Scaled Approach and Youth Rehabilitation Order YOT Briefing

Scaled Approach and Youth Rehabilitation Order YOT Briefing pack v 1. 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

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

Key aspects of the CJ&I Act 08 ● Purposes of Sentencing 30 November 09 ● YRO 30 November 09 ● Youth Default Orders 30 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

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

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

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

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 147 -148 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

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

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

YRO Requirements 1. Supervision Requirement 2. Programme Requirement 11. Mental Health Treatment Requirement 4. Attendance Centre Requirement 12. Intoxicating Substance Treatment Requirement 5. Curfew Requirement 13. Exclusion Requirement 6. Education Requirement 14. Prohibited Activity Requirement 7. Residence Requirement (16/17 year olds only) 15. Electronic Monitoring Requirement 3. Activity Requirement 8. Local Authority Residence Requirement 9. Drug Treatment Requirement 10. Drug Testing Requirement (14 years old or over) 16. Unpaid Work Requirement (16/17 year olds only) Custody Threshold 17. Intensive Fostering 18. Intensive Supervision and Surveillance

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: 1. it follows ‘wilful and persistent’ non-compliance of a YRO, and 2. 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

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

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

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

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

Draft transitional arrangements Q 1. 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 Q 2. A young person commits an offence both pre and post 30 November 2009 but is sentenced for both after the 30 November 2009. How should they be sentenced? Yes they would have to be sentenced to both old and new orders

Draft transitional arrangements Q 3. A young person is subject to a current order goes on to reoffend after the implementation of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008. 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” Q 4. 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

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

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 For further information please refer to the Youth Conditional Caution Code of Practice (Draft)

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

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 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

Overview of the Scaled Approach

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

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

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 Reduced reoffending Reduced risk of serious harm Increased public confidence

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

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

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

Scaled Approach in practice

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

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

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

Determining Likelihood of Reoffending – static factors Scoring 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 No previous convictions = 0 Total static factors score (0 -16) Initial score

Determining Likelihood of Reoffending – dynamic factors Dynamic factors/Asset section Scoring Living arrangements 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 Family and personal relationships 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 Education, training and employment 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 Neighbourhood 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 Lifestyle 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 Substance use 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 Physical health 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 Emotional and mental health 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 Perception of self and others 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 Thinking and behaviour 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 Attitudes to offending 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 Motivation to change 0, 1, 2, 3, 4 Total dynamic factors score (0 -48) TOTAL SCORE (0 -64) Initial score Overall assessed likelihood of reoffending Rating Standard (score 0 -14 inclusive) Enhanced (score 15 -32 inclusive) Intensive (score 33 -64 inclusive)

Determining intervention level Child/young person profile 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) 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) High likelihood of reoffending (as indicated by Asset score [dynamic and static factors] between 33 and 64 inclusive) OR High risk of serious harm or very high risk of serious harm (as indicated by risk of serious harm assessment) Intervention Level Standard Enhanced Intensive

Statutory contacts for assessed intervention level Intervention Level Contacts per month (likelihood of reoffending Score) for first three months for rest of order Standard (0 – 14 inclusive) 2 1 Enhanced (15 – 32 inclusive) 4 2 Intensive (33 – 64 inclusive) 12 4 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.

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 Enabling compliance and repairing harm AND Enabling help/change • Reparation • Supervision • Requirement/component to help or change behaviour, e. g. drug treatment, offending behaviour programme, education, programme • Combination of the above Intensive Enabling compliance and repairing harm AND Enabling help/change AND Ensuring control • Reparation • Supervision + • Requirement/component to help or change behaviour • Requirement/component to monitor or restrict movement, e. g. prohibited activity, curfew, exclusion or electronic monitoring • Combination of the above

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

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 e. Asset changes to allow the Scaled Approach intervention levels Resettlement planning

Benefits of the risk-based approach

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’

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

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

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

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

Implementation overview

Scaled Approach roles and responsibilities Wales / Regional Scaled Approach and YRO leads YOT Scaled Approach and YRO Leads Central Implementation Team YOT management boards, YOT officers

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

Implementation approach: Standard STANDARD

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

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

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

Implementation approach: Proactive Upfront planning, based on judgement, impact, knowledge of business, number of cases Proactive Support STANDARD

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

Implementation approach: Identifying who needs proactive support Proactive support Cap Gemini analysis Heads of Regions/ Wales Regional/ Wales leads input Confirmed list of YOTs Compare with existing / impending Performance Consultant work Wales / Regional leads Discuss with YOTs Performance Consultants Central Implementation Team Submissions from the Change Checklists Ongoing monitoring and assessment of priorities

Implementation approach: Delivering proactive support 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 Attended by: • YOTs • Regional/Wales lead • Other regional/Wales reps • Central Implementation Team member

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

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

Project timeline Phase 1: Phase 2: Preparation Phase 3: Implementation Project Initiation April 09’ May 09’ – Phase 4: Post Implementation June ‘ 09 Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov 19 June Dec + Until April 11’ • Kick-off briefing events • Support YOTs • Monitor • Scope of Case Management technical solution • Delivery of further briefing events • YOT Leads delivering knowledge drop in events for YOT staff benefits • First submission of Change Checklist • National Standards published • Second submission of Change Checklist • First formal checkpoint • Case Management Guidance published report • Case management technical changes developed, tested and deployment commenced • Second formal checkpoint report • Third submission of Change Checklist • Monitor post implementation issues • Three formal • National Standards checkpoints to and Case assess the Management guidance implementation success of the distributed. • Technical changes will Scaled Approach & be deployed YRO • Third formal checkpoint report

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

Next steps

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