Written by Barnaby Prince Police Community Support Officer at Lincolnshire Police Dementia Safeguarding Lead & Member of the force Safeguarding Network Police lead for the Atlantis Alliance – Collaborative Coastal Working Every summer, the Lincolnshire coastline attracts millions of visitors. Families arrive for rest, recreation, and connection but behind the scenes, policing, rescue and community services prepare for intense demand, heightened risk, and devastating consequences if things go wrong. This blog tells the story of Operation ATLANTIS, a multi‑agency, evidence‑led response to missing children on Lincolnshire beaches. It is not a story of a single intervention or a “silver bullet”. Instead, it is a practical example of how evidence‑based policing, structured problem solving, and true partnership working can reduce harm, save lives, and deliver real value for policing and the public. The Catalyst: Why Change Was Necessary In August 2022, a child was reported missing on the Lincolnshire coast. A large‑scale multi‑agency search was launched. After five hours, the child was tragically located in the water and pronounced dead at the scene. No agency failed. Every service responded professionally and with commitment. Yet the incident exposed a difficult truth: the system was almost entirely reactive. That moment became the catalyst for change. SCAN: Understanding the True Scale of Harm Following the 2022 season, neighbourhood teams at Mablethorpe and Skegness conducted a detailed review with partner agencies. What the data revealed Police systems recorded 22 lost or missing children from beaches. RNLI lifeguard data recorded 56 reports, including 39 multi‑agency searches. On the day of the fatal incident, officers recalled around 10 missing children, yet only four were formally logged. The conclusion was clear but uncomfortable: despite best efforts, policing did not fully understand the scale or nature of the problem. Patterns emerged even within incomplete data: Two consistent hotspots: Skegness Central Beach and Mablethorpe Central Beach Peak risk hours between 1300–1900, with highest risk 1600–1900 All children were under 13, non‑local, and visiting the county National RNLI data confirmed this was not unique, Skegness consistently ranked among the busiest beaches nationally for multi‑agency missing‑child searches. ANALYSE: Why Was This Happening? Partner analysis and frontline debriefs identified multiple contributory factors: Lost‑child searches are extremely resource‑intensive, often pulling officers from core policing duties Officers were deployed close to water without appropriate rescue equipment Preventative engagement was minimal and largely shouldered by policing alone Agencies routinely worked in parallel rather than together Communication relied on separate radio systems, creating risk during live incidents The working hypothesis was that children became lost due to: Crowd density and spatial disorientation Lack of local knowledge “Holiday psychology” - a perception that beaches feel inherently safe Across all findings, one gap stood out: prevention. RESPOND: Operation ATLANTIS Using the SARA problem‑solving model, partners redesigned their approach from the ground up. Building the Alliance Agencies brought together included: Lincolnshire Police RNLI Lifeguards and Lifeboats HM Coastguard National Coastwatch Local councils Holiday parks and community businesses Joint training, tabletop exercises, and honest debriefs clarified roles, formalised shared objectives, and embedded daily points of contact. A Visible, Preventative Model The Sandi Starfish wristband scheme became central: Free wristbands for children and vulnerable adults Highly visible safe‑point flags staffed by trained partners Distribution by police, lifeguards, Coastwatch, businesses and holiday parks Children knew where to go. Adults knew what to do. Prevention became everyone’s responsibility. Smarter Responses On operational days: Teams staffed hotspots between 1100–1900 Every incident logged via police CAD and a shared missing‑child log Single points of contact coordinated searches Early dynamic risk assessments prevented escalation In 2024, partners trialled shared Airwave and VHF communications, significantly improving live incident coordination. An anonymous staff survey later showed 79.16% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the radio trial had a positive impact on their work. ASSESS: What Changed? Across 2023–2025, the results were clear: 96% reduction in reports of lost and missing children Minimum policing savings of £85,000 This saving was calculated using national average investigation costs: Low/medium risk incidents: £2,500 High‑risk incidents: £8,500 Based on reduced demand, this equated to: £72,500 saved between 2022/23 £12,500 saved between 2023/24 Additional outcomes included: 607 recorded staff engagement hours across 44 days in hotspot areas 22,000 pieces of crime‑prevention and water‑safety literature distributed Frontline and partner feedback echoed these findings: “In my 15 years with the RNLI, this is the closest I’ve seen our organisations work together and it’s translated directly into better outcomes.” An independent review by Lincoln University corroborated the findings and the evaluation report can be provided on request. Learning Forward Success did not end the learning cycle. New risks emerged including paddleboards drifting, weaver fish injuries, and UXO washing ashore, all now addressed through partnership planning. Future priorities include: Reaching families before they travel Better data capture on public engagement Joint, synchronised media messaging Expanding interactive engagement methods Continuing regular multi‑agency debriefs year‑round Why This Matters Operation ATLANTIS demonstrates that: a tested approach (POP) can be practically applied Prevention saves lives, money, and wellbeing Collaboration requires structure, trust and accountability The SARA model is not abstract - it is deeply practical Most importantly, it shows that complex safeguarding problems cannot be solved by policing alone. If there is one question this project leaves for all of us, it is this: “What are we only reacting to that we could prevent together?”

Here are the studies we found this month that may be worth your attention. As ever, if you spotted something we missed, let us know and we'll add it into the next brief. TL;DR Summary Strip searches in police custody and ethnicity Black detainees face significantly higher odds of being strip-searched in custody, even after controlling for offence type, vulnerability and use of force. What shapes police officers' attitudes toward AI-assisted policing Organisational justice and supervisory support significantly shape whether officers accept AI tools. A community policing communication field experiment A brief collaborative message during door-to-door visits significantly improved citizen perceptions and reporting intentions. School exclusion, missing children and serious harm School exclusion, exploitation and missing incidents frequently overlap in the most seriously harmed child cases. Automated feedback and AI body-worn camera review Automated positive feedback emails improved officers' acceptance of AI-driven body-worn camera review. Strip searches in police custody and their association with ethnicity: evidence from an English force Authors: Ali and Dymond Criminology and Criminal Justice Study design: Quantitative analysis of administrative custody data (binary logistic regression, N=25,676) Setting: England and Wales Summary: Using four years of custody records from an English force, this study finds that Black detainees face over twice the odds of being strip-searched compared to White detainees, even after controlling for offence type, vulnerability indicators and use of force. Black men and Black children face disproportionately higher odds than either characteristic alone would predict, providing evidence of racialised policing in the custody suite. You'll be interested if: you work in custody, equality, professional standards, inspection or research, or if you are responsible for ensuring policing is fair and lawful. Relevant to all forces given proposed PACE Code C changes. What shapes police officers' attitudes toward AI-assisted policing Authors: Jian, Sun, Wu et al Journal of Experimental Criminology Study design: Vignette experiment Setting: Taiwan Summary: This vignette experiment tests what contextual factors shape police officers' willingness to accept AI-assisted tools. It finds that organisational justice, supervisory support, and the perceived purpose of the AI system all significantly influence officer attitudes. Officers are more accepting when they believe the technology supports rather than replaces professional judgement. You'll be interested if: you are implementing AI tools in a force, leading technology change, or researching the human side of AI adoption in policing. How police communication influences citizen perceptions and cooperation: a community policing field experiment Authors: Canales and Santini Journal of Experimental Criminology Study design: Randomised field experiment (N=980 households) Setting: Mexico Summary: Officers conducting door-to-door visits were randomly assigned to vary their uniform type and whether they delivered a brief collaborative safety message. The message condition significantly improved citizen perceptions of police and their willingness to report crime. Uniform type alone had little effect. Findings support procedural justice theory and suggest low-cost communication changes can meaningfully improve public cooperation. You'll be interested if: you work in neighbourhood policing, community engagement or public confidence. Note: Mexican context. School exclusion, missing children and serious harm: disentangling the interlinking factors Authors: Fox CrimRxiv (preprint — not yet peer reviewed) Study design: Mixed-methods analysis of Child Safeguarding Practice Reviews using machine learning-assisted content analysis Setting: UK Summary: This preprint analyses Child Safeguarding Practice Reviews to examine how school exclusion, missing child incidents and exploitation co-occur in the most seriously harmed cases. Findings show these factors frequently intersect, with exclusion functioning as both a vulnerability indicator and a pathway to further harm. Uses accessible machine learning methods to analyse sensitive text data at scale. You'll be interested if: you work in child protection, exploitation, vulnerability, or multi-agency safeguarding. Also relevant for those interested in how AI-assisted text analysis can support research with sensitive case review data. Automated feedback and the acceptability of AI-generated body-worn camera review: an implementation science natural experiment Authors: Watts, del Pozo, White and Malm Journal of Experimental Criminology Study design: Natural implementation science experiment (within context of two randomised controlled trials) Setting: United States Summary: Automated emails highlighting positive professionalism scores from AI-driven body-worn camera analysis were associated with significantly improved officer acceptance of the technology. This is the first implementation science study in a police setting and finds that feedback design, not just tool validity, matters for successful adoption. You'll be interested if: you are implementing body-worn camera AI, leading technology adoption, or interested in what implementation science can offer to evidence-based policing.

SEBP is pleased to highlight an important update from the All‑Wales Policing Academic Collaboration (AWPAC) - a partnership that exemplifies what can be achieved when policing and academia work side by side with a shared purpose. In a recent reflection, Temporary Assistant Chief Constable Ross Evans, Co‑Chair of AWPAC, set out the scale of progress made across Wales and the growing impact of collaborative, practice‑focused research. His message is clear: Wales has built something genuinely pioneering, and its momentum must continue. Where policing meets research: Transformative impact across Wales By Temporary Assistant Chief Constable Ross Evans, Co-Chair of AWPAC "As I prepare to step down from my role as co-chair of the All-Wales Policing Academic Collaboration (AWPAC), I’ve been reflecting on just how far we have come - and how vital it is that this work continues to grow. What began as a shared ambition to strengthen ties between policing and academia in Wales has evolved into the nation’s first collaboration of its kind: a nationally recognised model of evidence‑based partnership that is shaping practice, policy, and future research capacity across the country. AWPAC’s core purpose has always been clear: to bring policing and academia together to advance evidence-based change and ultimately keep our communities safer. Brought together by the Wales Innovation Network (WIN), and supported by Policing in Wales, AWPAC has spent the past several years transforming that purpose into meaningful, tangible results. AWPAC has funded fifteen research projects so far, each a collaboration between researchers and police officers, producing recommendations now being embedded into policing practice across Wales. These aren’t abstract academic exercises - they are shaping the way officers engage with communities, respond to harm, and address emerging challenges. Some examples include: Understanding misogynistic behaviour and predicting domestic abuse risk A Bangor University project with North Wales Police and Dyfed-Powys Police is exploring how indicators of misogyny can help predict domestic abuse risk, with the aim of feeding these findings into training and operational practice. Strengthening specialist units tackling violence against women and girls Cardiff University researchers partnered with all Welsh police forces to evaluate violence against women and girls specialist units. This work has provided evidence to support future policing plans and improvements. Improving community engagement and training Findings from a Bangor University–led project, developed with North Wales Police and university partners, have been incorporated directly into North Wales Police’s communications strategy, strengthening how the force connects with the public. Boosting student volunteering A multi‑agency project involving South Wales Police, University of South Wales, University of Wales Trinity Saint David, and Cardiff Metropolitan University identified the barriers and enablers to volunteering within policing. The resulting recommendations are already informing new approaches to student engagement. These projects demonstrate what is possible when police and academic partners work closely and openly together: research with immediate relevance, shaped by policing needs, to improve practice today while shaping the policing of tomorrow. One of AWPAC’s greatest achievements is how it has built on existing local connections to establish networks that now operate at an all-Wales level. For the first time, policing research in Wales is connected, collaborative, and strategically aligned. Through AWPAC, policing and academic colleagues have: formed national research networks that strengthen collaboration connected with major funders such as UKRI and NIHR, opening doors for wider research investment into Wales built links with UK and international networks including the College of Policing, the Welsh Centre for Crime and Social Justice, the N8 Policing Research Partnership, and violence against women, domestic abuse and sexual violence networks pursued global opportunities, such as work between three Welsh universities and the National Forensic Sciences University in India, supported through Global Wales This connectivity is invaluable. It raises Wales’ profile, increases our influence, and ensures we are part of the conversation about the future of policing research. A particular point of pride for the group has been AWPAC’s support for early career researchers and PhD students. Three AWPAC-funded projects were led by early career academics, helping build essential skills, confidence, and connections within the policing research community. We have also supported wider academic projects not directly funded by AWPAC, such as facilitating connections for Project DRAGONS and DRAGONS+, which focus on countering online child sexual exploitation. This commitment continues with AWPAC now funding the development of a training resource to prevent online grooming. This work lays the foundations for the next generation of Welsh policing research, built through genuine collaboration between universities, police forces and police and crime commissioners. By co‑designing research and sharing expertise, we ensure that innovation is driven jointly by academic insight and frontline experience. As my tenure as co-chair comes to an end, one thing is abundantly clear: AWPAC’s work is vital and we must continue to build on the strong foundations that we’ve established. The challenges facing policing are complex and evolving - from digital crime and technological change, to vulnerability and community cohesion. Using evidence to guide policing practice is now fundamental to effective policing. AWPAC has proven what sustained collaboration can achieve. We have shown that well-designed research, rooted in real-world need, can transform practice, shape strategy, and improve outcomes for the public. But there is more to do. More questions to answer. More innovation to unlock. More opportunities to connect Wales with national and international best practice. That is why continued and expanded investment in AWPAC is so important. With the right support, this collaboration can reach even further, bringing greater insight, stronger partnerships, and deeper impact for policing across Wales. AWPAC is a powerful example of what happens when policing and academia join forces with a shared purpose. I look forward to seeing this collaboration continue to grow, evolve, and make Wales a leading voice in evidence-based policing. To all our academic partners, police colleagues, funders, and supporters of AWPAC: thank you."

We are proud to launch the 2026 National Evidence-Based Policing (EBP) Awards, a celebration of the individuals, teams, and partnerships transforming policing through the use of high-quality evidence, taking place in Milton Keynes on 23rd September 2026, as a part of our National EBP Conference. These awards shine a spotlight on innovation, collaboration, and impact - recognising those who are not only using evidence, but actively producing and communicating it to improve policing outcomes. Evidence-based policing continues to play a vital role in shaping effective, ethical, and accountable policing practices. By grounding decisions in robust research and data, forces across the country are improving outcomes for communities, reducing harm, and driving meaningful change. The National EBP Awards exist to: Celebrate excellence and innovation in evidence-based approaches Encourage collaboration between policing and research partners Highlight impactful projects that can be scaled or replicated Inspire the next generation of practitioners and leaders Award Categories for 2026 This year’s awards recognise a diverse range of contributions across policing: Police-Research Partnership Award – Recognising exemplary collaborations between police practitioners and academic researchers that have generated meaningful evidence and delivered practical improvements to policing. Policing Innovation Award – Honouring creative, evidence-informed initiatives that have achieved significant improvements in service delivery, community relations, operational effectiveness, or public trust. Emerging Talent Award – Celebrating early-career practitioners, researchers, or students who demonstrate exceptional promise and dedication to advancing the principles and practice of evidence-based policing. Excellence in evidence-based prevention of violence involving children - Sponsored by the Youth Endowment Fund, this award recognises the outstanding use of projects that make a difference for children and demonstrate the impact. How to Submit a Nomination Submitting a nomination is straightforward. Share your colleague's project, partnership, or contribution through our online form and tell us how evidence has shaped the work and outcomes. Please refer to our award criteria and terms and conditions. Join us at The 2026 National Evidence-Based Policing Conference and Awards The National Evidence-Based Policing Conference 2026 will bring together police leaders, practitioners, researchers and partners from across the UK to explore the role of evidence in the next phase of police reform. Taking place in Milton Keynes on 23–24 September 2026, the conference will focus on the emerging “What Works” agenda in policing - examining both the evidence on how the police reform agenda can be implemented effectively and the capabilities policing will need in a modern, evidence-informed model. Secure your place here. Stay tuned for further updates! #NEBP2026

We’ve bundled up the highlights from some interesting papers and reports circulating in the last few weeks. TL;DR? Shorter is sweeter? Short, focused hot‑spot patrols can deliver similar violence‑reduction benefits to longer deployments. Maybe. Improving investigations: Trauma‑informed interview training could lead to more victim‑centred practice and fewer harmful questioning behaviours in sexual offence investigations. Evaluations are no picnic: Practical insights from a series of youth violence evaluations It's what's inside that matters most: Officers’ sense of legitimacy is shaped more by internal fairness and leadership than by public attitudes alone. What do police do: Police in England and Wales spend very little time on visible patrol and crime prevention. A null effect: Serious Violence Reduction Orders do not reduce reoffending or weapon carrying. Protecting the workforce: Workload, role design and organisational support are critical to wellbeing, rather than exposure to sensitive material alone (among child sexual exploitation investigators). How long should hot spot patrols last to reduce serious violence? Authors: Kochel, O’Guinn, Nouri, and Haberman Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice Study design: Randomised Controlled Trial Setting: USA Summary: This study found that shorter, focused hot spots patrols achieved comparable reductions in gun violence to longer deployments, with diminishing returns beyond a certain patrol length. The findings support more efficient patrol strategies, particularly relevant for forces facing workforce and response pressures but... the authors are clear more research is needed to improve confidence that the finding holds elsewhere. You’ll be interested if: you design, deploy or oversee hot spot patrols, or are responsible for balancing visibility, effectiveness and limited officer time. This study is particularly relevant for those managing patrol strategy under workforce and response pressures and considering whether shorter, more targeted deployments can deliver similar violence‑reduction benefits. Trauma-informed interview training for sexual offence investigations Authors: Campbell et al. Journal of Experimental Criminology Study design: Randomised Controlled Trial Setting: USA Summary: Trained investigators demonstrated more victim-centred communication and fewer harmful questioning behaviours than those in a comparison group. The study supports specialist trauma-informed training for RASSO investigators, aligning with UK VAWG priorities. You’ll be interested if: You work in, lead or commission training for RASSO or other specialist investigative teams. The findings will also resonate with those responsible for improving victim experience, interview quality, and alignment with VAWG priorities through evidence‑based training. Police self-legitimacy and organisational justice Authors: Kuen & Hyun Kim British Journal of Criminology Study design: Quantitative Observational Setting: South Korea Summary: Internal procedural justice and leadership fairness were stronger predictors of officer self-legitimacy than public attitudes alone, reinforcing the importance of internal organisational justice. You will be interested if: You hold a leadership, supervisory or HR role and want to strengthen officer morale, ethical decision‑making and legitimacy from the inside out. The study is especially relevant for those focusing on leadership practices, fairness, and internal culture as levers for organisational performance. Lessons from evaluating youth violence interventions Authors: Acquah, Kung & Sherlock Behavioural Sciences Study design: Reflective review of multiple RCTs Setting: UK Summary: The paper highlights challenges around recruitment, consent, retention and racial equity in youth violence evaluations, offering practical guidance for police and partnership-led programmes. You’ll be interested if: You are involved in designing, commissioning or evaluating youth violence prevention work, particularly in partnership settings. The paper offers practical insights for anyone grappling with recruitment, consent, retention and equity challenges in real‑world evaluations. How police in England and Wales spend their time Authors: Home Office with support from Price Waterhouse Cooper Link Study design: Observational study based on a survey of 6.1 million working hours Setting: England & Wales Summary: This report provides a detailed breakdown of how police time and resources are actually spent. It finds that officers spend more time investigating violent crime than any other crime type, while spending almost no time investigating social‑media posts—challenging some common media narratives. Overall, only around 7% of police time is spent on visible patrol and less than 1% on crime prevention. Even neighbourhood teams devote only 18% of their time to patrol and 1.6% to prevention. You’ll be interested in this if you: Lead, oversee or scrutinise police demand, resourcing or neighbourhood policing models; work on public confidence or police visibility; or engage in debates about police priorities such as shoplifting, online harms or prevention. The report is particularly useful for those seeking an evidence‑based counterpoint to media commentary on what police do—or don’t—spend time on. Serious Violence Reduction Orders (SVROs): what did the pilot achieve? Authors: Ecorys Link Report type: Mixed‑methods evaluation of impact Setting: England (pilot forces: Merseyside, Sussex, Thames Valley and West Midlands) Summary: This independent evaluation examined the two‑year SVRO pilot introduced under the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022. Using a quasi‑experimental quantitative design alongside extensive qualitative fieldwork, the evaluation found no clear or consistent evidence that SVROs reduced reoffending or weapon carrying among those subject to an order compared with similar individuals who did not receive one. Take‑up was far lower than anticipated, with only a minority of eligible cases resulting in an SVRO being issued, and implementation was uneven across forces. Stakeholders highlighted significant operational burdens, legal complexity, and concerns about proportionality. You’ll be interested in this if you: Are involved in serious violence policy, stop and search governance, or deciding whether enforcement‑led interventions should be expanded, amended or discontinued. The report is particularly relevant for senior leaders, PCC offices and central government teams weighing the costs, benefits and risks of extending SVROs, and for anyone concerned with evidence‑based approaches and disproportionality in policing. Psychological outcomes for investigators of online child sexual exploitation Authors: Wortley, Powell & Smallbone Journal of Police and Criminal Psychology Study design: Cross‑sectional quantitative study Setting: Australia Summary: This study compared the psychological well‑being of investigators working on online child sexual exploitation (CSE) with that of investigators in other policing roles. While CSE investigators showed higher levels of distress on some measures, such as disengagement‑related burnout, role overload and lower organisational identification, there were no significant differences on most mental health indicators, suggesting that many stressors are common across policing. Importantly, the study identified key protective factors for CSE investigators, including psychological mindedness and high, “vigorous” work engagement, while role overload emerged as the primary risk factor. The findings challenge assumptions that CSE work is uniquely damaging in all respects and point to organisational and job‑design factors as central to safeguarding investigator well‑being. You’ll be interested in this if you: Lead or support online harms, CSA/CSE or digital investigations; design wellbeing, supervision or selection processes; or are concerned about burnout and retention in high‑exposure roles. The study is especially relevant for forces seeking evidence‑informed ways to protect staff without unnecessarily restricting access to specialist investigative work.

Introduction The first webinar in the AWS x SEBP 2026 series brought together experts from the military and ambulance service to explore a deceptively simple question: what really shapes decision‑making in critical incidents? Across policing, health, and emergency response, practitioners increasingly operate in environments saturated with data - dashboards, feeds, sensors, mapping tools, and AI‑enabled systems. Yet, as this session made clear, the human emotional experience remains inseparable from the decisions made under pressure . SEBP's Chief Operating Officer Matt Bland opened the session by framing the challenge: critical incidents unfold too quickly for calm, analytical weighing of all available information. Instead, decisions are shaped by time pressure, uncertainty, threat, and emotional load . Experienced commanders rely heavily on pattern recognition  - a sense that “something doesn’t feel right” - built from years of exposure to similar situations. Matt brought together two speakers from outside policing to broaden the perspective: Steve Killick , Tactical Director at Airbox and former senior military leader with 38 years’ experience in operations. Dave Williams , senior leader in the ambulance service and doctoral researcher studying emotional decision‑making in large‑scale incidents . Both speakers emphasised that while technology is advancing rapidly, the emotional and cognitive realities of decision‑makers must remain central . Training, Pattern Recognition and the “Right” Information Dave highlighted that effective decision‑making begins long before  an incident occurs. Training, exposure, and prior knowledge create the mental patterns responders rely on when events unfold at speed. “How do we ensure the data we’re looking at matches something that we see?” he asked, emphasising the role of preparation in building those internal templates. Dave described responding to the 2009 Boeing 777 crash, where information was limited to voice‑only radio updates - a stark contrast to today’s digital tools. The lack of visual data increased uncertainty and anxiety, reinforcing his research finding that information flow can mitigate fear , which he defines (via Huberman) as anxiety + uncertainty . Steve echoed this from a military perspective: early in a career, concise information is essential; with experience, leaders prefer more  data so they can self‑filter. But accuracy and consistency are critical — every step in the chain (gathering, transmitting, receiving, interpreting) introduces potential distortion. Emotion, Instinct and the Limits of Data Both speakers agreed that instinct - far from being guesswork - is the brain’s rapid matching of current cues to past patterns. Dave noted that experienced responders often act instinctively first, then use data to steer or validate their decisions. Data becomes an enabler , not a replacement for human judgement. Dave's research uses self‑evaluation tools to track emotional states during decision‑making. While physiological measures (heart rate, eye tracking) are possible, simple self‑reflection remains highly effective. Designing Technology for Humans, Not the Other Way Around A recurring theme was the need for systems that support, rather than overwhelm, decision‑makers. Dave argued strongly for visual information  as a stabilising force. Many responders are visual learners, and mapping tools help reduce emotional load by grounding people in space and context. “Stability in information gives you key evidence to drop your emotions down a bit,” he explained. Steve described how Airbox evolved from an aviation tracking tool into a multi‑agency situational awareness platform, shaped by user feedback rather than theoretical design. But he acknowledged that current systems rarely incorporate emotional cues - an area ripe for development. Both emphasised: intuitive interfaces simplicity under pressure systems usable even after long gaps early and continuous user involvement in design As Dave put it: “System design can either add to or reduce anxiety.” Emotional Regulation: A Missing Piece of Training One of the most compelling discussions centred on whether experienced leaders “turn off” their emotions. Both speakers rejected the idea. Emotions cannot be switched off - but they can  be regulated. Dave noted that emotional regulation is a trainable skill , yet rarely taught in emergency services. He argued for embedding emotional intelligence, fatigue awareness, and self‑reflection into command training, especially for 3am decision‑making when cognitive resources are low. Steve added that repeated realistic training conditions people to operate effectively despite emotional load, and that heightened emotion can sometimes sharpen decision‑making when time is critical. Gamification and Safe Failure Both speakers saw huge potential in gamification , VR, and simulation. Steve argued that humans learn best from failure - but real‑world failure in major incidents is unacceptable. Technology allows safe experimentation, pushing scenarios to breaking points to reveal hidden weaknesses. Dave emphasised narrative‑based learning: exercises should tell a story, not just present isolated tasks. This mirrors how humans naturally make sense of events. What Should Procurement Teams Look For? The session closed with practical advice for organisations buying decision‑support tools: Intuitive, simple interfaces  that reduce cognitive load Visual mapping and spatial tools User involvement from the earliest design stages Systems that work under pressure and after long periods of non‑use Evaluation criteria that measure emotional impact, not just technical performance As Steve warned, if a system is too complex, “under pressure, they’re just not going to use it.”

Introduction The latest session in SEBP’s Easier Said Than Done  series brought together practitioners, researchers, and oversight professionals to explore one of the most contested areas of policing: the grounds recorded for stop and search. This session featured Dr. Paul Dawson , Head of Evidence & Insight at the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC), joined by Dr. Anthony Dugay , a data science specialist from the same team. The focus was a major new piece of research analysing all 152,000 stop and search records in London during 2023 , including nearly 17 million words  of free‑text grounds written by officers. Paul described this dataset as “ fantastic ” in scale and offers an unprecedented opportunity to understand how grounds are constructed, how they vary, and what this means for fairness, legitimacy, and operational practice. Why This Research Matters Stop and search remains one of the most scrutinised police powers, particularly due to persistent disproportionality affecting Black Londoners. Previous studies suggested that Black individuals were more likely to receive vague or subjective grounds, but these were based on small samples. MOPAC’s new analysis scales this up dramatically, using a combination of: Human-coded samples  (600 grounds texts) A bespoke coding framework developed with community scrutiny experts Natural language processing models trained to code all 152,000 records This hybrid approach allowed the team to analyse the entire dataset with consistency and rigour. What the Research Found 1. Black Londoners receive more vague and subjective grounds The analysis confirmed significant differences in the types of grounds recorded. Black Londoners were more likely to have grounds referencing: “ concealing clothing ” “ area known for weapons or robbery ” “ attempts to avoid police contact ” “ smell of drugs ” White Londoners, by contrast, were more likely to have evidential  grounds recorded, such as: “ subject seen stealing ” “ subject admitted possession ” Clearer articulation of what was being searched for This aligns with earlier small‑scale studies but now rests on a dataset of unprecedented size. 2. A new ‘quality of grounds’ metric MOPAC developed a statistical measure of “quality” based on whether particular grounds were associated with positive outcomes (e.g., finding the item searched for). Paul clarified: “ When I say quality, I’m talking about the statistical likelihood that it will find something or not. ” The key findings were: Grounds like “ attempting to avoid contact ” or “ concealing clothing ” were not  associated with positive outcomes. These factors were instead linked to no further action . Black Londoners had significantly lower quality  grounds in several search types, including weapons, going equipped, and stolen property. 3. Quality varies by time of day, age, and borough Quality was highest during low‑volume early morning hours. For white Londoners, quality remained stable throughout the day. For Black Londoners, quality dropped sharply  during peak operational hours. Young people (14–19) received the lowest quality  grounds. Inner London boroughs showed lower average quality than outer boroughs. 4. A strong link between quality and public perceptions Boroughs with higher‑quality grounds also had more positive public attitudes  toward the fairness of stop and search. As Paul described: “ The public are able to pick up when stop and search is being done well. ” Introducing the ‘Groundskeeper’ Tool One of the most practical outputs of the project is a new tool — the Groundskeeper  — which allows users to paste in a grounds text and receive: A quality score Automated feedback Identification of key factors present in the text Paul described it as “ a really interesting tool that we can share with supervisors, with community groups… ” SEBP attendees were enthusiastic about its potential for scrutiny panels, training, and reflective practice. What's Next? MOPAC plans to: Repeat the analysis annually (2023, 2024, 2025…) Track changes over time, including the impact of the Met’s Stop & Search Charter Explore new variables such as officer length of service and repeat stops Expand the methodology to other forces if interest grows The Met has already committed to using the findings to strengthen supervision and local learning. As Paul summarised: “ This is a good example of really actionable analytics. ” Access the slides that Paul shared on the link below:

Sponsors of NEBP2026 The National Evidence-Based Policing Conference 2026 will take place  23–24 September 2026 at The Open University, Milton Keynes. This conference brings together police leaders, practitioners, researchers and partners to examine what works for police reform. Our aim is simple: to showcase rigorous, practice-relevant evidence that can inform the future of policing. We are seeking research that speaks directly to the real challenges facing policing today and helps decision-makers understand what works, what does not, and why. What we are looking for We invite submissions from anyone working in or alongside policing who has evidence with clear implications for policing practice, strategy or the reform agenda. We welcome all kinds of research, including experiments, quasi-experiments, data analysis, systematic reviews, implementation studies, and qualitative or mixed-methods work. What matters most is rigour, transparency, and practical relevance. Presentations should demonstrate: Practitioner-led or collaborative research Evidence that informs decision-making in policing Testing or evaluation of policing practices, policies or reforms Partnerships between policing, academia and other sectors We strongly encourage submissions reporting negative or null findings where these provide useful lessons for policing. Priority themes The 2026 conference focuses on  evidence of what does and doesn't work in policing reform , including: Artificial intelligence Crime prevention Digital policing Implementation Leadership Local policing Productivity Professionalisation Public confidence Who should submit Submissions are welcomed from: Police officers and police staff Researchers and academics Students Partner organisations and charities Collaborative teams involving policing and external partners Both practitioner-led and academic research are encouraged. Presenting at the conference Successful submissions will be invited to present to a national audience of practitioners, leaders and researchers. We will provide some guidelines to successful applicants but as an indication presentation slots will last around 30 minutes including discussion. Some submissions may be selected for poster presentations, panel discussions or workshops. Submission requirements Please submit an abstract of up to 300 words to info@sebp.police.uk outlining: Context and aims Methods used Key findings (or expected findings) Implications for policing reform Please also include: Presenters(s) and organisation(s) Presenter contact details Preferred format: presentation, discussion or workshop Key dates Submission deadline: 14 May 2026 Notification of outcome: 1 June 2026 Conference: 23–24 September 2026

Summary The seventh  Easier Said Than Done  session explored a complex and often contested issue: the relationship between school exclusions, serious violence, and the role of policing. Bringing together Professor Alex Sutherland and Superintendent Simon Rotherham (NPCC Children and Young Persons portfolio), the discussion moved beyond simple assumptions to examine what the evidence actually shows - and where it remains uncertain. Setting the Scene: What Are We Talking About? The session began by clarifying key definitions. Suspensions (temporary removal) and exclusions (permanent removal) are distinct processes, both widely used across the education system. While exclusions are relatively rare (around 11,000 annually), suspensions are far more common, approaching   one million per year. This scale is important. It reframes the issue from a small high-risk group to a much broader population experiencing disruption in education. The Evidence: Correlation Is Not Causation A central theme was the widely cited link between exclusion and serious violence. Around 70% of children convicted of serious violence have previously been excluded But only ~6% of excluded children go on to commit serious violence This asymmetry is critical. It challenges the idea of a simple “pipeline” from exclusion to crime. The panel emphasised: Exclusion often reflects underlying behavioural or contextual issues These issues may exist before exclusion occurs Therefore, exclusion may be a marker, not a cause There is some temporal evidence (e.g. exclusions often occur 1–2 years before serious violence), but this still falls short of proving causation. The Policing Question: Where Should Police Sit? There is currently: No consistent national policing policy on exclusions Significant variation between forces and even individual schools Two potential roles were discussed: 1. Pre-exclusion Police contributing intelligence to inform school decisions Potentially helping schools understand safeguarding risks But this raises concerns: Could police information bias exclusion decisions? Should intelligence (often unproven) influence educational outcomes? 2. Post-exclusion Should excluded children be referred to police? Should they come “onto the radar”? This is contested. With only a small proportion going on to serious violence, there is a risk of: Over-criminalisation Unnecessary police contact for low-risk children Local Variation and the Limits of Assumptions One striking finding: London has the lowest exclusion rates in England, despite high levels of serious violence. This challenges a simple geographic or causal link between exclusions and crime. Instead, the panel pointed to: Strong regional variation School-level differences driven by policy, context, and practice The need for place-based analysis, not national generalisation What Actually Works? Evidence on reducing exclusions points to four main areas: Academic support Counselling and wellbeing support Targeted mentoring and relationships Teacher training in behaviour management Notably, policing has limited direct role in these. This reinforces a key tension: Policing is often involved downstream But the most effective interventions are upstream and educational The Bigger Issue: We’re Acting Too Late A recurring point was that exclusion decisions come late in a child’s trajectory. By that stage: Behaviour patterns are already established Opportunities for early intervention may have been missed The panel suggested a shift towards: Earlier identification Multi-agency support before exclusion Better use of existing school and local authority data Information Sharing: Necessary but Risky Information sharing between police, schools, and partners is essential—but difficult. Challenges include: Determining what is relevant Avoiding prejudicial use of intelligence Balancing safeguarding vs. overreach The principle suggested: Be clear on  why  information is shared, not just  that  it is shared. Key Takeaways The link between exclusion and violence is real but complex Exclusion is more likely a signal of risk than a cause Policing currently operates in a fragmented and localised way The biggest opportunity lies earlier in the process, not after exclusion Evidence supports education-led interventions, not police-led ones What Next? Both panellists pointed to gaps in the evidence base, particularly around: What works in multi-agency responses The impact of police involvement (positive or negative) Early identification and prevention strategies

If you are suspected of, arrested for, charged with or convicted of a crime or crimes in England and Wales it goes onto the police national database (PND). The PND covers the type of offence, location, date and time(s) when the offence(s) were committed, if that information is known. If you are convicted, or admit guilt, the criminal justice outcome is also recorded, with a few exceptions relating to ‘out of court disposals’. There is a good deal more in the PND, but even those few things I’ve mentioned can be used to great effect by policy-makers but aren’t at the moment because it’s very difficult to access and use PND data outside of police forces or a few teams inside the government. What can we use this information for? There are four main topics I’ll cover: understanding offending and types of offenders, predicting future offending, assessing policy effectiveness and multiplier effects. I link to research that used PND either on its own or linked to other data, but don’t mistake this as the norm - these are often one-offs but this sort of work should be much more routine but it won’t be unless we make it so. Understanding offending and offenders. This is a necessity for effective criminal justice policy-making but one that is neglected. Policies, particularly prison and rehabilitative ones, are after-the-fact attempts at incapacitation or ‘cures’ rather than trying to prevent crime in the first place. However, if we look at entire populations of offenders - such as those serving short-term sentences for hate crime - we can derive new insights into that type of crime, those who might commit it and what to do about it. For example, those imprisoned for violent hate crimes tend to have more prolific criminal careers than non-violent offenders, be older and typically have been to prison already. That means there will be multiple opportunities to try and change their behaviour. This also tells us that there won’t be an obvious ‘profile’ of a person who is imprisoned for hate crime but that people who have wide versatility in offending may have a higher propensity for hate crime, but we can also investigate further to understand if there are any ways of identifying these offenders earlier in life. At the other end of the spectrum, again using population-level data, we can look at young first time entrants to the youth justice system - a key transition into the CJS - to understand how that group changed over time in terms of their offence profile (more serious), look at spatial differences in FTEs (high), whether it’s possible to identify when rates changed (yes), and provide definitive answers as to why they changed (no). Beyond these applications, centrally held criminal records also allow us to investigate and develop ways of thinking about crime as emergent patterns of behaviour that can begin very early in life. International evidence suggests that there are often distinct offending trajectories relating to the onset, frequency and timing of criminal acts, including some that persist through one’s life. Through linking with educational data we can look at how early education, or risk factors such as school exclusion , relate to different types of offending such as violence . This is useful because it helps us to think about the different policy responses that might be necessary and when they might be best placed to start - not forgetting that it’s ‘ never too early, never too late ’ to prevent future criminal behaviour. Predicting future offending . Thanks to decades of research we can now do a lot better* than chance at predicting the future likelihood of crime using only a few pieces of information from criminal records, but this is still far from perfect and only works at the level of a group average over a pre-defined time-frame. So getting a score saying ‘high risk’ might mean, for example, that 70% of people with the same recorded characteristics and situation as you will, on average , commit another crime in the next year. It doesn’t mean you will . But tools producing predictions need to develop , otherwise they become less accurate as the nature of offending and the population changes over time. Again, working at population level with offence data we can incrementally update tools rather than taking decades to make changes that may make practice worse .   What’s coming - is already here - is the use of more advanced statistical techniques and “AI”. The combination of administrative data from different sources and unstructured data from those or other sources, combined with large-language models, mean that we may be able to add a few more percentage points to our predictive accuracy. At the same time, we also have to benchmark the ethics, performance and proportionality of these approaches as they develop; least of all so we’re not sold a lemon by companies claiming to be able to ‘do prediction’ better without the evidence supporting that. It is much more difficult to do any of that if core data sources are largely inaccessible.   Assessing policy effectiveness. Perhaps the most well recognised but still under-exploited research benefit of using PND data is that it allows us to evaluate policies and practices. This has been happening for decades through initiatives such as the justice datalab , and one-off evaluations such as this on burglary prevention, but it’s still far from routine. This means that policies in criminal justice aren’t rigorously evaluated, meaning we may have policies that are ineffective or make things worse (e.g. here ). (This problem is exacerbated by the lack of experimental studies in UK criminal justice - something that is changing thanks to the efforts of the Evaluation Task Force - see for example this study on offending behaviour in prisons .) But beyond basic questions about effectiveness on average , using PND and other criminal justice data moves us towards the idea of more precision in policy-making; i.e. what works for whom? Opening up PND to allow for more research and reassessing evaluations already conducted can have several benefits, for one, allowing us to identify whether programmes have unintended consequences .   Multiplier effects. With better access to PND data and by working closely with practitioners and policy-makers on R&D, researchers can help to develop tools and understanding faster, and possibly save the state money . Similarly, better access will allow for innovative solutions to be developed to understand risk - such as work showing the importance of co-offender networks in transmitting risk , but also how to target interventions better . More broadly, the UK is fortunate to have several birth cohort studies, starting in the 1950s. A new birth cohort study is beginning, and with it the benefits it will bring to understanding how generations change. These studies allow us to answer novel policy-relevant questions about how attitudes and behaviour change as children turn into adults, such as knife carrying , or extreme political attitudes . We can do more if we routinely link these studies to administrative data for research. When combined with representative data from surveys or the census, we can also plan for much faster and slower changes that may affect crime rates that are driven by changing attitudes or demographics. For example, there have been sustained moral panics about youth crime in the 1990s, 2000s and 2010s, while at the same time youth crime has dramatically decreased, along with many types of crime more generally (notably homicide ). Similarly, demographic changes, such as short-term spikes in male:female sex ratios may influence crime rates, as this study using Swedish registry data explored. Sticking with the Scandis, combining population data in different ways means we can investigate the development of crime from different perspectives. Low resting heart-rate (<60 bpm) during adolescence is predictive of crime , in particular violent crime . It’s not necessarily because of a low RHR that someone goes on to commit a crime or be violent but through knowing this association we can work to understand what else might be important .   What next? For nearly two decades there has been a gradual reduction in the volume and scope of centrally funded or conducted research on the effectiveness of the criminal justice system in the UK. This is because analytical functions inside government were cut, as was funding for research and evaluation, even on core Areas of Interest (which don’t come with funding). To get the best from the hoards of data the justice system generates as it functions, we need to vastly simplify access to and working with PND and other criminal justice data, ideally allowing researchers access without the need to burden government teams to supply data, and to provide training for future generations of analysts in and out of government how to work with these data sources for the benefit of public policy.     ***** *about 70% predictive accuracy versus 50% chance of being right through flipping a coin.

Our new series of updates on new studies relevant to policing practice have been published in the last few weeks. In this bulletin the research spans recruitment and organisational fairness, hotspot detection, violence against women and girls, investigative practice, policing technology, officer wellbeing, and the use of artificial intelligence in policing. Below is a selection of recent empirical studies and evaluations with potential implications for policing policy and practice. Have we missed anything? Let us know - coo@sebp.police.uk Police Vetting Decisions and Ethnicity Watson, Katus, Shah, Barnes, Melia & Sutherland Journal of Experimental Criminology (2026) Method:  Randomised vignette experiment with 1,778 vetting decisions by police vetting professionals This study examined whether ethnicity influences police vetting outcomes. Vetting professionals reviewed fictional applicant profiles where ethnicity was randomly varied. Across five of seven scenarios, ethnicity had no statistically significant effect on vetting decisions. However, in two scenarios involving more complex applicant backgrounds, minority ethnic applicants were less likely to be approved. The results suggest that vetting processes are largely consistent, but that bias may emerge when decision-making becomes more ambiguous. Monitoring outcomes and reviewing decision guidance may help ensure consistency in these situations. Tags:  recruitment, organisational fairness, legitimacy Link   A Globally Optimal Algorithm for Hotspot Detection Martin Boldt Crime Science (2026) Method:  Algorithm development and empirical evaluation of 1.75 million crimes across Malmö, Boston and New York This paper introduces a new algorithm designed to identify crime hotspots more effectively than commonly used spatial techniques. Using crime data from three cities, the algorithm captured a larger proportion of crimes within hotspot areas than standard kernel density approaches. The study also presents a faster “greedy” version that approximates the optimal solution while significantly reducing computation time. The approach may offer crime analysts improved tools for identifying priority patrol locations. Tags:  hotspot policing, crime analysis, resource allocation Link Invisible Harms: The Hidden Health Impact of Fraud Skidmore, Halkon, O’Connell, Meenaghan & Button Police Foundation / NIHR (2026) Method:  Survey (n=311) and qualitative interviews Fraud is the most common crime experienced in the UK, yet its health impacts remain poorly understood. This study surveyed fraud victims and conducted interviews across two police force areas. Most victims reported negative health impacts following victimisation, including stress, anxiety and sleep disruption. A substantial proportion reported behavioural changes such as withdrawal from activities, and a smaller group reported severe distress including thoughts of self-harm. The report argues that fraud should be treated as a significant public health issue and calls for policing and support services to recognise the wider harms experienced by victims. Tags:  fraud, victim support, wellbeing Link : Policing Violence Against Women and Girls: Trust and Engagement Aisha K. Gill & Sundari Anitha Policing & Society (2026) Method:  Mixed methods study: 52 police officers in focus groups, 55 case files, body-worn video review This study examines police engagement with racially minoritised victims of violence against women and girls. Researchers found that victims’ needs and expectations were not always fully met, and that inconsistent communication and investigative practices could undermine trust. However, the study also identified examples of promising practice, particularly where officers demonstrated empathy, proactive safeguarding and strong partnership working. The authors argue that improving trust requires both organisational learning and stronger engagement with affected communities. Tags:  VAWG, trust and confidence Link Investigating Intimate Partner Sexual Violence Cassandra Wiener, Andy Myhill & Merili Pullerits Policing & Society (2026) Method:  Qualitative study with practitioner interviews and case analysis This research examines how police investigate sexual violence within intimate relationships. The study argues that these cases are often poorly understood because they sit between domestic abuse and sexual offence frameworks. Forces that approached these investigations through a domestic abuse lens were better able to recognise coercive control dynamics and support victims effectively. The authors suggest that clearer investigative frameworks and training could improve outcomes for victims. Tags:  domestic abuse, sexual violence investigations Link Dynamic Guardianship and Residential Burglary van Sintemaartensdijk, Frerichs, Friehs & de Vries Journal of Experimental Criminology (2026) Method:  Behavioural experiments using virtual-reality burglary scenarios This research explores whether “dynamic guardianship” signals such as automated lighting, smart cameras and self-closing blinds, influence offender decision-making. Participants placed in simulated burglary scenarios responded differently to these signals. Cameras appeared to increase perceived risk, while other cues had weaker effects. The findings suggest that smart-home technologies may contribute to deterrence but should be considered complementary to traditional situational prevention measures. Tags:  burglary prevention, situational crime prevention Link   Measuring Police Burnout Using Brain Monitoring Chen et al. Scientific Reports (2026) Method:  Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) with machine learning Sample:  33 active police officers performing simulated operational tasks. Researchers used brain-imaging technology to measure stress responses in police officers during simulated tasks. A machine-learning model trained on the brain activity data was able to classify burnout levels with high accuracy. Although still experimental, the research suggests physiological indicators may eventually complement traditional self-report measures when assessing officer wellbeing. Tags:  wellbeing, burnout Link Social Media Campaigns and Adolescent Relationship Violence Seddig, Bartz, Bliesener, Rühs, Schauten & Thomsen Journal of Experimental Criminology (2026) Method:  Randomised survey experiment of 1,973 adolescents, 772 follow-up Researchers evaluated a social-media campaign (in Germany) promoting healthy relationships among young people. Participants exposed to campaign videos and audio content demonstrated improvements in knowledge and intentions to seek help. Attitude changes were smaller, but some effects emerged over time. The study suggests digital campaigns may increase awareness but may need to be combined with broader prevention efforts to achieve sustained behavioural change. Tags:  youth violence prevention, digital interventions Link : Natural Language Processing and Police Reports Lukmanjaya, Halmich, Butler, Cook & Karystianis Crime Science (2026) Method:  Scoping review of 61 studies This review examined how natural language processing techniques have been used to analyse police narrative reports. Across the studies reviewed, machine-learning models showed promising performance in tasks such as classifying domestic violence cases and extracting information from incident narratives. However, the authors highlight inconsistent reporting standards and limited discussion of ethical issues. They call for improved governance frameworks and shared benchmarks for applying NLP techniques to policing data. Tags:  AI, policing data, intelligence analysis Link Generative AI and Financial Crime Tiwari, Zhou & Lee Crime Science (2026) Method:  Quantitative systematic literature review (94 studies) This review examines how generative AI is influencing financial crime. The literature shows that offenders are increasingly using AI tools for fraud automation, voice cloning and synthetic identity creation. At the same time, law-enforcement agencies are beginning to apply AI techniques to detect suspicious transactions and identify emerging fraud patterns. The authors emphasise the importance of developing governance frameworks and analytical capabilities to respond to AI-enabled crime. Tags:  fraud, cybercrime, AI Link

The Police Graduate Research Showcase is now open for submissions. The online event, taking place on 6 May 2026 , will showcase high-quality, applied research conducted by police officers as part of the Police Constable Degree Apprenticeship (PCDA) or other policing-related degree programmes. The Showcase is hosted by the National Policing Education Research Hub and supported by the Society of Evidence Based Policing (SEBP) . We are inviting police officers who have completed research with clear practical relevance to policing to submit their work for consideration as speakers at the event. What we are looking for Submissions should be based on completed research that demonstrates practical application and learning for policing. Priority areas include research that supports: Safer Streets Violence Against Women and Girls Trust and Confidence in Policing Research from any other area of policing will also be considered, provided it offers clear operational, organisational, or policy relevance. Selection process and opportunity Applications will be reviewed by a panel drawn from the Higher Education Institutions Research Hub . Successful applicants will be invited to present their research at the online Police Graduate Research Showcase on 6 May 2026 . From these presentations, winners will be selected from each category . Those selected will : Receive a presentation slot at the National Evidence-Based Policing Conference in September 2026 Be shortlisted for the SEBP Emerging Talent Award , announced at the same conference This is a unique opportunity to share practitioner-led research with a national audience and to help shape the future of evidence-based policing. How to apply To submit your research access the submission form here 🗓 Deadline for submissions: 18 February 2026