1. Detective Inspector Paul Cook Public Protection Unit Bedfordshire Police ‘Working together to protect the most vulnerable’

2. NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED.; DI (Bedford Borough) DI (Luton)DI (Bedford Central) CAIU and DAIU SOMT/OLIT/ VULNERABLE MISPERS REFERRAL TEAM CAIU and DAIU HBV / Forced Marriage VAIU (Countywide) CAIU and DAIU RIU/VLO (Countywide) Head of Public Protection - DCI

3. NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED A scheme allowing parents to check if someone is a sex offender will be rolled out across England and Wales by March 2011, the Home Office says. A year-long pilot has already protected 60 children, ministers say. Under the scheme, police can give parents more information about someone who has access to their children. In all, police disclosed information on 32 individuals who had a record of child sex offending or posed a risk in a different way. Extract from “BBC News” Wednesday 3 rd March 2010 Sarah Payne ‘Sarah’s Law’ in the national media

4. http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/video/Victory- For-Sarahs-Law-Campaigners-Sex-Offenders-Alert- Scheme/Video/201003115566139?lpos=video_Article_R elated_Content_Region_2&lid=VIDEO_15566139_Vict ory_For_Sarahs_Law_Campaigners_Sex_Offenders_Al ert_Scheme http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/video/Victory- For-Sarahs-Law-Campaigners-Sex-Offenders-Alert- Scheme/Video/201003115566139?lpos=video_Article_R elated_Content_Region_2&lid=VIDEO_15566139_Vict ory_For_Sarahs_Law_Campaigners_Sex_Offenders_Al ert_Scheme NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

6. ‘Megan’s Law’ – U.S.A Megan Kanka – California 1994 Limited management of R.S.Os by police (Varies state to state) – Still requires registration Managed by parole officer / community Legal requirement for offenders details to be made public (Internet / mobile phone applications) Sanctions for sex offenders include placing signs in their garden, wearing arm bands/ baseball caps Whereabouts of 45% of sex offenders is known Suggestion that this leads to vigilantism NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

7. UK Perspective 98% of R.S.Os (Registered Sex Offenders) whereabouts are known Managed by Police/ Probation / MAPPA/ Other agencies Legislation to deal with R.S.Os who breach requirements R.S.O details remain confidential – used by agencies as part of existing safeguarding procedures. NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

8. Bedfordshire Approximately 460 R.S.Os in Bedfordshire Approximately 370 at liberty Approximately 70% of 370 are for child sexual offences Significant number for Indecent Images of Children offences 370 managed by a team of six officers & supervisor NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

9. 2007 Review of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offenders (June 2007)  Referred to as the “Child Sex Offender Review (CSOR)”.  Came about as a result of negative headlines around convicted sexual offenders.  Focussed on how child sexual offenders are managed, how sexual offending against children can be prevented and how to provide greater reassurance to the public.  Created 20 actions, of which Actions 4 and 1 are of particular importance to the process. NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

10. ACTION 4 Pilot a process where members of the public can register their child protection interest in a named individual. Where this individual has convictions for child sex offences and is considered a risk, there will be a presumption that this information will be disclosed to the relevant member of the public. ACTION 1 Pilot a community awareness programme, in partnership with non- governmental organisations, to provide better child protection and develop messages to help parents and carers safeguard children effectively.

11. NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED 2008 Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 Places a statutory duty on MAPPA Responsible Authorities to; Consider in every case disclosure; and Presumption to disclose; where Reasonable cause to believe that a child sexual offender poses a risk of serious harm to a child(ren); and Disclosure is necessary for the purpose of protecting the child(ren) from serious harm.

12. NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED 2008 Disclosure Pilot Trials 15th September 2008 – trials began in Cambridgeshire Constabulary, Cleveland Police, Hampshire Constabulary and Warwickshire Police. Ran for 12 months. Independent evaluation completed www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs10/horr32c.pdfwww.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs10/horr32c.pdf Many positive key findings No known negative outcomes Home Secretary expressed his desire for the process to be rolled out nationally

13. What is the Disclosure Process? What is New? Principle of 2-way disclosure Presumption to disclose Public can request disclosure even when they have no concerns What is the same? Safeguarding Children procedures Process of disclosure under MAPPA/Safeguarding Children procedures Disclosure must be lawful, necessary & proportionate NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

14. The Process NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED Initial Contact Any person can make an application about a person (the subject) who has some form of contact with a child or children. Basic details obtained about the applicant, child, subject and the nature of the concern. Initial checks made on PNC, ViSOR and local systems (within 24hrs). Assessment made as to if there is an immediate child protection concern that requires action.

15. The Process Applicant may not go on to receive disclosure Disclosure should only be made to person who is in a position to safeguard children (e.g. Parent, carer etc) Parent, carer or guardian who was original applicant may be estranged and not in a position to protect (therefore no disclosure) NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

16. The Process NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED Face to Face Application Applicant seen face to face to obtain further details, including verifying the applicants identity and relationship with the child and subject (if applicable). Empowerment/Information The applicant is provided with information about the Disclosure scheme, keeping children safe and MAPPA via a leaflet pack.

17. The Process NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED Full Risk Assessment Checks are revisited, then further checks are made on Impact Nominal Index (INI) and with other agencies (including children’s services). Decision taken about whether the application raises ‘concerns’ or ‘no concerns’. Full risk assessment must be completed within 10 days. Decision Making on Disclosure Enquiry will either raise ‘concerns’ or ‘no concerns’. These involve processes on making a decision about whether to disclose information. This will usually involve a multi-agency meeting as part of MAPPA and/or safeguarding children procedures.

18. The Process NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED Outcome and Closure The applicant is contacted and receives disclosure or is alternatively told that there is no information that the police can disclose to them. It is important that the applicant is told that just because there is no information this does not mean that there is no risk of harm to the child and that they should continue to take steps to safeguard their child(ren).

19. Early Learning from Pilot Forces NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED VOLUME OF ENQUIRIES 12 months (formal end of pilot) Enquiries12 Applications 7(Average per Force per month) Disclosures 1

20. Early Learning NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED PERCEIVED RISKS Maintaining confidence of RSOs Compliance of RSOs with registration and monitoring requirements Vigilantism Breach of disclosure confidentiality agreement Malicious false applications i.e. Journalists

21. Early Learning NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED Intelligence about RSOs (Registered Sexual Offenders) Highlights other risks (i.e. serious domestic violence) PUBLIC PROTECTION Breaches of SOPO (Sexual Offences Prevention Order) Child Protection Investigations Recall to Prison

22. NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED EARLY LEARNING PUBLIC PROTECTION Good News Story 1 Force A Child U13 Applicant was child’s mother Subject was the husband of a friend Rumours about subject 2 custodial sentences for indecency with children Disclosure and safeguarding advice

23. NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED EARLY LEARNING PUBLIC PROTECTION Good News Story 2 Force B Child U10 Applicant single mother Subject neighbours boyfriend Concerns over subject behaviour No previous convictions but a number of allegations of serious sexual assaults Disclosure, child protection investigation and referred for management as a potentially dangerous person (PDP)

24. The future  All four pilot forces extended the operation of this scheme beyond the 12 month pilot.  Full Home Office evaluation has been completed and can be found at www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs10/worr32c.pdf www.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs10/worr32c.pdf  Home Secretary has expressed his wish for the scheme to be rolled out nationally.  Staggered regional roll-out, you are all in the first phase!  ‘Go live’ date of 1 st August 2010. NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

25. Child Exploitation & Online Protection Centre http://www.ceop.gov.uk/ Individual Law Enforcement Agency Intelligence, Harm Reduction and Operations Faculties U.K Tracker Team – High Risk / VH Risk RSOs C.E.O.P report abuse button on web-site (35-50 reports per day) Online reporting mechanism for C.S.O.D.S (via hyperlink from Beds Police web-site) NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

26. Partners Beds Police Media release in late August C.E.O.P reporting mechanism on agency / L.S.C.B web- sites ?? Awareness raising with staff Opportunity to engage with public and raise awareness and provide reassurance (Healthcare establishments, Social Care offices etc) Co-operate with information sharing / decision making process. Enquiries under Disclosure Scheme should be referred to police (Should not be used as a route to make referral / report child abuse) NOT PROTECTIVELY MARKED

27. Detective Inspector Paul Cook Co-ordinator for Child Sex Offender Disclosure Process Bedfordshire Police paul.cook@bedfordshire.pnn.police.uk Tel: 01234 842287 Mob: 07500 106526