checked 2026-11-02.

Sources

Where earlier ideas went

• neighbourhood-safety (earlier 12-point plan): expanded. Whole action: now/next/longer-term steps became the delivery table; measures (matched categories, repeat victimisation, outcomes, resident experience) became the evaluation table; trade-offs moved to risks; Police.uk caveats kept in baselines and claims.