MoJ Grabs Youth Justice

Thanks go to the long term friend and supporter of this blog for pointing us in the direction of the recently published paper A Modern Youth Justice System that many feel will be anything but bad news for the one part of the criminal justice system that works reasonably well. Rob Allen has this to say about it:-   

Youth Justice - A Missed Opportunity?

There are some things to welcome in the government’s youth justice policy statement presented to Parliament today. Improved funding arrangements should enable local services to divert more children from crime, particularly knife crime and develop more effective alternatives to custody especially for those on remand. Plans to better incentivise local authorities to keep children awaiting trial for serious crimes in the community look promising.

But does the package really add up to the self-proclaimed “foundations fit for the future” of a modern system?

Yes, the government’s making some structural change- but it’s of questionable merit. They’re going further than the independent review of the Youth Justice Board (YJB) (also out today), by relieving the YJB of its roles in developing youth justice standards, overseeing how well they’re being met and advising ministers accordingly- as well as disbursing funds. These functions will revert to the Ministry of Justice, in line with cross government plans to cut spending and give ministers more decision-making powers.

The Board has at least survived, something of a surprise following its last minute reprieve from the 2010 bonfire of the quangos and loss of its responsibilities for youth custody in 2017. It would certainly have been odd to scrap entirely a New Labour creation which has been at the heart of what today’s statement calls “one of the great societal success stories in modern Britain.” The YJB will be a shadow of its former self however much it can make of its new mission of driving continuous improvement.

David Lammy’s statement also has some honest words on the dismaying conditions for children in custody, particularly Young Offender Institutions “too old and too big, they are austere and unsafe, and they were often not designed to hold children at all”. It’s just what Charlie Taylor said in his 2016 review since when the distraction of the Secure School has led to 10 wasted years. Work is now promised on a plan that is realistic, affordable, and focused on achievable outcomes, getting children safely out of their rooms and into education. Key to that will be investment in the right kinds of values and skills among staff.

That indicates where today’s proposals don’t go far enough. This was an opportunity to move youth justice policy out of the Ministry of Justice into the Department for Education. Developing the best response to children in trouble of course involves many departments and agencies. That’s why the variety of experience and expertise among YJB members is so important. Taking responsibility from them and giving it to MoJ officials seems a mistake; better the YJB report to a department more centrally involved with promoting the interests of children.

Youth Justice Minister Jake Richards recognises that successful policy and practice relies predominantly on activities outside his department’s remit. He recently expressed frustration at how long the Health department took to get the best child psychologist in the country to write a one-pager for staff at the Secure Training Centre on how to manage girls locked up there.

Lammy will “soon set out our plans for the system as a whole and, taken together, we believe these proposals will amount to the most fundamental reform of the youth justice system in a generation.”

To do that should paradoxically mean a significant reduction in his own responsibilities and a shift to a more fitting place in the machinery of government. After all, he who opens a school door, closes a prison.

Rob Allen

Lets Look at E3 (8)

Chapter 7 Youth Offending Services (YOS)

7.1 What does the model look like now? 

Since Youth Offending Services (YOS) were set up in 1998, Probation has played an integral part as a statutory partner in local services. This has included the secondment of probation staff to work in local Youth Offending Teams (YOT). These staff contribute to the multiagency work of the teams and in particular to the transfer of YOS cases to NPS or CRC at the age of 18. The NPS has responsibility for the Probation contribution to more than 150 local YOS. Currently the shape of this contribution varies across the NPS, specifically in the numbers and grades of staff, whether these are directly seconded staff or staff recruited by the YOT but paid for by Probation, and whether additional funding or other support is provided. There are also variations in the focus of work which seconded staff undertake. 

The proposals for YOS focus on harmonising staffing and working models, to ensure that these reflect both the needs of local services and best practice. The resources provided to YOS need to be reviewed to ensure a level of consistency and value for money. The proposals take into account changes in the profile of youth offending and in sentencing policy over recent years which have resulted in an estimated fall of 60% in the volume of cases managed by YOS. The Ministry of Justice is currently undertaking a review of Youth Justice which may have an impact on these proposals.

7.2 What do we want the future model to look like? 

We will continue to support YOS work to fulfil our statutory responsibility. We are committed to the multi-agency focus in work with young offenders and to a continued fall in youth offending. We will continue to build and maintain positive links between Probation and YOS which benefit young offenders and the community. We will ensure an equitable use of resources across different YOS. We want seconded Probation staff to contribute their specialist skills effectively in the most appropriate cases.

7.3 End state proposals 

There are three proposals for YOS work. 

7.3.1 National Framework 

Subject to the outcome of the Review of Youth Justice, we will agree an NPS framework which confirms the NPS responsibility towards YOS work. The framework will mean clear expectations of secondment arrangements for both YOS and NPS. It will ensure a consistent approach to YOS which meets statutory requirements. 

7.3.2 Resource model 

The framework will include a resource model based on the current workload of each YOS, with the contribution being in the form of seconded members of staff rather than financial. Seconded staff will be band 4 POs. In YOS where the resource model requires an additional member of staff to be seconded, there is scope for us to negotiate with the YJB about whether the additional resource should be a band 3 PSO, as is currently the situation in some YOS. This will apply in some of the larger YOS.

We expect that it will be easier for the NPS to monitor staffing cost than financial contributions. We will second staff for a period of three years to ensure that they retain their Probation skills and that the development opportunities offered by secondments are open to a greater number of OMs. 

As a result of this rationalisation of the resource model, we anticipate that there will be an overall reduction in numbers of staff seconded to YOS and therefore in cost. 

7.3.3 Standard workload 

Seconded OMs will work with high risk offenders and those offenders who will transfer to the NPS when they are 18. The expected size of caseload for a full time seconded OM will be 25 cases, this takes into account the complexity of and level of intervention required with YOS cases which are high risk and/or transferring to the NPS. Where YOS caseloads are particularly low this may mean that the seconded OM does not work full time in the YOS. 

7.4 Impact on service delivery 

We will need to negotiate with the YJB, and also with individual local authorities to agree the resource model and transition arrangements. In some areas we expect there will be a reduction in probation contribution and we will need to agree arrangements to manage this transition carefully to minimise the impact on local services. Other areas are likely to see an increase in provision and planning will also be needed to make best use of the additional staff. 

Agreeing the focus of the seconded OMs’ work means that they will make effective use of their risk assessment and intervention skills. It should also mean good quality risk management and a smooth transfer to the NPS for relevant cases.

OMs who have undertaken a secondment will be able to contribute to an increase in understanding and practice in work with young adults in the NPS. 

We will need to agree with the YJB an arrangement for providing performance data so we can ensure that OMs are managing the correct cases and that transfer of young adults to the Probation adult services has improved. 

The progress of the Youth Justice review may affect the timescale for putting these proposals into effect. 

7.5 Impact on staff 

These changes will provide OMs with a valuable development opportunity to be seconded to the YOT for a set period during their career, using their probation skills in a multi-agency setting to work with the most challenging young offenders whilst maintaining their NPS links.

We recognise that it will be important to support them in maintaining their knowledge and training in NPS work to ensure that they can remain flexible and mobile members of staff and so that they can continue to contribute to good practice in the light of their experience in youth justice. 

We are aware that some staff who have been seconded to YOS for extended periods may have specific training needs on returning to the NPS. We will take this into account in planning the arrangements for their return.

7.6 Conclusion 

We believe that E3 provides an opportunity for the NPS to agree an updated framework for the NPS contribution to YOS, which makes the best use of probation qualified staff and contributes to public protection.

(more to follow)