Publications

We do not produce policy in isolation from communities.

Our aim is to connect lived experience with evidence and institutional literacy, so that communities are better able to understand the systems affecting them, formulate their own priorities and enter policy debates with greater power.

Good policy should not simply describe a problem. It should clarify who is responsible, what must change, how progress will be measured and how communities can hold institutions to account when commitments are not delivered.

A practical model for democratic community oversight

The Policing Accountability Framework is one of the APA's most significant policy outputs.

It establishes a practical civic architecture through which communities can participate directly, independently and democratically in police accountability.

The Framework sets out a chain of accountability based on Popular Assemblies, locally produced policing charters, Community Police Monitoring Groups, structured institutional engagement and national learning.

It also establishes minimum standards around democratic legitimacy, evidence integrity, safeguarding, paid participation, funding independence, ethical technology and public reporting.

Although the APA uses the PAF to guide our work with Black communities, the underlying model is designed to be replicable and can be adapted by other communities facing recurring problems of low trust, disproportionality and weak accountability.

Our programme for turning the model into practice

The APA Policing Accountability Strategy guides our organisational and programme development.

The Strategy sets out how we intend to move from framework development into place-based delivery, beginning with Birmingham and expanding only where local readiness, organisational capacity and sustainable funding are in place.

It connects local charter development, community evidence, policy work, partnerships, communications, paid participation and national advocacy within one long-term programme.

The Strategy guides the APA. The Policing Accountability Framework is an output of the APA that communities can use.

In early 2026, the APA developed the PRAP/LRAP briefing Accountability in Crisis.

The briefing argued that police reform would remain incomplete without independent community oversight. It challenged reliance on voluntary compliance, institution-controlled evidence and fragile oversight arrangements, and called for stronger democratic scrutiny within the architecture of policing reform.

This work helped establish the policy case that later informed the Policing Accountability Framework.

The Beyond Statements report emerged from our May 2026 conference on Black women and policing.

The report translated the conference into a substantive policy output and strengthened our accountability work in five areas:

• independence from policing institutions;

• protection for whistleblowers;

• access to disaggregated data;

• sustainable funding for community accountability;

• democratic processes through which communities establish their own demands.

Our Black child safeguarding work has generated a series of policy proposals focused on preventing harm and strengthening accountability when children come into contact with police.

These have included proposals for:

• automatic statutory safeguarding referrals following certain forms of violent police contact or strip search;

• a clearer critical incident protocol for child arrests;

• independent monitoring of police interactions with children;

• stronger recognition of adultification and racial disproportionality;

• a public health approach to safeguarding and serious violence.

The work developed through community meetings, the 2024 Policing and the Black Child Conference, subsequent roundtables and our responses to developments in the Child X case.

The APA has produced analysis and convened civil society around the future and accountability of the Police Race Action Plan.

This work asked a fundamental question: who should be responsible for judging whether policing institutions have delivered the commitments they make on race equality?

Our answer is that technical scrutiny matters, but it cannot substitute for independent community mandate. Communities need their own evidence, standards and institutions through which they can assess whether reform is changing practice.

We have contributed policy analysis and evidence to discussions about reform of the Metropolitan Police following the Casey Review, including through the Truth and Transformation conference and subsequent scrutiny work.

Our policy approach is consistent across different reform programmes: commitments should be measurable, evidence should be accessible, communities should be able to test institutional claims, and accountability should survive changes in leadership or political priorities.

Our work on racist attacks and community safety has developed proposals for stronger critical incident responses and community early warning mechanisms.

This strand reflects a broader principle within the APA's work: communities should not have to wait until a crisis has escalated before institutions coordinate an effective response.

The APA has also contributed to work engaging international human rights mechanisms, including reporting connected to the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination.

This reflects the human rights foundation of our policy work. Policing accountability is not only a question of institutional performance. It is also a question of whether public power is exercised consistently with equality, dignity, liberty, safety and protection from discrimination.