PFD report

Oliver John Roberts · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 30 Mar 2026•Dorset

Report record

Published report and response evidence

This page connects the concerns raised in this report with statements found in recipients’ published responses. A link shows a clear evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
2

Raised in this report

Recipients
5

Named on the report

Responses found
2

Of 5 recipients

Stated actions
5

Described in responses

Source document

Full report text

This is the full text from the original published report.

Open published report

Concerns and recipient responses

Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

Report evidence summary

Concerns raised2

  1. Lack of practical guidance on making communications data applications
  2. Lack of practical guidance on authorising communications data applications
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

Actions described in response An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.4

  1. Action

    Provide the “Standardising Communications Data Applications” training product through the NCDS website.

    Stated by College of PolicingStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 April 2026.
  2. Action

    Provide national eLearning on communications data applications, including Grade 1 and Grade 2 criteria, to police officers and staff.

    Stated by College of PolicingStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 7 April 2026.
  3. Action

    Examine how Missing Persons Authorised Professional Practice can be strengthened to clarify communications data and tracking.

    Stated by College of PolicingStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 7 April 2026.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.5

  1. Position

    Individual police forces are responsible for providing suitable risk-based training for staff on communications-data requests.

    Stated by National Police Chiefs’ CouncilRedirects responsibilityThe respondent said that another organisation was responsible for deciding or taking action.

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of practical guidance on making communications data applications

Wider context from the report

“(1) There is a lack of guidance to assist Police Officers in the practical application of their powers to obtain communications data, whether that be under a Grade 1, 2 or 3 application. (2) Communications data can be obtained by Police forces in England and Wales pursuant to the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (the Act). In November 2018 the Home Office issued the Communication Data Codes of Practice (the Codes of Practice) which is a document that extends to 144 pages and relates to the exercise of functions conferred by virtue of Parts 3 & 4 of the Act. (3) Requests are submitted by police representatives to their Communication Data Investigation Teams to access data, and this will be done in different ways depending on the grading of the request. (4) Grade 1 requests are made when there is an immediate risk to life. Grade 2 requests are made when there is an exceptionally urgent requirement for the prevention or detection of serious crime; a credible and immediate threat to national security; or a serious concern for the welfare of a vulnerable person where urgent provision of the communications data will have an immediate and positive impact on the investigation or operation. Grade 3 requests are made when matters that are not urgent but, where appropriate, will include specific or time-critical issues such as bail dates; court dates; where persons are in custody; or where there is a specific line of investigation into a serious crime and early disclosure by the telecommunications operator or postal operator will directly assist in the prevention or detection of that crime. (5) Section 5 of Codes of Practice refers to the application process and Section 6 deals with the authorisation of the application, however there is no practical guidance, such as Authorised Professional Practice Guidance, to assist Forces and their officers, as to how and when applications should be made and authorisations should be given. (6) In this case a Grade 2 application was submitted almost 24 hours after Ollie was reported missing. Once submitted, Ollie was found within 2 hours and 9 minutes. This application was submitted in writing, however evidence was given that in some circumstances a verbal application for a Grade 2 request can be made if the Grade 2 application is urgent. There is a lack of guidance to police officers nationally as to what would constitute a Grade 2 urgent application and what should be done in writing and what should be done verbally. (7) I am concerned the circumstances of Ollie’s death could occur again as a result of the lack of practical guidance to Police Forces and their staff as to when and how to make data communication requests pursuant to the Investigatory Powers Act 2016. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of practical guidance on authorising communications data applications

Wider context from the report

“(1) There is a lack of guidance to assist Police Officers in the practical application of their powers to obtain communications data, whether that be under a Grade 1, 2 or 3 application. (2) Communications data can be obtained by Police forces in England and Wales pursuant to the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (the Act). In November 2018 the Home Office issued the Communication Data Codes of Practice (the Codes of Practice) which is a document that extends to 144 pages and relates to the exercise of functions conferred by virtue of Parts 3 & 4 of the Act. (3) Requests are submitted by police representatives to their Communication Data Investigation Teams to access data, and this will be done in different ways depending on the grading of the request. (4) Grade 1 requests are made when there is an immediate risk to life. Grade 2 requests are made when there is an exceptionally urgent requirement for the prevention or detection of serious crime; a credible and immediate threat to national security; or a serious concern for the welfare of a vulnerable person where urgent provision of the communications data will have an immediate and positive impact on the investigation or operation. Grade 3 requests are made when matters that are not urgent but, where appropriate, will include specific or time-critical issues such as bail dates; court dates; where persons are in custody; or where there is a specific line of investigation into a serious crime and early disclosure by the telecommunications operator or postal operator will directly assist in the prevention or detection of that crime. (5) Section 5 of Codes of Practice refers to the application process and Section 6 deals with the authorisation of the application, however there is no practical guidance, such as Authorised Professional Practice Guidance, to assist Forces and their officers, as to how and when applications should be made and authorisations should be given. (6) In this case a Grade 2 application was submitted almost 24 hours after Ollie was reported missing. Once submitted, Ollie was found within 2 hours and 9 minutes. This application was submitted in writing, however evidence was given that in some circumstances a verbal application for a Grade 2 request can be made if the Grade 2 application is urgent. There is a lack of guidance to police officers nationally as to what would constitute a Grade 2 urgent application and what should be done in writing and what should be done verbally. (7) I am concerned the circumstances of Ollie’s death could occur again as a result of the lack of practical guidance to Police Forces and their staff as to when and how to make data communication requests pursuant to the Investigatory Powers Act 2016. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Provide the “Standardising Communications Data Applications” training product through the NCDS website.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In addition to the referenced College training, in collaboration with the National Action Fraud Network, IPCO-A, HMRS and Home Office, we have produced a further training product, “Standardising Communications Data Applications,” which is available on the NCDS website. Some organisations have taken the decision to mandate this training for staff.”

Source location

Response from College of Policing
Page 3 · response
Published 7 April 2026

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Provide national eLearning on communications data applications, including Grade 1 and Grade 2 criteria, to police officers and staff.

Verbatim wording from the response

“There is eLearning training that is available for investigators on our national ‘College Learn,’ platform. These learning packages “Introduction to Communications Data,” sit within the Digital Media Investigators (DMI) modules. Within this training there is emphasis on Grade 1’s requiring an ‘immediate threat to life, and Grade 2’s requiring …’ a serious concern for the welfare of a vulnerable person where urgent provision of the communications data will have an immediate and positive impact on the investigation or operations.” This training is available for all police officers and staff across England and Wales. (Please also see my response to point five, for additional available training).”

Source location

Response from College of Policing
Page 1 · response
Published 7 April 2026

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Examine how Missing Persons Authorised Professional Practice can be strengthened to clarify communications data and tracking.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I have tasked my team with examining where the Missing Persons Authorised Professional Practice could be further strengthened in this area to provide greater clarity and direction around communications data and tracking, during the current review process.”

Source location

Response from College of Policing
Page 3 · response
Published 7 April 2026

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Develop further communications data training for the SPoC community, including a Hydra immersive exercise for fast-time decision-making, and pilot it in summer 2026.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Acknowledging the grading criteria, and the available training (referenced in my response to point 1 and 5 below), we are also in the process of developing further training for the ‘CD Single Point of Contact (SPoC) community; particularly with the development of a Hydra (immersive learning) exercise around fast-time decision making in this space. We anticipate that this will be piloted in Summer 2026.”

Source location

Response from College of Policing
Page 2 · response
Published 7 April 2026

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Individual police forces are responsible for providing suitable risk-based training for staff on communications-data requests.

Verbatim wording from the response

“It is also relevant to note that force capabilities vary. For example, West Yorkshire Police operate a 24/7 Communications Data Investigation Unit with an on-duty SPoC at all times, accessible to operational staff. Other forces may still operate on an on-call basis, which can affect local processes but does not alter national legal thresholds. Due to the difference in processes across force areas, each force remains responsible for ensuring that suitable risk-based training is provided for staff. This would be especially true for officers at the rank of Sergeant or Inspector, who would normally undertake a risk assessment and set relevant investigative actions – including the consideration to request communications data.”

Source location

Response from the National Police Chiefs' Council
Page 2 · response
Published 7 April 2026

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Existing operational guidance, statutory codes and specialist advice are considered sufficient to support communications-data grading and urgent authorisation decisions.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Points of Contact (SPOCs). These specialists are trained experts in the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 and are best placed to advise whether a Grade 1 or Grade 2 application is appropriate.”

Source location

Response from the National Police Chiefs' Council
Page 2 · response
Published 7 April 2026

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

The College of Policing leads national policing standards, Authorised Professional Practice and related national guidance and training development.

Verbatim wording from the response

“In providing this response, we have worked closely with the College of Policing, who lead in areas such as setting national policing standards, including the provision of Authorised Professional Practice (APP). I will not seek to repeat the information that they have provided to you, other than to support their comments around the training and national guidance that already exists and is readily available to officers and staff. I welcome their ongoing process of developing further training specifically for the communications data SPoC community, focused on fast-time decision-making.”

Source location

Response from the National Police Chiefs' Council
Page 2 · response
Published 7 April 2026

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Communications-data SPOCs are responsible for deciding grading, urgency and whether applications should be verbal or written.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I am not aware of any national guidance that prescribes when an operational officer must submit a communications data request. Decisions regarding grading, urgency, and whether a request should be made verbally or in writing properly sit with communications data SPOCs. In making those decisions, SPOCs are expected to undertake a risk assessment, apply the statutory thresholds, and fully document their decisions and actions.”

Source location

Response from the National Police Chiefs' Council
Page 2 · response
Published 7 April 2026

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

The concern may relate to the initial risk assessment and application speed rather than communications-data grading or guidance.

Verbatim wording from the response

“While I am not privy to any further detail of the investigation, (and cede to any new information that could cast light on the following) the concern here may be around the initial risk assessment and speed of application submission, rather than the grading or guidance. According to the IPCO Service Level Agreement, Priority two data, has a six-hour turnaround, for example.”

Source location

Response from College of Policing
Page 3 · response
Published 7 April 2026

Open published response

Other statements in published responses

These actions and other statements could not be clearly connected to one concern in this report.

Recipient-stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.1

  1. 1

    Support forces and stakeholders to continually improve policing responses involving communications data.

    Stated by National Police Chiefs’ CouncilStatus unclearThe respondent did not make the status of this action clear when they made their response on 7 April 2026.

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Support forces and stakeholders to continually improve policing responses involving communications data.

Verbatim wording from the response

“I am also reassured that the College are in the process of reviewing the Missing Persons Authorised Professional Practice and whether it can be further strengthened. The NPCC remains committed to supporting Forces and other stakeholders to continually improve the wider policing response with respect to investigations where communications data is pertinent.”

Source location

Response from the National Police Chiefs' Council
Page 2 · response
Published 7 April 2026

Open published response
Back to top

Information checked against the published report and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Official responses located
2/5

Data last updated 7 September 2026