Handbook for Practitioners

YOUTH CRIME action PLanHandbook for Practitioners

3

Ministerial Foreword

everyone working in the youth justice system shares the common goals of keeping young people safe, of preventing them becoming involved in crime, of enforcing the law and supporting those who become victims of crime. we know that most young people do not commit crimes; like the rest of law-abiding society, they just want to be able to get on with their lives.

the launch of the Youth Crime action Plan in July 2008 saw a significant step forward in partnership working to tackle youth crime – partnerships that are being consolidated at all levels, from Government departments to local youth workers, sentencers, police and third sector colleagues.

at its heart, is a set of interventions, described in this Handbook, which have been designed to tackle effectively the problem of youth crime. they reflect the YCaP’s triple-track approach of enforcement and punishment where behaviour is unacceptable, non-negotiable support and challenge where it is most needed, and better and earlier prevention. the interventions are evidence-based and effective. local areas are already showing early signs of success as a result of the hard work that has taken place and we look

forward to seeing even greater progress over the coming year to further build communities’ confidence that youth crime is being tackled.

this Handbook is intended to support the work in the 69 YCaP priority areas by giving clear guidance on each strand. But these interventions can also be implemented in any local area. we strongly encourage local practitioners in areas outside the 69 priority areas to look at their local needs and consider how these activities can help reduce youth crime and support young people in their areas.

Alan Campbell Parliamentary Under-secretary Crime reduction

Beverly Hughes Minister of state for Children, Young People and Families

David Hanson Minister of state for Justice

5

Contents

PAGE

introduction: Youth Crime - Making the difference 07

1. operation staysafe 10

2. street-based teams 14

3. reparation 18

4. Youth offending team workers in custody suites 22

5. after school Patrols 26

6. supporting Young Victims 30

7. think Family 34

8. Family intervention Projects 40

9. Making the links 46

10. Find out More 48

6

AbbreviationsABC acceptable behaviour contract

ASB anti-social behaviour

ASBO anti-social behaviour order

CAF Common assessment Framework

FIP Family intervention Project

LA local authority

LCJB local Criminal Justice Board

NPT neighbourhood Policing team

PCSO Police Community support officer

PEIP Parenting early intervention Programme

SETF social exclusion taskforce

SSP safer school Partnership

TYS targeted Youth support

YCAP Youth Crime action Plan

YOT Youth offending team

7

intr

od

UC

tio

n: Y

oU

tH

Cri

Me

– m

Ak

ING

Th

E

dIF

FE

rE

NC

E

the Youth Crime action Plan (YCaP) is designed to tackle youth crime using three complementary strategies: prevention, non-negotiable support and tough enforcement.

YCaP makes sure that young people and their families get the support they need as early as possible so they can get back, and stay, on track. it aims to guard against re-offending by ensuring that young people who do break the law are held to account for what they do, while also giving the public adequate protection from the harm caused by crime.

there are a number of commitments and interventions in the Plan to address different aspects of youth crime. seven of these measures are being delivered as part of an intensive package in priority areas, together with support for young victims:

g Operation Staysafe: partnerships between the police and Local Authorities (LA) sweeping anti-social behaviour (ASB) hotspots and removing young people who are at risk off the streets at night.

g Street-based teams: partnerships between police and youth workers keeping young people away from crime or anti-social behaviour.

g Increased reparation activity: making up for harm or damage done to victims or local communities in leisure time, including on Friday and Saturday nights.

g YOT workers in custody suites (Triage model): Youth Offending Team (YOT) staff liaising with the Police and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) to make rapid assessments of young offenders and inform decisions on next steps.

g After School Police Patrols: recognising that there are peaks of criminal or anti-social behaviour by some young people in the period following the end of the school day, around the school vicinity and nearby transport routes and interchanges.

g Supporting Young Victims: recognising that young people are not just perpetrators of crime but are also affected by it and require support.

introdUCtion: YoUtH CriMe mAkING ThE dIFFErENCE

8

g lay the foundation for an end-to-end approach to tackling youth crime in the area.

the work of the Youth Crime action Plan is also complementing other activity. in June 2008, the tackling Knives action Programme (tKaP) was set up to focus intensive activity in ten police force areas, covering a range of action from enforcement to prevention, to reduce the prevalence of teenage knife crime. the programme has now been extended to cover 16 police forces. the additional investment that tKaP is making to support prevention work, including ssPs and after-school patrols, as well as enforcement, is providing those areas with an enhanced capacity where the problems of teenage knife crime and other forms of serious youth violence are particularly evident.

only a small proportion of the young people in england and wales commit crime. working with partners to identify these young people and focusing the YCaP approach on them will make a real difference to local indicators of success. it will also save money.

g Family Intervention Projects: providing support for the most vulnerable and problematic families with children at risk of offending.

g Think Family reforms: changes to systems and services to improve the support offered to vulnerable children, young people and adults in the same family.

each of these YCaP interventions is covered in more detail in the sections that follow.

the YCaP approach is more than the implementation of separate initiatives. the variety of action funded by the intensive package and the triple track approach provides an opportunity to:

g use funding streams in creative, joined-up ways to tackle youth crime (e.g. Barking and Dagenham are using their area-based grant to fund extra street teams because they realized it was an effective approach to the problem of groups of young people causing disorder)

g forge new partnerships, such as between police and children’s services in Operation Staysafe

9

intr

od

UC

tio

n: Y

oU

tH

Cri

Me

– m

Ak

ING

Th

E

dIF

FE

rE

NC

E

10

Who should be involved?the key partners in staysafe are the police and the la Children’s and Youth services (including Common assessment Framework (CaF)/targeted Youth support co-ordinators). all should be involved in planning operations, to ensure the necessary processes and resources are in place for it to be run successfully.

each operation should have a team made up of representatives from the Children’s services, Yot workers, Youth workers (possibly from the la’s street-based team), Family intervention Project, Parenting Practitioners and a local safer school Partnership (ssP) officer (if carried out in an ssP school catchment area).

there must also be a minimum of two police officers – an ‘initiating officer’ (who takes children and young people off the streets) and a ‘designated officer’ who oversees the operation and the care of the children at the place of safety. it is important that these roles are not performed by the same person, nor must they be performed by PCsos, although PCsos can be an important part of the visible patrols.

Aimsstaysafe aims to protect vulnerable children and young people whose behaviour or whereabouts places them at risk of significant harm. this behaviour can include being out on the streets at night at a particularly vulnerable age or being involved in anti-social behaviour, for example possessing fireworks, alcohol or being drunk. it may also include being in the company of adults involved in crime or anti-social behaviour.

the initiative uses existing child protection legislation under section 46 of the Children’s act 1989 to take these young people into police protection until they are reunited with their parents/guardians.

operation staysafe is built on a partnership between the police and local authorities (la). any young person picked up will be taken to a designated ‘place of safety’ where Children’s services or a Yot worker will carry out a risk and needs assessment on that individual. wherever possible, parents or guardians will be contacted to come and collect the young person, while multi-agency support will be called upon if necessary.

1. oPeration STAYSAFE

11

1. o

Pera

tio

n

ST

AY

SA

FE

the child must be told why they are being taken into police protection and, once they are at the safe place, they must be kept informed of what is happening throughout the process. if they refuse to go to the safe place they can be taken home and Children’s services can be asked to meet the young person and their parents there.

More than one child or young person can be transported at the same time – either

Most operations run with many more officers in a combination of foot, bike and vehicle patrols.

Identifying a safe placethe safe place should be chosen by agreement between the Police and la Children’s services. the decision is based on a risk assessment and a consideration of the following criteria:

g the safe place must be easily accessible to parents

g it must have toilet and washroom facilities and be able to provide food, water and hot drinks

g it must never be a police station

g it should not be near/adjacent to licensed premises

g it must take cultural sensitivities into account

g it should consist of at least two rooms: one room for the young person to meet Children’s Services, and another room where they can wait during busy periods (under police supervision).

Taking young people into protectionthe decision to take a child into protection is the individual police officer’s. they must judge whether the child or young person is at risk of significant harm, including harm caused by involvement in crime or asB. However, the police officer must be able to justify his/her decision to take a child into police protection.

12

a child or young person might be brought into the place of safety because they are at risk of harm from their own behaviour (i.e. likely to, or indeed beginning to, commit criminal or anti-social acts). if the incident is not serious then the person and their parents should be made aware of the consequences of continued misbehaviour. they should also be encouraged to change behaviour through positive activities as well as local parenting advice and support. strong links can be made here with other services providing positive activities such as youth clubs. Family support may also be appropriate. the child or young person can then be released into the care of parents or guardians.

Serious or hidden issuesif the issues seem more serious or hidden, then the CaF should be used. the implications of this should be discussed with the child or young person and a parent and their consent should be sought before proceeding.

the CaF Pre-assessment Checklist1 will help determine which services are needed

in police or other unmarked vehicles but must never be transported in the cage of a secure van. we strongly recommend that an unmarked vehicle is used for this operation.

the officer who takes a child or young person into police protection must accompany them to the safe place and remain with them until Children’s services are happy for them to go (they will usually leave at the start of the interview). Children and young people must be supervised at all times.

the presence of la Children’s services at the safe place ensures compliance with the requirement for a police officer to notify the la when a child is taken into police protection.

Assessing and managing issuesinitial assessments should be based on a conversation with the child or young person and the application of common sense. there should also be back-up checks to see if the child is known to the police, Children’s services or Yot.

1 For the full list visit: www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/resources-and-practice/tP00004/.

13

Involving the communityin Preston, police send young people and local residents mobile phone text alerts using Bluetooth technology when an operation is taking place. after the operation, the police return to the area to let people know how the operation went using the same technology. we recommend that all areas publicise their staysafe operations in the most effective ways.

Cost implicationsMost of the costs are borne by the use of existing staff and facilities. the new money provided under the YCaP intensive Programme from 2009 will allow those resources to be expanded and could include additional costs such as training, vehicle and facility hire, and staff overtime (especially for working on Friday and saturday nights).

liverpool found that each staysafe operation cost approximately £2,500 per ‘place of safety’, most of the costs being in staff time. in Preston the costs were closer to £2,000 per ‘place of safety’.

or whether a full CaF is necessary. the decision should be discussed and agreed and appropriate arrangements made for a swift follow-up, ideally the next day.

if the parents or young person refuse a CaF, it must be considered whether this places them at risk. if so, the person may require non-negotiable support through actions such as a parenting order, referral to a Family intervention Programme (FiP) or acceptable Behaviour Contract (aBC) or anti-social Behaviour order (asBo).

Involving parentsif parents are present at the place of safety and they have been assessed as capable of providing support, the child or young person should be released into their care. if parents are unable or unwilling to attend then the child should be delivered to their home and the necessary discussions should take place there. the team may, however, assess that returning the child or young person to the parents places him or her at risk of harm. in such cases, emergency accommodation must be arranged through Children’s services in the usual way.

1. o

Pera

tio

n

ST

AY

SA

FE

14

recognising that a large proportion of youth disorder or asB is driven by groups of young people, these teams share information to identify young people at risk of crime and/or anti-social behaviour who will not engage in mainstream youth provision. working together, team members agree on the most effective way forward and, using local police intelligence and crime data, they work out when and where they will be most effectively deployed.

they then try to engage with the young people they target, developing ways of preventing anti-social behaviour and putting them in touch with local services and facilities that could help. a key part of this work is ensuring that appropriate, positive activities are provided to support the work these teams do on the street.

Who should be involved?the groups organising the teams and those actually deployed to deliver the outreach work will all include representatives from the local neighbourhood policing team (such as the neighbourhood beat manager/sergeant), a local housing officer and youth workers. linking up with non-statutory, third-sector providers and community group representatives can also be beneficial.

Aimsstreet teams aim to tackle youth offending and asB by engaging disaffected young people on the streets. they set out to target those who have rejected previous offers of support, in particular. they aim to achieve their goals by offering three main types of support:

1. Engagement: working to gain the trust of young people and encouraging them to take up positive enjoyable activities that provide structure and opportunity.

2. Advocacy: being seen as a reliable, credible source of advice and guidance. working with young people by offering them (or helping them to access) relevant holistic and/or therapeutic services if they need them.

3. Non-negotiable support: emphasising that tough sanctions will be enforced if young people refuse to engage and/or conduct asB and/or criminal disorder.

2. street-Based TEAmS

15

2. s

tree

t-Ba

sed

TE

Am

S

based on intelligence from neighbourhood police teams and other sources. a multi-disciplinary team should also be on hand to co-ordinate assigned resources with the roll out of targeted Youth support in that area.

Partnership boundarieswhere appropriate, youth workers should forge close partnerships with the police and youth services and assume a lead professional role. it is important, however, that the youth workers’ engagement, advocacy and support roles are clearly distinct from the intelligence and enforcement roles of the police.

Getting startedwhen setting up street teams, local intelligence should be used to identify which areas have the highest levels of anti-social or criminal activity. then determine the times your teams will be deployed. Current projects have found Fridays, saturdays and sundays, between 4.00pm and midnight the most effective times to be out on the streets. some areas deploy their teams on foot, which is very effective. other areas have developed a ‘resource bus’ that is parked in the selected neighbourhood and acts as a base from

in establishing and deploying street teams, it is essential to consider links with other YCaP/youth initiatives in the area. operation staysafe, after school Patrols and extended school provision, ssP and extended Friday and saturday provision of positive activities might all be usefully linked to the work of these teams.

the success of street team operations depends on how well the la youth and children’s services, the police and other local agencies work together. one agency will need to take the lead, ensuring the commitment of all partners at a senior level and that a sustainable, strategic approach is adopted and maintained. the lead agency will also be charged with driving the initiative forward and will, ultimately, be accountable for the partnership’s activities. which agency is chosen is a matter for local discretion.

identifying the most problematic neighbourhoods will require information provided by the la, police and other partnership data. this will also help to ensure the street teams deployed to those neighbourhoods are of the correct composition and receive the right support and back-up. what is needed should be

16

backgrounds. some team members might be able to relate directly to the challenges of growing up in difficult and often violent surroundings.

some areas have found it useful to recruit team members who may, themselves, have made difficult choices to give themselves better life chances. this will help them to relate to the stark choices that young people often face.

Communication activitiesthe work of street teams should be communicated both to the young people they encounter in their daily work and around the communities in which they operate. regular channels should be agreed and used to communicate project updates.

important information includes a system of ‘graduated sanctions’ to stop poor behaviour escalating. this should be agreed and communicated to children, young people and their families or carers. local interventions associated with your street teams should also be advertised, including opportunities for local stakeholders to air their views on their work and the issues they are dealing with.

which foot-based teams can operate. the bus also provides a venue where the young people can get information and advice or be invited in for a chat or a hot drink.

everyone needs to be clear about their roles and responsibilities as well as who they need to report to and what they need to deliver. where possible, the youth worker should act as the lead overseeing a flexible team that can draw in new ‘members’, such as housing officers, when needed.

teams should be able to offer graduated support and challenge. this means initially giving young people the opportunity to engage voluntarily with services, but escalating and applying tougher sanctions where young people will not engage.

street teams should be able to gain the respect of the young people they are working with – these may be people who are challenging and difficult to engage, and may have resisted help from other services. street team members should therefore appear credible to young people and understand, or have shared, the young people’s cultural, family and educational

17

Cost implicationsstreet teams tend to use existing staff and facilities. additional funding can be used to expand the work of the teams and/or to pay for extra costs such as:

g additional staff hours

g publicity and community awareness campaigns

g expanding the resource budget, e.g. training and facilities

g expanding family support services

g impact evaluation and monitoring

g rapid mobilisation of the police, local authority and non statutory/third sector providers

risksstreet-based teams need to gain the respect of the young people they are working with.

street team members should therefore be credible and acceptable to the young people who are being targeted. some street-based teams have found recruiting youth workers that are ex-gang members or ex-offenders highly beneficial.

street team workers who are ex-offenders or former gang members should not be seen as experts in this area just because they have lived the experience. they are valuable because they are able to relate to the challenges of growing up in a difficult and often violent environment. they therefore have the ability to listen to troubled young people and help them make important changes to their lives.

2. s

tree

t-Ba

sed

TE

Am

S

18

Who should be involved?to ensure that interventions are as effective as possible, the involvement of the Yot and the police and the support of local courts is essential. From autumn 2009, reparation activity might be attached to a Youth rehabilitation order. Until then, it could form part of a referral order, action Plan order, reparation order or supervision order.

Getting startedthis initiative aims to draw on the experience that all Yots already have at delivering individual and group reparation. it is likely to build on the good practice that is currently followed across the country, for example paying overtime for Yot staff to supervise reparation activity. what might be new to Yots are the elements of evening provision, involving the community and improving visibility – all discussed below.

Evening reparation (including Friday and Saturday night)reparation must be appropriate and sensitive to the cultural, health, language, religious and other needs of the young person and the local community. in a case

the Youth Crime action Plan includes commitments to improve the use of reparation and highlights reparation during leisure time, including on Friday and saturday nights. the Plan commits to providing the public with opportunities to identify suitable reparation work and looks for improved publicity for community sentences in the youth justice system so that local people can see what is being done to tackle youth offending. in addition, the Plan states that “the Criminal Justice and immigration act 2008 will establish a sentencing structure firmly based on reparation …[which] should be a fundamental part of any community sentence for a young offender”.

Aimswhatever reparation activity is delivered, it should demonstrate actively that young offenders are engaged constructively in making up for their offences and putting something positive back into their neighbourhoods. wherever possible, local communities should have a say on what reparation activity is done in their local area.

3. reParation

19

Involving the communityit is a Government priority to increase public confidence in the youth justice system. Yots should contribute to this by developing effective means to communicate with, and invite suggestions from, the local community regarding community-based reparation projects. Meaningful consultation with the local community and increased knowledge of effective reparation projects should contribute to a greater public understanding of, and confidence in, the youth justice system. in particular, it can demonstrate that community sentences are robust and effective alternatives to custody for young offenders. Greater understanding can also lead to greater sense of community ‘ownership’ of youth crime problems and solutions.

the projects should deliver tangible benefits to local people and be appropriate for delivery by young people who have offended. Projects should be developed with partner agencies, including the la and neighbourhood policing teams. Yots should also consider dialogue with a range of

where a high risk of reoffending is identified with a particular timing, consideration should be given as to whether curfew or evening reparation would be appropriate.

Given the increased risk of breach, it is not recommended that evening reparation is combined with curfew. Care will also need to be exercised to avoid tension between evening reparation and operation staysafe. the particular health and safety issues of evening reparation will need to be fully addressed, e.g. safe transport to and from placements, working in the dark, etc.

Yots should work closely with the local police to further develop understanding and analysis of peak offending times and locations in their area in order to support the targeting of interventions. las have the flexibility to adapt Yot services to address local needs, but where additional resources are required (e.g. for overtime and/or recruiting new staff) the la will need to be persuaded of the case.

3. r

ePa

rati

on

20

Care must be taken at all times to protect young people’s identities.

the use of local media and local information newsletters to showcase stories and case examples of best practice can be effective ways of improving local community knowledge and confidence. local media will be most interested in reporting projects that have a visible or tangible benefit to the local community, so any approach to them should emphasise the benefits of the reparation work to local people. ‘Before and after’ photographs of reparation projects (for example, work done to improve neglected areas) are likely to be of interest to the local press, as are images of reparation work in progress.

if victims are willing to share their experience of the restorative/reparation process with the local media, this can be effective in demonstrating the benefits that reparation can have and help to lessen the fear of crime. Plaques can also be used to show where work has been completed by Yots – and can be sponsored by local businesses.

community groups including the voluntary sector, neighbourhood resident associations, agencies responsible for the local environment, day centres for the elderly and disabled, community centres, young victims’ panels (where they exist), and advice and volunteer bureaux. Yot workers may be able to meet group representatives or attend community group meetings to talk about reparation work and current projects. where possible, the groups should also be given the opportunity to suggest reparation projects which would benefit the community. information briefings or newsletters featuring reparation work can also be produced and distributed to raise awareness.

Improving visibility – publicising reparationCommunity involvement and confidence can be enhanced by visible evidence of community reparation work. it is important that this is achieved by Yots at the same time as ensuring the anonymity of the children and young people carrying out reparation work, in order to avoid the risk of vulnerable young people being targeted.

21

depending on the design of the reparation scheme, you may also have to factor in costs of management work to identify suitable reparation, costs of risk assessing reparation work, safety equipment, and warm clothing for young people. la insurance may not cover evening activities either, in which case there would be additional insurance costs. safe travel home for young people should also be considered.

It is essential that your local authority press office is notified before members of the media are approached.

riskslate-night reparation activities might only be appropriate for older young people and should not be given if they interfere with curfew provisions.

Cost implicationswhen costing reparation activities, the following factors should be taken into account:

g staff overtime

g hire of facilities or equipment

g training of staff

g on-call out-of-hours manager

g refreshments and transport.

3. r

ePa

rati

on

22

the child or young person as quickly as possible.

Why do this?the triage model brings Yot expertise into the police charging centre and ensures that expertise is on hand to inform decision making. it improves the sharing of information between Yots, police and the CPs and means that all young people entering a police charging centre can have their risks and needs rapidly assessed.

this will deliver a number of benefits. it will ensure young people are assessed and, where necessary, referred to the appropriate support services; and it will help ensure that the disposal given in any given case is appropriate – for example, low level offences involving low risk offenders should receive a proportionate response, such as being dealt with through a restorative justice approach. this will help prevent unnecessary escalation through the criminal justice system whilst ensuring that more serious offenders are dealt with appropriately – for example, through the courts.

wherever possible, a Yot worker will be available in the custody suite2. they will carry out a rapid assessment of all young people brought into custody, establishing whether they are already known to the Yot, YisP or Children’s services. the worker will then provide advice to the Police and CPs which will inform their decision on the next steps.

in low-risk cases this will probably involve restorative intervention rather than further progress through the criminal justice system (CJs). in more complex cases, however, the most likely course of action is bail, so a more detailed assessment can be made before any decisions are taken. if the offence is clear cut, then the young person will be given an out-of-court disposal or be charged and any decisions will be the responsibility of the CJs agencies.

AimsHaving a Yot worker in a custody suite means they will be alerted as soon as a young person is brought into the CJs. they can therefore help to ensure that informed and appropriate decisions are made about

4. Yot worKers IN CuSTOdY SuITES (triaGe Model)

2 the location of the Yot worker will depend on the number of custody suites available in the local area. if they cannot be accommodated in the suite itself then they will be available by phone.

23

4. Y

ot

wo

rKer

s

IN C

uS

TO

dY

Su

ITE

S

(tri

aG

e M

od

el)

delivering the servicethe exact times when this service should be available will be determined by local needs and peak offending times. in most places, the times of highest need for the service will be between 4.00pm and 8.00pm (from school leaving time to early evening) and at weekends.

Triage case studies triage in custody suites for young people is a relatively new concept and is still at the trial stage. it is being piloted by the YJB and the CJB in the london boroughs of lewisham and Greenwich and is in use in Middlesbrough as part of a Youth Custody support scheme.

early findings from the pilots indicate a reduction in Ftes and improved information sharing and partnership working between agencies. the final report on the london pilots is due in april 2009. this will also examine the impact of triage on responses to more serious youth offending.

Who should be involved?this approach involves Yot workers operating with the police and the CPs as well as other agencies who may be delivering specific services (such as third-sector children’s organisations).

working this way should also mean that a young person’s family is engaged at a far earlier stage than is currently the norm.

Getting startedwhen setting up a triage scheme, it is essential to get the agreement and support of senior representatives of the police, CPs and Youth offending team at local level. the project must develop a reporting structure headed, for example, by the Yot Management Board but local areas will determine their own arrangements.

all agencies involved should agree and sign up to the necessary protocols and procedures, examples of which are available within the standard operating Procedure. each of them should also nominate a champion tasked with driving the development and delivery of the scheme forward

24

risksPolice sanction detection (sd) targets should not be problematic, particularly now the focus is on increasing public confidence in the police and on bringing more serious offences to justice. the pilots have shown only a small reduction in sds.

Cost implicationsBasic costs are likely to be incurred through staff recruitment and overtime, particularly for work in the evening and at weekends.

25

4. Y

ot

wo

rKer

s

IN C

uS

TO

dY

Su

ITE

S

(tri

aG

e M

od

el)

26

5. aFter sCHool PATrOLS

individuals concerned as necessary. there are links with the delivery of street teams, truancy sweeps and positive activities.

Why organise After School Patrols?school closing time can be a flashpoint for trouble, even if the trouble does not actually occur immediately outside the school gates. Young people have told us that increasing the presence of police and PCsos wherever young people congregate would help reduce youth offending.

this approach is a development of the neighbourhood Policing initiative which has proved to be successful in building public confidence by involving the community in tackling offending.

Who should be involved?the teams should be run by neighbourhood Policing teams in consultation with a range of stakeholders including:

g British Transport Police (if operations are run on buses or at a transport interchange)

Aimsafter school Patrols are designed to tackle anti-social behaviour, disorder and more serious offending (including knife crime) at school closing time, on problematic school bus routes and at transport interchanges. the visibility of the patrols will reassure young people, local schools and communities in areas where crime and disturbances occur while helping to prevent problems and enforce laws as required. it is also an opportunity for the police patrols to pick up additional intelligence.

they will work closely with schools, ssP officers, parents and the local community to identify and address the needs of individuals who cause disturbances. there should also be links made with other partners in the local community such as bus service providers, shop keepers etc.

drawing on intelligence from neighbourhood Policing teams (nPt), ssPs or the schools themselves, these patrols will target areas and individuals of particular concern. they will inform schools and the local ssP of the outcomes of their operations enabling the ssP to work with

27

5. a

Fter

sC

Ho

ol

PAT

rO

LS

targeted area. there should therefore be sufficient police officers and PCsos on hand without the patrol being seen as ‘heavy handed’.

after school patrols should respond to intelligence, while also using the patrol as an opportunity to gather further information. if asB or crimes do occur then teams will be expected to respond accordingly and enforce the law.

it is important that information from the patrols is fed back to the schools, ssP officers and any other appropriate party (such as shopkeepers or transport workers). while this may not be practical or appropriate after every single deployment of a patrol, it is important that this information and intelligence is not lost, so you should factor in regular feedback meetings to share information.

Follow up operationsFollowing the discussions described above, the school, police and ssP officer (where possible) will then agree a strategy for addressing any needs people might have and work with them accordingly in the future.

g Safer School Partnerships

g schools

g young people

g local communities

g other individuals or agencies who are aware of problems in the area (such as YOT workers and youth workers).

Getting startedstart by identifying where patrols need to be put in place. this can be determined through discussions with neighbourhood Policing teams, the schools in the area and ssP officers. You should also ask young people and people in the local community what kind of problems occur (e.g. shoplifting within a shopping centre, disorder on public transport), where they happen and what they think should be done to resolve them. this can all be taken into consideration when determining where to deploy your patrols.

running a patrolthe primary purpose of the operation is to reassure the public, including young people, and prevent asB and crime occurring by providing a visible police presence in the

28

the local community should be told about any specific successes patrols have had and they should have the chance to suggest changes or improvements to how the patrols operate. this can be done through neighbourhood Policing approaches. Finally, it might be worth discussing the patrols and their outcomes with young people in the area and canvassing their thoughts on how the patrols could be run. these ideas should be noted and used to help inform future strategy changes.

risksafter school Patrols are governed primarily by common sense and are a continuation of the work most nPts have been doing in some form or another for some time.

Cost implicationsBasic costs are likely to be incurred through staff overtime. Comprehensive guidance on safer school Partnerships will be published in spring 2009.

29

5. a

Fter

sC

Ho

ol

PAT

rO

LS

30

g speak up and influence decisions that affect them.

Meeting these aims and supporting young victims effectively requires four essential stages:

1. Giving young people information so they can keep themselves safe before a crime has happened.

2. Giving young people the confidence and knowledge to recognise victimisation and report crime.

3. Identifying the practical and emotional support each individual needs.

4. delivering that support.

Why support young victims?Young people are more likely to be victims of crime than adults, yet they are less likely to report that they have been a victim and therefore less likely to get support. there are a variety of reasons for this: they may not know how to; they might not trust authority; or they might think that what has happened to them is normal and not worth reporting. another important reason is that they may fear reprisals from perpetrators they know. without support some young victims may also go on to offend.

supporting young victims recognises that young people are not just perpetrators of crime – they are affected by it as well.

supporting young victims starts with giving young people information so they can keep themselves safe from crime. it also involves increasing their confidence in coming forward as well as giving them practical and emotional support if they need it.

Five pilot projects are being run to test the best ways to support young victims of crime. the following outlines current best practice for anyone working with young people who may have been victims of crime, or who may be at risk of becoming victims.

Aimssupporting young victims should help young people to:

g feel safer

g understand what crime is, that it is not acceptable and not just part of growing up

g know how to get help if they need it

g avoid turning to crime in response to being a victim

6. sUPPortinG YOuNG VICTImS

31

6. S

uP

PO

rT

ING

Y

Ou

NG

VIC

TIm

S

Getting startedthe first step is to establish what support services already exist for young victims in the area and the gaps that need to be filled to meet all four stages. the next steps would be to:

g convene a meeting of the agencies and organisations that need to be involved in the area

g identify the ‘zone’ in which the scheme is to be run (e.g. LA area, LCJB, CDRP, ward, a few schools)

g identify which parts of the four essential stages already exist

g agree how the partnership will fill the gaps locally

g define roles and responsibilities for any new work

g identify any additional resources that might be needed and how the partnership will provide them

addressing these problems will help young victims access support if they need it and may also help to stop some young victims from offending through retaliation or befriending offenders.

Who should be involved?a single agency or organisation could not deliver all four necessary stages. Victim support demands a partnership approach and in the pilot projects, partners have included:

Criminal Justice Agencies: Police, Yots, Courts, Crown Prosecution service, local Criminal Justice Boards, Crime and disorder reduction Partnerships.

Local Authorities: Children’s services, Community safety Partnerships, youth services, schools.

Voluntary Sector: Victim support, local groups supporting victims or young people, local groups that work with people at risk of offending.

6. s

UPP

ort

inG

Y

Ou

NG

VIC

TIm

S

32

appropriate support. it is no good running fantastic support services for young victims, for example, if local agencies do not know about them and cannot therefore make referrals.

Cost implicationsMost areas will already be involved in activities such as supporting young victims, or may at least have services, like self-esteem building activities, that are underused because young victims are unaware of them. developing partnerships, sharing information and making referrals between partners should not necessarily incur a huge cost.

depending on the design of the scheme, there may be some additional costs to consider, including:

g costs of additional staff time to co-ordinate partnership activity

g costs of additional services for victims

g clarify referral pathways and information sharing arrangements between the partners (e.g. referring victims with different needs to different partners)

g canvas the views of young people on what is being planned.

Trialling victim supportthere are currently five pilot projects working out the best ways to deliver the four stages of support. these are in derby, lambeth, lewisham, norfolk and oxfordshire. Most areas, however, will be already delivering some, if not all, of the four stages. Further good practice ideas and guidance from all five sites will be available in the summer.

riskswith four stages to supporting young victims, schemes can only be effective if they are run by a partnership of agencies and organisations. without a partnership approach it may not be possible to identify young victims or to provide the

33

6. S

uP

PO

rT

ING

Y

Ou

NG

VIC

TIm

S6.

sU

PPo

rtin

G

YO

uN

G V

ICT

ImS

34

this funding will enable las to deliver a range of support for families with different levels of needs from universal services to more intensive support for high need families. Underpinning this are changes in attitudes, culture and behaviour at local level and on the front line to identify and intervene early.

Aimsthink Family means reforming systems and services provided for vulnerable children, young people and adults to ensure services work together to:

g identify families at risk to provide support at the earliest opportunity

g meet the full range of needs within each family they are supporting or working with

g develop services which can respond effectively to the most challenging families

g strengthen the ability of family members to provide care and support to each other.

Following the Government’s Families at risk review3 the think Family approach was developed to improve the support offered to vulnerable children and adults within the same family. From april 2009, las will receive extra funding to:

g implement Think Family reforms to LA and health service systems and services

g set up Youth Crime Family Intervention Projects (FIPs) to provide intensive support to families in the greatest difficulty

g offer Parenting Early Intervention Programmes (PEIPs) to help mothers and fathers of children (aged 8-13) at risk of poor outcomes to improve their parenting skills

g continue to fund Parenting Experts and practitioners in all authorities.

in addition, some las will continue to be eligible for significant additional funding to support the development of family-based approaches to tackling anti-social behaviour and child poverty.

7. tHinK FAmILY

3 the report is available at: http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/social_exclusion_task_force/families_at_risk.aspx

35

7. t

Hin

K FA

mIL

Y

in the family are appropriately supported and protected from falling into difficulty, sustaining the family unit as a whole.

intervening early with a think Family approach helps stop problems escalating to crisis level. By thinking about the broader needs of the family, for example, adult services supporting a mother or father with mental health problems can play an important role in sustaining the family unit and helping to ensure that children in the family receive the support they need.

Who should be involved?delivering think Family systems and services requires a core set of partners. these include: la education and children’s social care services, adult’s social care and housing services. other services that need to be involved are Primary Care trust and provider services for child and adult health (including mental health), substance misuse services, Children’s Centres, Jobcentre Plus and the learning and skills Council, as well as schools, the police, anti-social behaviour teams, the third sector, Prison service, Probation, Youth offending teams, the Youth service and maternity services.

to implement think Family, las will need to improve integrated governance systems, strategy and processes such as commissioning, needs assessment and information sharing. think Family reforms should form an integral part of local strategies to improve children’s well-being – children usually live in families and the needs of their mothers and fathers are of direct relevance to the well-being of the child.

the changes that need to be made as part of think Family mirror the steps introduced under every Child Matters. they are summarised in a diagram known as the ‘eCM onion’ (see overleaf):

Why Think Family?a small number of families are responsible for a disproportionate amount of the workload of many different agencies. these families experience multiple problems and need significant amounts of support. schools, health services, the criminal justice system and housing services may all have contact with the same family, but that does not mean that all of the family’s needs are being met. By identifying the broader needs of all family members, adults and children, adult services can help ensure that children

36

Families at the centre

Families are involved the design of their support wherever possible and empowered through devolved budgets and family led decision making

intergrated frontline delivery

empowered and assertive practitioners provide tailored and joined-up support around the whole family. they identify needs early and proactively engage families.

intergrated processes

shared assesments and information across agencies give a full picture of a families needs and help ensure support is fully co-ordinated.

intergrated strategy

Joined-up planning and commissioning drive a focus on families at risk across all agencies.

inter-agency governance

accountability for family outcomes is clear, with strong leadership at the top and protocols set out responsibilities between agencies.

Intergrated strategy

Interg

rated processes

Inte

rgrat

ed frontline delivery

Inter-agency governance

Familiesat the Centre

37

(taF), builds on the existing CaF model, but captures more data about the family. the form includes employment history, financial issues, housing and physical and mental health. it aims to bring services together via a lead worker at the centre responsible for liaising with a family.

Family Pathfinder 3a lead professional (lP) has been nominated to negotiate the care plan and co-ordinate work with families at risk. the la is looking at giving each family an lP for both children and adults, to ensure the two sets of services are co-ordinated effectively.

Family Pathfinder 4overall accountability for the successful delivery of the pathfinder lies with their ‘improve wellbeing Board’ (the strategic commissioning group for children’s services, usually chaired by the director of Children’s services). the board is responsible for joint planning, performance management, joint commissioning and integrated workforce development. it is reviewing board membership to ensure all section 10 partners, including police and probation services, are represented.

Getting startedall local authorities are being provided with funding for think Family in 2009-10. la Parenting Commissioners have been asked to submit a template outlining plans. local areas will be provided with tailored support in implementing think Family reforms and setting up new targeted parent and family services.

Who has done this already?there are currently 15 local authorities developing the think Family model. examples of changes being made by Family Pathfinder areas include:

Family Pathfinder 1a multi-agency panel has been set up to discuss referrals of at-risk families, share information and decide on appropriate action. a team of key-workers receive all referrals and escalate the most serious cases to the panel while dealing with cases that need single referrals to sources of support such as parenting programmes.

Family Pathfinder 2this area has developed a whole family assessment tool to assess a family’s needs. the form, called team around the Family

7. t

Hin

K FA

mIL

Y

38

Family Pathfinder 5responsibility for families at risk locally has been placed with the directors of both children’s and adults services. Both are now required to provide reports on the progress of the think Family pathfinder to the local strategic Partnership.

Cost implicationsdepending on the design of the scheme, costs to be considered include:

g costs of staff time to scope how best to deliver Think Family reforms, co-ordinate

g partnership activity and join up delivery to families at risk

g costs of workforce development activity and awareness raising

riskssuccessful implementation of think Family requires buy-in from key partners in the la, PCt and police. it cannot be achieved through the efforts of children’s services alone and Children’s trusts will need to develop plans for achieving local sign-up where this is not in place from the outset.

39

7. t

Hin

K FA

mIL

Y

40

AimsFamily intervention Projects are being extended to support families whose problems put children and young people at risk of future offending. evidence shows that half of youth crime is committed by a small number of highly prolific offenders. Children who go on to become prolific young offenders typically suffer from harsh or neglectful parenting and develop behavioural difficulties at an early age. By providing intensive support, FiPs can intervene in this cycle at an early stage creating immediate benefits for the family and, later on, wider benefits for the communities they live in.

Family intervention Projects (FiPs) provide intensive support to vulnerable families. they were initially developed as part of the Government’s respect programme to focus on families involved in persistent anti-social behaviour who are at risk of losing their homes and are now being expanded to wider groups of families at risk.

through assertive working methods and the threat of sanctions, projects help families improve behaviour and underlying problems. accredited parenting programmes are delivered and additional services, such as health, are brought in and co-ordinated around the family.

8. FaMilY INTErVENTION PrOJECTS

41

8. F

aM

ilY

IN

TE

rV

EN

TIO

N

Pr

OJE

CT

S

a recent evaluation detailed the successful outcomes FiPs are delivering, which is why YCaP has committed to extending FiPs to every local authority in england by 2010 (to reach at least 20,000 families)4.

key risk factors for offending

Family Child

g Mental ill health

g Domestic violence

g Offending/having a parent in prison

g Substance misuse

g Child abuse and neglect

g Poor parenting (harsh, inconsistent parenting, lack of supervision etc)

g Family conflict/breakdown

g Deprivation and unemployment

g Behaviour problems, ADHD, conduct disorder, anti-social behaviour

g Truancy and exclusion

g Low achievement at school

g Taken into care of local authority

Why start a FIP?Family intervention Projects can improve the lives of the most challenging families. they have demonstrated that intensive multi-agency support co-ordinated by a single key worker can bring about significant changes for families with the most severe and complex needs.

4 see: http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/publications/youthcrimeactionplan/.

42

Yot, the PCt and health services may all need to participate. relevant agencies need to make referrals, share information about a family, attend case review meetings and inform the FiP about progress and whether appointments are being attended.

Getting startedthe following features are crucial to the effectiveness of the FiP model.

A dedicated key worker who works intensively with the whole family: their role is to manage or ‘grip’ the family’s problems, co-ordinate the delivery of services and use a combination of support, rewards and (where appropriate) the possibility of sanctions to motivate families to change their behaviour.

Persistence and assertiveness with families is critical to keeping them engaged and following agreed steps. Key workers deliver direct support to families (around developing life skills, self confidence, motivation and goals) as well as referring to specialist interventions (e.g. evidence-based parenting programmes, drug treatment, Child and adult Mental Health services etc). small caseloads (of four-to-six) enable

Significant reductions in risk factors for families after FIP.g 49% of families had four or

more ASB problems at the start of the intervention: by the end this was 4%

g 58% of families were subject to one or more housing enforcement actions at the beginning of the intervention: at the end this had fallen to 14%

g the proportion of families exhibiting poor parenting had halved from 60% to 32%

g the proportion of families considered to be at risk of domestic violence had reduced from 26% to 8%

source: National Centre for Social Research data from the first 327 families to complete a FIP www.dcsf.gov.uk.

Who should be involved?services such as early years, schools, social services, youth services and housing as well as community safety, the police and the

43

8. F

aM

ilY

IN

TE

rV

EN

TIO

N

Pr

OJE

CT

S

the key worker to work very intensively with families and stay involved for as long as necessary. access to budgets is important in enabling key-workers to solve small problems for families that can quickly help win trust.

Projects take a whole family approach: the key worker needs to take a ‘whole family approach’ ensuring that the needs of the whole family are assessed and responded to in an holistic way. Projects make particular efforts to include non-resident fathers (including fathers who are in prison, Young offender institutions, secure training Centres etc) in work carried out with a family.

A contract is drawn up between the family and key worker: this sets out the changes that are expected, the support that will be provided to facilitate those changes and what will happen if those changes are not made. a co-ordinated plan for the whole family is developed which sets out what contribution different services will make and fills any gaps in support. the support plan nearly always includes an evidence-based parenting programme which outlines the family’s

objectives and how they will be met, the contributions of individual family members (where appropriate) and the contribution of services, with timescales and reviews built in to ensure accountability.

The possibility of sanctions to motivate families to change: the ‘asB FiPs’ use a range of sanctions primarily linked to anti-social behaviour (asBos, demoted tenancies, possession orders etc). las will need to consider the role of sanctions in the new projects once they have formed a view on the families they wish to target. where there is evidence of poor parenting, projects may consider using parenting-related sanctions such as Parenting orders. if sanctions are felt to be inappropriate, projects may want to consider how incentives might be created through the use of rewards.

Effective multi-agency arrangements: services that may need to take part include early years, schools, social services, youth services, and housing as well as community safety, the police and the Yot, the PCt and health service

44

FIPs in action.three types of FiP currently operate in different areas of the country:

FIPs aimed at families who are persistently anti-social and at risk of homelessness (asB FiPs) currently operate in 65 areas of the country. these aim to tackle the root causes of the anti-social behaviour which can be caused by mental health issues, domestic violence, and substance misuse or living in poverty.

FIPs aimed at families who are workless and who have significant barriers to work, e.g. substance misuse, mental health issues (Child Poverty FiPs or CPFiPs): announced in the 2008 budget, 10 are currently up and running with further projects planned in 2009-10 and for 2010-11. they target families where no-one is working and tackle intergenerational worklessness.

YCAP FIPs aimed at families experiencing problems linked to youth offending and other poor outcomes (e.g. child behavioural problems, mental ill health, domestic violence, having a parent in prison, prolific parental offending, substance misuse, child

neglect). twenty projects were set up in 2008 and, from april 2009, all las will receive funding to establish projects of their own.

new Youth Crime FiPs should be designed around the most significant types of risk in families, such as prolific parental offending, substance misuse and domestic violence. examples of projects established so far include:

g targeting families with substance misusing parents with at least one child under five delivered through children’s centre

g focussing on preventing inter-generational patterns of offending by working with the families of priority prolific and longstanding offenders

g working with the families of prisoners from a project based in a prison

g project focussing on working with families involved in local guns, gangs and knife activity

g targeting families with children at risk of offending due to domestic violence and family breakdown.

45

risksFiPs cannot be effective without the co-operation of the full range of relevant local agencies. they can only be delivered effectively if links have been made with relevant local services. Multi-agency arrangements need to be in place to ensure that the appropriate local agencies are aware of the projects and are contributing to multi-agency support plans.

Cost implicationsthe average costs of delivering a FiP range from around £8,000 to £20,000 per family, per year. in comparison, where these families do not enter a FiP, one study estimated the costs to the taxpayer as being between £250,000 and £350,0005 per family per year. this expenditure is nominal when compared with other costs that can be incurred by these families. For example, it costs about £110,000 a year to keep a child in residential care and it is estimated that every £1 spent on a prevention programme for those at risk of offending saves £5.

5 Communities and local Government (2006) ‘anti-social Behaviour intensive Family support Projects: an evaluation of six pioneering projects’. Department for Communities and Local Government: london

8. F

aM

ilY

IN

TE

rV

EN

TIO

N

Pr

OJE

CT

S

46

Linking Reparation in leisure time with:g publicising reparation, through

community panels

g support for young victims, through young victims’ panels helping to choose reparation activities

g resettlement, through using reparation as an opportunity to develop skills that can help young people to get back on track

g positive activities, such as in Haringey, where young people who are on reparation do the washing up in the youth centre on Friday nights.

Linking Operation Staysafe with:g delivery of family and parenting

interventions, through using assessment in the place of safety as a way to identify families in need of extra support (Rotherham’s FIP workers are based in the place of safety for this purpose)

every area will make links with other YCaP initiatives in the way that best meets local needs. some of the things YCaP areas are doing to make different elements work most effectively together include:

Linking After School Patrols with:g Safer Schools Partnerships, through

sharing intelligence on hot spots and young people who are at risk

g Street teams, through intelligence sharing to identify young people at risk who could be targeted by street teams (an approach bring taken by Tower Hamlets and Hackney)

g Friday and Saturday positive activities, through signposting young people after school to leisure activities

9. MaKinG ThE LINkS

47

g support for victims, as young people who are alone on the streets late at night are often vulnerable to victimisation

g positive activities, with staff pointing young people to leisure activities and support.

Linking YOT workers based in custody suites with:g positive activities, referring young

people to diversionary activities to reduce their involvement in offending

g parenting and family support, where this is identified as a risk factor for the young person

g support for young victims, where the young person is at-risk.

Linking Street Teams with:g After School Patrols and SSPs, sharing

intelligence to identify people and places that are particularly risky

9. M

aKi

nG

Th

E L

INk

S

g support for young victims, with street team workers having knowledge of services where young people can offer help and advice

g parenting support, with street team workers able to share knowledge and identify young people whose parents could benefit from support.

there are a number of effective practice principles that underpin these links, enabling practitioners to realise the benefits of co-ordinating the implementation of their YCaP strands. the most important are:

g intelligence-sharing between agencies and front line staff

g identifying and focusing effort on the people and places that are most risky

g ensuring front line staff have the right knowledge to be able to signpost young people to relevant services.

48

Further details of the Government’s policy on tackling youth crime can be found on the following websites:

Youth Crime Action Plan www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/youth-crime-action-plan/youth-crime-action-plan-08?view=Binary

respect website www.respect.gov.uk

respect handbook www.respect.gov.uk/members/article.aspx?id=12070

Think Family guidance www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/parents/supportfunding/

Youth Justice Board Guidance to Youth Offending Teams on reparation elements in the Youth Crime Action Plan www.yjb.gov.uk/en-gb/practitioners/workingwithVictims/restorativeJustice/

this booklet can also be found online at: www.homeoffice.gov.uk

www.dcsf.gov.uk

www.crimereduction.homeoffice.gov.uk

10. Find oUt More

49

notes

50

notes

If you require further copies of this title contact: Prolog Home Office orderline and quote reference: CDSD24

Tel: 0870 241 4680 E-mail: dpas@prolog.uk.com

(Office staffed from 8.30am to 6pm Monday to Friday)

Produced by the Home Office, March 2009. 293650