Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Scaled Approach and Youth Rehabilitation Order YOT Briefing pack v1.2

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Scaled Approach and Youth Rehabilitation Order YOT Briefing pack v1.2"— Presentation transcript:

1 Scaled Approach and Youth Rehabilitation Order YOT Briefing pack v1.2

2 Objectives To give you an overview of:
The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 (CJ&I) The Scaled Approach The Youth Rehabilitation Order (YRO) To outline the YJB’s approach to implementation support for YOTs To begin planning operationally and strategically for implementation To give an overview of the significant changes coming into force as a result of the Criminal Justice & Immigration Act 2008

3 Overview of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 including the Youth Rehabilitation Order

4 Key aspects of the CJ&I Act 08
Purposes of Sentencing 30 November 09 YRO November 09 Youth Default Orders November 09 Changes to Referral Orders 27 April 09 Youth Conditional Caution To be advised Custody-related changes 2008 Anti-Social Behaviour Orders 1 February 09 Rehabilitation of Offenders Act December 08 Context Received royal assent in May 2008. A number of the youth justice provisions of the Act have been implemented already with the remaining planned for implementation throughout 2009. The most significant youth justice provision is the YRO which introduces a generic community sentence for children and young people under the age of 18. This sentencing framework mirrors the adult generic community sentence as legislated for in the Criminal Justice Act 2003.

5 Purposes of sentencing
Brings purposes of sentencing in line with principal aim of preventing offending and gives equal weight to other factors including welfare When sentencing an offender under 18 the courts should give equal weight to: the principal aim of the youth justice system (prevent offending) the welfare of the young person in accordance with section 44 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933, and the purposes of sentencing punishment of offenders reform and rehabilitation of offenders protection of the public making of reparation by offenders to persons affected by their offences Key messages Why has it changed? It is recognised that the youth justice system requires a different approach to sentencing to that of adults, additionally, feedback from courts indicates that they find the current purposes of sentencing for children and young people difficult to reconcile the welfare of the child or young person and the aim of the youth justice system. The new framework brings the purposes of sentencing in line with the principal aim of the youth justice system which is the prevention of offending by children and young people, and gives equal weight to other factors including welfare. It is anticipated that these changes will give the youth justice system a clear sense of direction and that courts will benefit from this clarification. It will allow for the opportunity for courts to strike a reasonable balance when sentencing between the needs of the wider community to ensure public safety and public confidence and the needs of the individual child or young person.

6 The Youth Rehabilitation Order
Designed to combine existing community sentences into one generic sentence – the YRO Will enable sentencers to tailor sentences to individual risk and needs Provides menu of interventions to tackle offending behaviour Provides robust community sentence that can be returned to on multiple occasions adapting the menu to minimise the use of custody The Reparation Order and Referral Order remain as interventions below the YRO The Detention and Training Order remains for serious or persistent offenders where an intensive YRO is not deemed appropriate For further information please go to the YJB website – Criminal Justice and Immigration Act section.

7 The Youth Rehabilitation Order
Length dependent upon what requirements are imposed but cannot be longer than three years No restrictions on the number of times a YRO can be ordered or the number of requirements Sentencing Guidelines Council will issue guidelines to the judiciary in relation the YRO in late summer 2009 to inform training lead by Judicial Studies Board The Scaled Approach provides a model for supporting YOTs to tailor proposals effectively in PSRs to the individual’s likelihood of reoffending and risk of serious harm to others Each of the YRO requirements will have different lengths however the overall maximum length of the order is three years as this applies to the supervision requirement The Sentencing Guidelines Council is responsible for drafting guidance upon which the Judicial Studies Board will base its training for magistrates. The YJB is committed to working alongside the Sentencing Guidelines Council and the Judicial Studies Board to ensure all messages with regards to sentencing of children and young people are aligned The Scaled Approach was developed in order to support the new sentencing framework

8 When making a YRO the court:
Must consider that the offence is serious enough to warrant a YRO, and that the restriction of liberty must be proportionate to seriousness of offence (ss Criminal Justice Act 2003) Must specify the date by which requirements must be completed (three years’ maximum length, requirements within may be different dates) Court must revoke an existing YRO, Referral Order or Reparation Order before sentencing to a new YRO – existing orders (e.g. Supervision Order) can run concurrently with the YRO for offences committed prior to the commencement of the YRO What must the court consider before sentencing to a YRO? Before sentencing a child or young person to a YRO, the court must first obtain and consider information of their family circumstances and the likely impact the YRO will have. The court must ensure that if there are two or more requirements attached to a YRO, that these are compatible with each other. Additionally, the court must ensure that any requirement attached to a YRO does not: Conflict with the child or young person’s religious beliefs Interferes with the times, if applicable, that the child or young person is in education or employment Conflict with the requirements of any other youth rehabilitation order to which the child or young person may be subject In relation to the last bullet point – please see the slides on transitional arrangements for more information.

9 When making a YRO the court:
May make two or more YROs on one sentencing occasion for associated offences (Schedule 1 paragraph 31) but: YROs must be of the same type and run concurrently Requirements which can vary for each YRO can run consecutively or concurrently Where a Crown Court makes a YRO it can order that further proceedings relating to that YRO can be undertaken by the youth court and magistrates court Further proceedings include: Failure to comply Any application for amendment or revocation

10 What does it replace? Action Plan Order Attendance Centre Order
Community Punishment & Rehabilitation Order Community Punishment Order Community Rehabilitation Order Curfew Order Drug Treatment and Testing Order Supervision Order Exclusion Order Its important to understand that these orders will still be available for those young people who have committed their offence prior to November We are ensuring that the case management systems retain the functionality to continue to record these.

11 YRO Requirements Custody Threshold Supervision Requirement
Programme Requirement Activity Requirement Attendance Centre Requirement Curfew Requirement Education Requirement Residence Requirement (16/17 year olds only) Local Authority Residence Requirement Drug Treatment Requirement Drug Testing Requirement (14 years old or over) Mental Health Treatment Requirement Intoxicating Substance Treatment Requirement Exclusion Requirement Prohibited Activity Requirement Electronic Monitoring Requirement Unpaid Work Requirement (16/17 year olds only) Intensive Fostering Intensive Supervision and Surveillance The YRO essentially brings existing legislative powers under one order. The YJB is drafting practice guidance in relation to the YRO and we hope to have this published around September. We will also begin to communicate through regular updates on each of the requirements of the YRO and how we envisage they will work. We are currently working with policy leads internally to ensure agencies involved in the delivery of these requirements are aware of the legislative changes. The YJB however before sending information out to YOTs must ensure that Ministry of Justice lawyers have had sight of the materials. Custody Threshold

12 Custody threshold Custodial sentences: for an imprisonable offence
the court forms the opinion that the offence/s are so serious that a community sentence cannot be justified court states YRO with Intensive Supervision and Surveillance (ISS) or Intensive Fostering not appropriate and reasons why (schedule 4 – paragraph 80 (3)) For a non-imprisonable offence, custody is an option only where: it follows ‘wilful and persistent’ non-compliance of a YRO, and there is ‘wilful and persistent’ non-compliance with a YRO with Intensive Supervision and Surveillance or Intensive Fostering length of time in custody is limited – four month DTO for the above situation There is now an additional requirement on the court when passing a custodial sentence to include in the statement they are already required to make when passing such a sentence to explain why they have reached that decision. This additional requirement is that where a young person is under the age of 18 the court must include a statement that it is of the opinion that the sentence of a YRO with Intensive Supervision and Surveillance or Intensive Fostering cannot be justified and why it is of that opinion.

13 Alternatives to custody
The YRO brings into its remit two alternatives to custody: YRO with Intensive Supervision and Surveillance (ISS) YRO with Intensive Fostering (pilot areas only) Conditions: The offence must be imprisonable The offence is so serious, custody may be appropriate For under 15 years only if available if deemed persistent Must be deemed persistent to get custody – therefore if court is considering custody for young person under 15 then ISS and Intensive Fostering become available If not deemed persistent but the offence is still deemed serious, then a YRO with proportionate requirements should be imposed It will put ISSP onto a statutory footing. Please note that ISSP remains an option for the community element of the custodial sentence as well as for bail applications. Mary Wyman and Sue Walker at the YJB will be providing further guidance in relation to this.

14 ISS and Intensive Fostering
ISS mandatory requirements: An extended activity requirement (more than 90 days but no more than 180 days) Supervision Requirement A Curfew Requirement with electronic monitoring (standalone the exception) Intensive Fostering mandatory requirements: Pilot areas only (London, Staffordshire, Trafford and Wessex) Court must consider whether living arrangements contributed to offending Must end no later than 12 months Must not include any period of time after the young person has turned 18 Young person would become looked after Must include Supervision Requirement For both orders, additional requirements can be attached (e.g. Programme Requirement) but the YRO is still considered a YRO with ISS / Intensive Fostering

15 DRAFT – Sue Walker - Strategy Manager - YJB Programmes & Innovation who leads on ISSP has consulted with various ISSP Managers on the above model. Further guidance will be provided however if you have further comments please do let us know. NB: If the young person is not eligible for ISSP but the YOT still assesses the young person as posing a high likelihood of reoffending, then the YOT should ensure that they propose a YRO that included the requirements that would be appropriate to manage the level of risk.

16 Custody-related changes
PSR must be in writing where possible custody sentence likely Public protection sentences Curfew credit for tagged bail periods, at courts discretion if nine+hours per day, to be taken into account in fixing DTO period Young people aged 17 years can be tagged on bail, if court satisfied bail would not otherwise be given Subject to satisfaction re risk of serious harm to others, automatic 28 day release after recall for 12+ months custody PSRrs – section 12 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 amends section 158 of CJA 2008 in relation to PSRs. The effect of this amendment is that any PSR for under 18s who is facing a possible custodial sentence, must be in writing. Public Protection Section 14, 16 and 25 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 amend sections 226 and 228 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Amendments to Section 226 (detention for public protection) Once the seriousness threshold has been met and the court has made an assessment of dangerousness, for cases not falling within subsection 2 (detention for life), the court may impose a minimum custodial sentence of at least two years (before any reduction for time spent on remand and before the Parole Board can consider release on licence). Amendments to section 228 (extended sentence for certain violent or sexual offences) Once the seriousness threshold has been met and the court has made an assessment of dangerousness, for cases eligible for an extended sentence, the court must impose a custodial sentence of at least four years. There will be automatic release in these cases at the half way point (section 25 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act). The extension period begins at the end of the whole custodial period, not at the point of release (if the young person receives a four year sentence they are automatically released at two years, their extension period will begin at the four year point). The entire sentence (custody and extension period) must not exceed the maximum penalty available for that offence. Judicial discretion as to what sentence to impose will be wider as a result of the provisions of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act Where a finding of dangerousness has been made, and the seriousness threshold met, the court has the discretion to impose a detention for public protection, an extended sentence or any other lawful sentence; or, where the offence carries a maximum penalty of less than 10 years, an extended sentence or any other lawful sentence. Curfew Credit – provision is now in force Section 21 of Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 provides for young people’s custodial sentences to be “credited” with time already spent on electronically curfewed bail. The credit period is half the number of days (at least nine hours per day) that the young person was subject to the curfew rounded to the nearest whole number. It is at the courts’ discretion and they may not decide to count all or any of the available days. The last day of the curfewed period does not count towards the credit period.

17 Breach of YRO requirements
It is now within the legislation and National Standards that: Warning must be given for failure to comply without reasonable excuse If third warning within 12 month ‘warned period’ case must be referred to court for breach proceedings Court action can be stayed if exceptional circumstances – with manager approval Court penalties for breach No action – continue with existing YRO Fine (under 14 max £250 / over 14 max £1000) Amend YRO but not with ISS or Intensive Fostering unless already applies Revoke YRO and re-sentence Breach is of the YRO not the requirement The Act also sets out what information the warning must contain such as: Warned Period – means the period of 12 months beginning with the date on which the warning was given. The circumstances of failure to comply State that the failure is unacceptable State that the offender will be liable to be brought before the court The responsible officer must also record the warning Amending the YRO following BREACH: Any amended YROs with new requirements - all requirements must still be completed within three year timeframe When amending following breach the court can only add or substitute requirements – it appears as though you can not reduce number of requirements. Where the original order did not contain and unpaid work requirement but following breach a unpaid work requirement was included as part of the amended YRO then the minimum number of hours is 20 rather than 40. Breach takes place in the court at which you were sentenced in unless Crown Court has stated otherwise NOTE: If offence non-imprisonable custody is an option only where: 1. It follows ‘wilful and persistent’ non-compliance of a YRO 2. And ‘wilful and persistent’ non-compliance with a YRO with Intensive Supervision and Surveillance or Intensive Fostering Limits on length of time in custody – four month DTO for the above situation

18 Draft transitional arrangements
Q1. A young person commits an offence prior to 30 November 2009 but is sentenced after implementation. Which legislation will they be sentenced under? The date that will determine which provisions will apply when a young person is sentenced is the date the offence was committed. See paragraph 1(1)(a) of Schedule 27 to the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 Q2. A young person commits an offence both pre and post 30 November 2009 but is sentenced for both after the 30 November How should they be sentenced? Yes they would have to be sentenced to both old and new orders Please note these are draft and we will provide much fuller detail nearer to the time. The information was provided to us by lawyers at the Ministry of Justice.

19 Draft transitional arrangements
Q3. A young person is subject to a current order goes on to reoffend after the implementation of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act How should they be sentenced? Can the old and new run concurrently? Yes, however, if the existing order is a “youth community order” then the court will have to ensure, so far as practicable, that any requirement imposed by a YRO is such as to avoid any conflict with the requirement of the existing “youth community order” Q4. A young person is on the community element of their custodial sentence and they reoffend. Can a YRO run alongside this ‘licence’ period? If subject to DTO under s 100 of the Sentencing Act then YRO will have to take effect either instead of or after any supervision period i.e. not at the same time

20 Referral Order changes in the Criminal Justice & Immigration Act
From April 2009, Courts can make Referral Orders where: there is one previous conviction and Referral Order not given previous bind over or conditional discharge in exceptional circumstances on YOT recommendation in case with previous Referral Order also includes where a previous custodial sentence has been given And court discretion to: discharge Referral Orders early for good behaviour extend up to three months at YOT recommendation e.g. non-compliance Please note that these provisions came in to force on 27 April and guidance will be made available on the YJB website in the near future. For any further questions in relation to Referral Order changes please contact Roger Cullen at the YJB.

21 Youth Conditional Caution
Higher-tariff, pre-court disposal available for use by police – must be CPS approved Initially to be piloted during 2009 with 16 and 17 year olds (date to be confirmed) Only if certain conditions met e.g. signs offence admission, sufficient evidence to charge, Appropriate Adult present if 16 or under And can include fine (up to £100) or activity (up to 20 hours) supervised by the YOT Non compliance for Youth Conditional Caution – young person then dealt with by courts as they would have ordinarily been. Please refer to the Youth Conditional Caution Code of Practice (DRAFT) for more information. For further information please refer to the Youth Conditional Caution Code of Practice (Draft)

22 Further community-related provisions
Statutory one year reviews of ASBOs for under 17 year olds ISOs must be issued with every ASBO where magistrates’ court consider it would help prevent further antisocial behaviour Youth Default Orders power in lieu of unpaid fine to impose unpaid work (16-17 yrs), curfew (with or without EM) or attendance centre Reprimands and Warning spent once given; Youth Conditional Caution after three months; Apply retrospectively Sexual Offences Prevention Order Court Ordered Reviews – piloted in Liverpool and will require further consultation and a statutory instrument to implement Sexual Offences Prevention Order – We still have limited information in relation to this and it is expected to be used rarely. Section 141 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration act amends the Sexual Offences Act It will mean that some young people convicted of offences listed in the schedule 3 of the Act will become eligible for a Sexual Offences Prevention Order. Court Ordered Reviews – will allow courts to request orders to come back before the court for a formal review. Not currently in place however pilot court areas are being considered. Will provide more information as we receive it.

23 Implications Public Accounts Committee found for adult Community Orders: Requirement options limited by availability/funding Delayed starts impacting on completion Geographical variation including enforcement For YOT and management board All YOT partners understand and support the complexity of YRO requirements and the Scaled Approach Recognise that YOT will case manage orders but expect partners to support contact activity Seek regular Scaled Approach and YRO performance management reports, consider and forward plan to ensure resources match need

24 Overview of the Scaled Approach
All information contained in the following slides has been taken from the publish Scaled Approach Model document Version 2 which is on the YJB website.

25 Why introduce the Scaled Approach?
Audit Commission (2004) recommendation: ‘YOTs should make better use of Asset to determine the amount as well as the nature of interventions with individuals using a scaled approach’ Recent review of evidence to develop the revised Key Elements of Effective Practice tells us that interventions are more effective when: the level and intensity of intervention is matched to an assessment of the likelihood of reoffending it is focused on the risk factors associated with offending Audit Commission The Audit Commission report recommended that the YJB should make changes to national standards to reflect a risk-based approach. The Audit Commission used the term ‘scaled approach’ from which the name of the model is drawn. Also advised us to revise our National Standards for Youth Justice Services Research (See Key Elements of Effective Practice source documents) Andrews et al., 2006 – programme service delivery to offenders who are higher risk produces larger decreases in recidivism than it does for offenders who are lower risk. For further information on risk based approaches the APIS Key Elements of Effective Practice provides the basis for your information.

26 Why introduce the Scaled Approach?
YOT interest in a risk-led approach and existing practice in some YOTs Supported by the risk-based pilot that the YJB ran with four YOTs to inform the development of the Scaled Approach Already a tiered framework of interventions in the adult sector from which we could gather learning The YRO will require a more tailored and targeted approach to the proposals made in court reports

27 Reduced risk of serious harm Increased public confidence
Anticipated benefits More efficient and effective allocation of YOT resources Fewer young people in custody Strengthened case management across the youth justice system Improved practice in assessment quality, pre-sentence reports and intervention planning Tailored interventions based on an the young person’s risks and needs These anticipated benefits and impacts have been drawn information from the pilots. Reduced reoffending Reduced risk of serious harm Increased public confidence

28 Principles of the Scaled Approach
Aims to ensure interventions are tailored to the young person, with more resources directed to those most likely to reoffend and/or pose a risk of serious harm to others Framework for assessment, proposals to court and youth offender panels, interventions and review Overall revised National Standards for Youth Justice Services incorporating the Scaled Approach should not result in additional demands on YOTs 

29 Principles of the Scaled Approach
Assessment determines frequency of YOT contact and type of intervention appropriate (quality is paramount) Focus on: likelihood of reoffending (using Asset dynamic and static factors) risk of serious harm to others (using Risk of Serious Harm Asset) Professional judgement can be used to amend the assessed intervention level but this decision must be: defensible discussed and agreed with a manager clearly recorded Assessment of vulnerability should influence multi-agency input

30 How did we develop the Scaled Approach?
Used all available evidence (e.g. Asset Research, Juvenile Cohort Study data, etc) Sought approval from Ministry of Justice lawyers Piloted risk-based approach to interventions with four YOTs (Neath Port Talbot; Shropshire, Telford and Wrekin; Suffolk; and Wessex) Commissioned a process evaluation of the pilots (awaiting publication) Consultation – invited key people from the youth justice system to take part and provide feedback Developed and published the latest draft model in February 2009

31 Scaled Approach in practice

32 Does not include pre-court interventions
How does it work? The Scaled Approach should be used by the YOT to determine the level of intervention (either standard, enhanced or intensive) required when a child or young person is subject to one of the following court orders: Referral Order YRO Community element of a custodial sentence Does not include pre-court interventions

33 The Scaled Approach and the YRO
The Scaled Approach will enable and encourage YOTs to tailor the content of orders to the individual risk factors and needs of the young person For example, those at higher risk of reoffending and/or causing serious harm to others receiving the most intensive interventions This approach will align closely with the YRO, as the menu of requirements will enable the order to be better tailored to the individual Scaled Approach contacts will only be applied to the Supervision Requirement of the YRO. Assessed level of intervention will help YOTs determine proposals for appropriate requirements Its important to remember that the framework for assessment which is at the heart of the Scaled Approach not only determines the level of contact for a “Supervision Requirement” but it also should be used to assist the practitioner to determine the type of requirement being proposed to the court.

34 Scaled Approach in practice – an example
Court requests PSR YOT undertakes assessment Populate Asset (and ROSH if applicable) Court indicates likely sentence Determine possible YRO requirements Gather Info from range of sources Determine Scaled Approach Intervention level Apply professional judgement if applicable and seek managerial signoff Prepare PSR based on all available info

35 Determining Likelihood of Reoffending – static factors
Scoring Initial score Offence type Motoring offences/vehicle theft/unauthorised taking = 4 Burglary (domestic and non-domestic) = 3 Other offence = 0 Age at first Reprimand/Caution/ Warning 10 to 12 = 4 13 to 17 = 2 No previous Reprimand/Caution/Warning = 0 Age at first conviction 10 to 13 = 4 14 to 17 = 3 No previous convictions = 0 Number of previous convictions 4 or more = 4 1 to 3 = 3 Total static factors score (0-16) the offence type score is nothing to do with gravity or seriousness - it's about likelihood of reconviction (and was based on reconviction data from the first Asset study)

36 Determining Likelihood of Reoffending – dynamic factors
Dynamic factors/Asset section Scoring Initial score Living arrangements 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 Family and personal relationships Education, training and employment Neighbourhood Lifestyle Substance use Physical health Emotional and mental health Perception of self and others Thinking and behaviour Attitudes to offending Motivation to change Total dynamic factors score (0-48) TOTAL SCORE (0-64) Overall assessed likelihood of reoffending Rating Standard (score 0-14 inclusive) Enhanced (score inclusive) Intensive (score inclusive)

37 Determining intervention level
Child/young person profile Intervention Level Low likelihood of reoffending (as indicated by Asset score [dynamic and static factors] between 0 and 14 inclusive) AND Low risk of serious harm (as indicated by no risk of serious harm assessment being required, or low risk of serious harm assessment) Standard Medium likelihood of reoffending (as indicated by Asset score [dynamic and static factors] between 15 and 32 inclusive) OR Medium risk of serious harm (as indicated by risk of serious harm assessment) Enhanced High likelihood of reoffending (as indicated by Asset score [dynamic and static factors] between 33 and 64 inclusive) High risk of serious harm or very high risk of serious harm (as indicated by risk of serious harm assessment) Intensive Remember that it is the highest of either the likelihood of reoffending score or the ROSH (where triggered) which will determine the intervention level.

38 Statutory contacts for assessed intervention level
(likelihood of reoffending Score) Contacts per month for first three months Contacts per month for rest of order Standard (0 – 14 inclusive) 2 1 Enhanced (15 – 32 inclusive) 4 Intensive (33 – 64 inclusive) 12 Low risk likely to need an order with components to repair harm e.g. unpaid work Medium risk may also need components to help them change e.g. education or treatment High risk may need all of these plus a measure of control e.g. curfew The above may also be required to address offence seriousness The contact is a face to face planned meeting between the child/ young person, the YOT case manager, another member of the YOT, or a member of another agency or a volunteer approved to work with the young person in respect of the supervision of his or her court order.

39 Proposals to court Intervention level Function
Possible proposal to court (not exclusive) Standard Enabling compliance and repairing harm Reparation Supervision Stand-alone unpaid work Stand-alone attendance centre Enhanced AND Enabling help/change Requirement/component to help or change behaviour, e.g. drug treatment, offending behaviour programme, education, programme Combination of the above Intensive Ensuring control + Requirement/component to help or change behaviour Requirement/component to monitor or restrict movement, e.g. prohibited activity, curfew, exclusion or electronic monitoring

40 Case management After sentencing/ Referral Order contract agreement, a detailed intervention plan should be drawn up in line with Scaled Approach intervention levels YOT practitioners, as responsible officers, have the discretion to amend the level of supervision where there is clear evidence of a change in circumstances that would lead to amended intervention level Decisions to amend intervention levels must be recorded in an Asset and discussed with the young person, family, carers, etc. Any welfare or diversity needs should be addressed as part of ongoing case management YOT and secure estate relationships should be considered It’s what you are doing now!

41 Other considerations Criminal Justice: Simple, Speedy, Summary
Deter Young Offender Scheme (DYO) From 30 November the ‘Deter Group’ will be those young people falling into the intensive category under the Scaled Approach The Office for Criminal Justice Reform has published its management framework Knife Possession Prevention Programme Secure estate eAsset changes to allow the Scaled Approach intervention levels Resettlement planning

42 Benefits of the risk-based approach

43 Benefits cited by pilot YOTs
‘A risk-based approach is logical, the most intervention for the most needy should lead to reduced reoffending and public protection’ ‘Scaled Approach allows you to focus on the high risk offenders – those most likely to reoffend or cause serious harm.’ ‘Going from what we had to risk-based approach did make us think more about assessment and do more ROSHs’ ‘Staff are more satisfied with this approach; better professionalism, better consistency, makes jobs more satisfying ‘You get time to work with people you need to work with’, ‘It is common sense’ ‘It’s a more rational approach’ ‘It’s defensible’ ’Putting resources in the right place’ ’A focus on quality is now taking place’ ‘I would not go back to the old way of working’

44 Benefits the Scaled Approach can contribute to include:
Contribute to reduction of breaches, instances of serious harm Increase the chances of interventions tackling offending behaviour Improve the quality of assessments, plans and reports Staff confidence in improved outcomes for young people Improve staff satisfaction More effective use of YOT resources Help enable defensible managerial, operational and resource decisions Improve sentencer confidence These ‘benefits identified to which Scaled Approach can contribute’ is not based on statistical evidence (Need to stress here that the Scaled Approach can contribute to these, but won’t be in isolation)

45 And the possible disadvantages
Static factors weighting may adversely affect intervention levels? Increase potential for challenge by courts, defence, young people, youth offender panel members and family? Community / custody transition issues Practitioners might tamper with the banding Management board will withdraw resources Concern around sustaining quality where you identify more contacts The potential disadvantages noted are not based on statistical evidence.

46 Benefits approach: However…
Scaled Approach is a journey, involving significant cultural change It is straightforward to measure the Scaled Approach in relation to YOT practice (quality, congruence), but it is difficult to have confidence in its effect on key strategic objectives (e.g. reducing reoffending) While benefits to young people can be almost immediate, measuring those and wider benefits is not possible in a short timescale

47 Benefits approach: reporting
National measures will be collected via National Indicators and measurements which are already collected through YOT returns No new measures planned specifically for Scaled Approach For local measures, YOTs will be asked their ‘confidence level’ Baseline questionnaire Post-Scaled Approach go live questionnaire and post-implementation review

48 Implementation overview

49 Scaled Approach roles and responsibilities
Central Implementation Team Wales / Regional Scaled Approach and YRO leads Purpose – Give an overview of roles and responsibilities of implementation leads and YOTs Key messages Messages - YOT management ownership of the implementation is essential Good Communication and working relationship between Central Implementation team and regional and Wales lead is essential Role descriptions are on the Scaled Approach section of the YJB website When doing visits/calls on framework Wales and Regional leads Complete the Regional/Wales Change Checklist and submit at three set checkpoints Ensure YOT manager is regularly updated and informed of progress Ensure relevant officer attends YOT briefing events Proactively identify opportunities for YOTs to collaboratively work together where one service covers more than one YOT Establish YOT readiness for implementation Using the YOT Change Checklist identify potential areas of risk (e.g. shortfall in resources, lack support from partner agencies) YOT Scaled Approach and YRO leads Work with Regional / Wales leads by providing local knowledge Ensure YOT manager is regularly updated and informed of progress of implementing the changes locally Monitor progress against the YOT Change Checklist Disseminate knowledge from Regional/Wales briefing events locally Deliver briefing to courts as required Act as single point of contact for YOT managers and regional / Wales Scaled Approach and YRO lead Collate and record data from workload forecasting exercise to analyse local and regional/Wales implications of the Scaled Approach for YOT caseloads Central Implementation team Trish Boyce, Pegah Parandian, Nat Defriend, Peter Sutlieff and Mikesh Kotak Developing the implementation approach Developing the implementation tool set inc. the change checklists, briefing packs and the workload forecasting tool. Collating and analysing the change checklist submissions YOT management boards, YOT officers, partner organisations, courts Ensure they are ready for the changes Attend any briefing events Disseminate relevant information provided to appropriate staff YOT Scaled Approach and YRO Leads YOT management boards, YOT officers

50 The role of the Central Implementation Team
Design and development of the implementation model Design and development of implementation tools for YOT partnerships and Wales / regional teams Knowledge transfer for YOT partnerships Advice and assistance to Wales / regional leads Proactive and reactive support to YOT partnerships in conjunction with Wales / regional leads Information and query management

51 Implementation approach: Standard
A three tiered approach to delivering implementation will be adopted : Standard offer – what all 157 YOTs will receive Proactive – YOTs that are identified that will need further support with the change Reactive – YOTs that have requested that they need support with the change

52 Implementation approach: Standard
Legislative changes and the Scaled Approach Guidance Toolkits Briefing packs OU training Implementation YOT Change Checklist Contact level forecasting tool Plus regional / Wales support as normal!

53 Implementation approach: YOT Change Checklist (Standard)
Based on learning from the pilots Set of tasks to ensure YOTs are ready for 30 November It includes: Set-up Governance Contact level forecasting tool Stakeholder engagement (including courts) Staff training and quality assurance Performance reporting Sent out to all YOTS as planned on 23 April

54 Implementation approach: What will happen to the checklists?
Checkpoint 1 Checkpoint 2 Checkpoint 3 YOT checklist YOT checklist YOT checklist R/W checklist R/W checklist R/W checklist Submission to: YOT Change Checklist submission cc Regional/Wales Lead Central collation, analysis & reporting Ongoing monitoring of system-wide implementation readiness

55 Implementation approach: Proactive
Upfront planning, based on judgement, impact, knowledge of business, number of cases Proactive Support STANDARD In addition to the standard support some YOTs will be identified to require proactive support.

56 Implementation approach: What might proactive support look like?
Assistance to YOT on key activities including: Use of contact level forecasting tool Engagement of the management board and establishment of the steering group Engagement of courts, youth offender panels and YOT officers Advice on the use of materials and tools generated by the YJB including quality assurance toolkits and benefits measurements pack Purpose – Give an overview of what is in the proposed level of proactive support Message: Key message has to be that this will be done jointly with the regional and Wales leads and that they will then take over the follow up questions

57 Implementation approach: Identifying who needs proactive support
Cap Gemini analysis Heads of Regions/Wales Regional/Wales leads input Confirmed list of YOTs Compare with existing / impending Performance Consultant work Discusswith YOTs Wales / Regional leads Performance Consultants Central Implementation Team Submissions from the Change Checklists Purpose – Outline how the YOTs who will be approached for proactive support have been identified. Ongoing monitoring and assessment of priorities

58 Implementation approach: Delivering proactive support
Wales / Regional leads Performance Consultants Central Implementation Team Confirm with the YOTs identified whether support is actually sought Scoping meeting organised by Wales / regional team Scoping meeting confirms nature of support Support delivered by: Regional/Wales lead and/or Central Team) Performance consultants Purpose – Outline who will be responsible for delivering the proactive support Messages Consultancy Team for those YOT identified as requiring and or already receiving support from the team will cover the Scaled Approach and YRO as part of their remit. Central Implementation team Will target those YOT not captured above but identified by the regional / Wales leads as requiring this support. Regional /Wales leads Will assist Central Implementation Team to deliver the support and then take follow up questions as required When doing visits/calls on framework – ask how they are getting on with the Scaled Approach Other senior performance advisers Support regional / Wales leads in support other YOTs locally through performance visit and become involved in providing reactive support as required. Attended by: YOTs Regional/Wales lead Other regional/Wales reps Central Implementation Team member

59 Implementation approach
Upfront planning, based on judgement, impact, knowledge of business, number of cases Proactive Support STANDARD Reactive Support Request from YOTs for assistance

60 Information and query management: Proposed method
YOTs submit queries to Wales/regional lead using appropriate mechanism Wales / regional response to query Central Implementation Team analysis of queries Update FAQs Revise model (if necessary) Revise guidance and toolkits

61 Project timeline • Kick-off briefing events
Phase 1: Project Initiation Phase 2: Preparation Phase 3: Implementation Phase 4: Post Implementation April 09’ May 09’ – 19 June June ‘09 Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec + Until April 11’ • Kick-off briefing events • Scope of Case Management technical solution • First submission of Change Checklist • First formal checkpoint report •Support YOTs •Delivery of further briefing events • Second submission of Change Checklist •National Standards published Case Management Guidance published •Case management technical changes developed, tested and deployment commenced Second formal checkpoint report •YOT Leads delivering knowledge drop in events for YOT staff •Third submission of Change Checklist •National Standards and Case Management guidance distributed. •Technical changes will be deployed Third formal checkpoint report • Monitor benefits • Monitor post implementation issues • Three formal checkpoints to assess the implementation success of the Scaled Approach & YRO Please note, technology dates: Dates are approximate times and subject to change. They reflect current thinking and provide input negotiations with suppliers. They do not yet reflect contracted commitments from the suppliers

62 Project timeline: Post November 2009
December 2009 onwards until April 2011 Support users Post implementation change checklists Post implementation reviews Benefits realisation support and tracking Enhancing the Scaled Approach model where necessary Continued link with the performance framework Gradual reduction in project team size April 2011 Move to business as usual

63 Next steps

64 Next steps Review and plan the suggested activities listed on the YOT Change Checklist Submit first Change Checklist on 11 June Start using the Scaled Approach section of the YJB website for toolkits Organise local briefing events! Attend the second series of events that will be planned for in September Organise post September local briefings for your staff Provide any feedback/issues to your Wales/regional leads

Download ppt "Scaled Approach and Youth Rehabilitation Order YOT Briefing pack v1.2"

Similar presentations

Ads by Google