may 2014 executive summary & conclusion - dlnrcrc.co.uk€¦ · executive summary 6 biological...
TRANSCRIPT
Leicester, Leicestershire & Rutland
End of Phase One Report May 2014
Executive Summary
& Conclusion
CONTENTS
2
Contents
Background to the Young Adults Project (YAP) .......................................................................................................................................... 3
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5
Conclusion and Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................................. 11
BACKGROUND
3
Background to the Young
Adults Project (YAP)
YAP was established by the Leicester, Leicestershire
and Rutland Reducing Reoffending Board (RRB) in
October 2013. This was in response to Sir Clive
Loader, Police and Crime Commissioner, identifying
young adults as a priority group within the Police
and Crime Plan, 2013-2017, based on the evidence
that they are involved in a disproportionately high
amount of crime. This long-standing issue was also
a concern shared by partners. With this in mind, the
RRB agreed the first phase of the Project, an
exploratory phase aimed at gaining a deeper
understanding of the offending and needs of 16-24
year olds locally and examining the evidence as to
what is effective in reducing their offending and
reoffending.
Chaired by the Chief Executive of the Y, Leicester, a
multi-agency Project Board first met in November
2013. A Senior Probation Officer seconded to the
Office of the Police and Crime Commissioner (OPCC)
was assigned as Project Manager and managers
from County YOS, the Police, the OPCC and the Y-
Pod were identified as leads for the work stream
outlined below.
It was agreed that Phase 1 would focus on:
1. The gathering and analysis of relevant local
data provided by partner organisations
2. The involvement of young adults and the
analysis and incorporation of their feedback,
ideas and views
3. An exploration of the available research and
literature (including good practice guides and
site visits to innovative pilot projects) to obtain
evidence over what matters and what works
with this group
4. A mapping out of the current system, practices
and services to identify strengths of our
collective approach, any gaps and areas for
improvement.
5. The commencement of the engagement phase
and the development of a communications
strategy
In terms of planned and agreed outputs, Phase 1
was tasked with delivering the following:
1. A local data set (with analysis) relating to young
adults in the Criminal Justice System including
offending, reoffending, victim and needs data.
2. A written summary outlining the evidence-base
for what matters and what works in achieving
positive outcomes/reducing offending and
reoffending amongst this group.
3. The establishment of a Young Adult
Involvement System to inform Phase 1 but also
continue to underpin and shape local
developments in service delivery.
4. An outline and understanding of the current
system (including services and the transitions
between young person and adult services) and
an analysis of strengths and gaps.
5. Evidence-based recommendations including
recommended changes to service delivery
aimed at achieving better outcomes.
6. An Engagement and Communications strategy
to build levels of awareness of the Project
(locally and nationally) and increase
engagements with a wider range of
stakeholders.
In order to ensure the achievement of the agreed
outputs, five inter-related work streams were
established: Data Gathering and Analysis, Literature
Review and Effective Practice, Young Adult
Involvement, System Mapping and Gap Analysis and
Engagement and Communications.
Alongside monthly Project Board meetings, the
Board Chair, Project Manager and Work Stream
Leads were involved in a wide-range of activity
during Phase 1. This included:
BACKGROUND
4
Convening meetings for data leads from Police, the local Probation Trust, City and County YOS. All
agencies provided data and contributed to the Data Analysis report.
Organising Young Adult focus groups and an on-going social research project designed to gather the
views and experiences of young adults who have recently made transitions between services.
Convening practitioner focus groups to support the work of the System Mapping work stream
Compiling a Literature and an Effective Practice review, a YOS to Probation Transitions report and
Systems Mapping report.
Visits to a national T2A pilot for young adults
Hosting a visit for representatives from the Barrow Cadbury Trust/T2A and Revolving Doors
Attending relevant local and national conferences, workshops and briefings
Meetings with key stakeholders/partners, including those who represent key elements of the CJS and
pathways out of offending.
Publicising the project through launching a twitter account and the publication of a newsletter for
partners.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
5
Executive Summary
This report shares the findings of Phase 1 of the
Young Adults Project (YAP). It also makes a series of
system-wide recommendations focussed on
improving outcomes for young adults in contact
with the criminal justice system (CJS), including
securing a reduction in offending and reoffending
amongst this group. It is worth noting that there is
no definitive agreement over which age-range
constitutes ‘young adulthood’1. For the purpose of
clarity, the YAP considers young adulthood as 16-24
years inclusive. Whilst this review aims to highlight
the experiences and needs that many young adults
share, it is also crucial to emphasise that young
adults are not a homogenous group and both
background and need will be diverse.
Why Focus on Young Adults?
The current CJS is largely designed around a
distinction made between youth and adult, with a
step-change in law, policy, approach, services and
interventions when someone is deemed as an ‘adult’
(e.g. 18 years old) by the system. There is, however,
growing evidence that this does not adequately
address the offending or cater for the specific needs
of young adult offenders.
The over-representation of young adults in the CJS,
as both offenders and victims, has been a constant
feature of the system for many years. Nationally, 18-
24 year olds represent approximately 10% of the
population but they make up almost a third of
offenders found guilty or cautioned for indictable
offences, over one third of those starting a
community order or suspended sentence order and
almost one third of those sentenced to custody each
year (Justice Select Committee, 2013). However, it is
the higher reoffending rates of young adults in
contact with the CJS that raises questions over the
effectiveness of the current system.
1 The most common age bands seem to be 18-24 but other age bands are also frequently used (16-24 and 18-20) The YAP focuses on 16-24 because it provides an opportunity to make changes up-stream for those young people leaving young people’s services.
The literature also highlights the window of
opportunity that exists in addressing young adult
offending and reoffending. The widely recognised
age-crime curve (Farrington, 1986) shows that
young adulthood is a stage in life when desistance is
most likely to occur naturally. This, and other
similar evidence, suggests that:
‘…early adulthood is a watershed period, a time when
people start to desist and, thus a time when the
criminal justice system could be influential in helping
or hindering these moves towards desistance.’
(Shapland et al, 2012:128)
Whilst there is an imperative and opportunity to
specifically focus on young adults, the evidence also
highlights the particular developmental and social
needs of young adults, all of which can be relevant
to their offending. Of particular interest is the
evidence that individuals rarely reach all the
milestones associated with becoming an adult by
the age of 18. Social and economic changes in recent
decades have impacted significantly on young
people’s transition to adulthood. Generally, the age
of first marriage, having a child, living
independently, and the numbers staying in
education (and for longer) have all increased. It is
observed that the social and economic conditions
that young adults currently face are some of the
most challenging for decades. These changes
present particular challenges for many young adults
in contact with the CJS who may, for example, have
lower educational attainment and less support
structures available to enable them to make a
longer and smoother transition to adulthood.
Recent evidence from brain development and
maturity research highlights that the developmental
milestones associated with adulthood are rarely
reached by the age of 18. Whilst physical and
intellectual development is usually completed
during adolescence, emotional and social
development often continues into the 20s. These
areas of maturity hold particular relevance to the
onset and/or continuity of offending. As the
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
6
biological changes occur in the relevant part of the
brain during adolescence and into young adulthood,
there is a natural improvement in executive
functioning, in areas such as planning, anticipating
consequences, reasoning, abstract thinking and
impulsive control (Losel et al, 2012).
The needs and vulnerabilities of young adults differ
to older adults and often reflect the developmental
process and challenges associated with the
transition to adulthood. Generally, young adults
tend to have a higher level of need than older adults
and these are often multiple and inter-linked.
National data indicates that young adults tend to
have greater need in relation to Education, Training
and Employment (ETE), accommodation, substance
misuse, mental health, lifestyle and associates, and
thinking and behaviour. The changes and challenges
associated with making the transition to adulthood
can result in need emerging for the first time (e.g.
accommodation) or becoming magnified (e.g.
mental health). Young adults can become
particularly vulnerable during this time and this
seems to be predominantly the case for those
leaving care, those with experiences of childhood
trauma or those with health issues – for example
Acquired Brain Injury (ABI). The transition to
adulthood may be considered as an over-arching
need in itself given the change and challenge often
experienced during this life stage.
Recent inspections and studies highlight that the
current system in England and Wales does not
adequately address the issues above and therefore
is not as effective as it could be in reducing
offending and reoffending. This relates to two
particular issues: firstly, the untimely (and often
poorly managed) transition between young people’s
and adult services, and secondly, the approach of
adult services often not being attuned to the specific
offending and needs of young adults. This highlights
the need to review current practice within a local
context and against the evidence of effectiveness.
Young Adult Offenders in Leicester,
Leicestershire and Rutland
The local picture relating to young adult offending
largely reflects the national one. Between 2011 and
2013, 40% of offenders of crime were between the
ages of 16 and 24 whilst they make up only 13% of
the local population. The majority of crime was
committed by males (85%) and in terms of
ethnicity, the majority was committed by White
Europeans (78%) although this differed between
the City (68%), the County (89%) and Rutland
(98%) – a profile which is in keeping with offenders
overall. The most common crime type for this age
group was assault, which, it may be inferred is likely
to be linked to the night-time economy and alcohol
fuelled violence and may also relate to issues
underpinned by psychosocial maturity. Following
assault, drug offences and theft offences were most
common.
Of particular interest is that 68% of the cohort
committed one offence during the time period,
nearly a third committed more than one offence and
just 13 offenders were responsible for more than 50
offences each. This, it is later argued, shows the
need for a range of responses. Within this cohort the
most common crime resolution was a court disposal
(60%) and the use of out-of-court disposals
impressed as comparably low. Analysis of the local
data highlights that this age group were also over-
represented in stop and search (59% of all stop and
searches). Locally, young adults are also most likely
to be victims of crime but there is less of an over-
representation. Between 2011 and 2013, 21% of
victims were aged 16-24, with 18 being the peak
age.
Data on the current caseload of Leicestershire and
Rutland Probation Trust show an over-
representation of 18-24 year olds (25% of the
overall caseload). Young adults were particularly
over-represented in short-term sentences and
within the local Integrated Offender Management
caseload. Within the locally identified cohort the
most common offence for which a young adult was
known to probation was violence. YOS data on 16-
17 year olds confirmed this was also the case. The
most common disposal according to Probation data
was a Community Order with the most frequently
imposed requirements being Unpaid Work followed
by Supervision. The only specific young adult
requirement, the Attendance Centre, made up just
2% of requirements. Requirements designed to
meet specific needs, for example the Drug
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
7
Rehabilitation Requirement, also impressed as
being under-utilised.
A local analysis of need confirmed that young adults
within the cohort had a higher level of need than
older adults with many experiencing multiple and
inter-related need. This was particularly the case in
relation to ETE, lifestyle and associates, thinking
and behaviour, attitudes and emotional well-being.
Data from city and county YOS confirm some
similarities in need between 16-17 young people
and 18-24 year olds, particularly in relation to
lifestyle, thinking and behaviour, and attitudes. ETE
appears to become a more pressing need for those
over the age of 18. A deeper analysis of need
highlighted how a high proportion of young adults
appeared to be experiencing issues relating to the
emotional and social challenges of young adulthood.
An exploration of local services for young adults
indicates that, on the whole, the majority of young
person services stop when someone reaches 18 and
a transition to an equivalent adult service is
necessary. There are some exceptions to this.
However, practitioners report a complex provider
landscape wherein they struggle to fully understand
provision and in particular the scope and criteria.
Within adult services, there was limited evidence of
a specific young adult approach, with most services
not formally distinguishing between younger adults
and their older peers. Practitioners identified
particular issues and challenges in addressing
young adult need in areas such as housing,
substance misuse and finances.
An on-going social research project aimed at
gathering insights from young adults locally
provides some interesting qualitative data on how
young adults themselves view the current system.
The areas of need most frequently identified by
young adults relates to ETE, which reflects the data
above. On the whole, the young adults involved
reported that they found young people’s services
generally more helpful in meeting their needs than
adult services. In terms of the transitions between
young people’s and adult services, the negative
impact experienced was largely related to three
themes: adjusting to new rules, services stopping
altogether due to the change, and having to tell their
story again. Although a minority highlighted some
positive aspects of adult services, the majority
referred to the challenges and disruption involved.
When asked about how transitions could be
improved, most suggestions centred round
planning, communication and additional support.
The majority supported the idea of a ‘Transitions
Mentor’ to provide support and continuity during
this time.
As is the case with the national data, the YAP’s early
exploration of the local picture highlights some
opportunities to improve outcomes and reduce
offending and reoffending amongst this group.
Effective and Promising Practice
If it is accepted that young adulthood is a distinct
stage in life, and the offending and needs of young
adults differs from older adults, then it follows that
the response and model of delivery should reflect
this.
The available evidence on effectiveness highlights
the interventions that are proven to be effective or
at least promising. These, in summary, relate to
thinking skills, family approaches, restorative
justice, mentoring and ETE interventions. However,
the literature also highlights the importance of any
intervention being adapted and delivered in a way
that is responsive to the needs of young adult
offenders. The T2A alliance advocates a ‘Pathways
from Crime’ model for young adults. This outlines
the steps that can be taken at different stages of the
CJS and beyond. (For example, the opportunities for
and effectiveness of out-of-court disposals for
young adults and the importance of taking maturity
into account at all stages.) There is also evidence
from pilots and projects commissioned to
specifically address the needs of young adult
offenders. Many of these identify the ‘key
ingredients’ to a young adult approach.
The YAP has captured the available evidence in a
visual model of effectiveness.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
8
Whole system approach
INDIVIDUAL SOCIAL
Successful Transition to
AdulthoodPositive
transitions, reductions in offending and
reoffending
Criminal Justice Response
Takes account of maturity and specific needs of YAs. Targeted but flexible approach. Diversion
where appropriate, tailored
sentences.
Individual Capacity and Capability
Risk Management
Risk Management
Building confidence, resilience and responsibility
Acquiring and developing life skills
Thinking and behaviour work
Key Areas Cog skills,Emotional M’ment Substance Misuse, EET, Living Skills, Parenting, Relationships (inc DV and peers), Mental/Physical Health
Peer Mentoring and other involvement
opportunities
Restorative Justice
Opportunities and Access
Accommodation and supported housing,
Employment, Training and Education, Financial
Inclusion, Access to rehab, MH and counselling
Services
Networks and Inclusion
Key AreasLocating work within SU social context, family involvement & interventions, support groups, re-integrative activities
Quality of Relationship
Professional &/or Mentor
“Trusted Adult”Care, respect, trust
A role model to challenge and
support (emotional and practical)
General Approach of
Services Personalised Holistic
Accessible, Flexible &
ResponsiveService user
led
Strength-based
Provision of safety-net
Tailored to individual maturity
Promotes continuity
Specific InterventionsTailored to need and maturity
Mentoring
Actively manages
transitions between services
Accounts for diversity
Outcome Focussed
The model has a number of key inter-dependant
and equally important elements:
A whole systems approach
Criminal justice response
Quality of relationship
General approach of services
Specific interventions (at an individual and
social level)
Management of risk
Conclusion and Recommendations
Although significant work has been undertaken
within Phase 1 of the YAP, this represents the start
of a journey that will need to continue for some
time. It will be necessary to develop our collective
understanding of the offending and needs of young
adults and what is effective on an on-going basis.
However, there is sufficient information to make
recommendations at this stage. These centre around
key themes and are dependent on partners working
collaboratively. Critically, to improve outcomes, a
change in thinking across partner agencies will be
required, away from a generic ‘all adult’ approach to
one that recognises young adulthood as a distinct
stage in life, wherein we have an opportunity to
ensure young adults meet the milestones associated
with a successful transition to adulthood.
Strategic Leadership and Governance
Recommendation One
The Strategic Partnership Board should identify
young adults, aged 16-24 years, as a priority group
who require a tailored approach in order to reduce
offending and reoffending.
Recommendation Two
The Strategic Partnership Board should provide the
strategic leadership for driving forward system-
wide changes aimed at improving outcomes for
young adults involved in the CJS. The Reducing Re-
offending Board should involve: compiling a
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
9
Delivery Plan for 2014-2017 which includes a
performance framework; identifying ‘champions’ at
Senior Officer level; and providing a Chair and the
governance for the Delivery Group.
Delivery Infrastructure
Recommendation Three
The Reducing Reoffending Board should establish a
Delivery Group to ensure the agreed
recommendations and actions within the Delivery
Plan are implemented. The Board should provide a
chair, agree membership and establish an operating
budget.
Recommendation Four
The Reducing Reoffending Board should ensure a
clear Young Adult Involvement strategy is agreed
and implemented which includes young adult
representation on the Delivery Group.
Effective Practice and Quality
Recommendation Five
The National Probation Service, Community
Rehabilitation Company, YOTS and other providers
should establish a local model of effective practice
for working with young adults. The indicators of a
quality service and a mechanism for quality
assurance should also be developed.
Workforce Development
Recommendation Six
The Reducing Reoffending Board should
commission a joint awareness-raising and training
programme to ensure shared understanding and
knowledge of issues such as maturity, the
vulnerabilities and needs of young adults and
effective approaches and interventions in working
with young adults.
Criminal Justice Response
Recommendation Seven
The Strategic Partnership Board should commission
a review of the use of out-of-court disposals for
young adults including conditional cautions and
how these could be used to divert young adults
involved in less serious offences away from crime.
Recommendation Eight
The Reducing Reoffending Board should encourage
local Mental Health Liaison and Diversion schemes
to consider the specific needs of young adults and
develop the approach accordingly.
Recommendation Nine
The Community Rehabilitation Company, together
with the NPS and YOTS, should develop bespoke
sentencing options for young adults based on local
need and effectiveness in consultation with local
Sentencers.
Recommendation Ten
The Reducing Reoffending Board should work with
the local MAPPA Strategic Management Board to
ensure local IOM/MAPPA arrangements consider
the variable maturity and different needs of young
adults and tailor the approach accordingly.
Recommendation Eleven
The Reducing Reoffending Board should promote
the development and implementation of a local
model of resettlement for young adults.
Recommendation Twelve
The OPCC should ensure that the forthcoming
commissioning of RJ and Victim services includes a
specific focus on young adults and the Strategic
Partnership Board should promote the
development of RJ approaches for young adult
offenders/victims at all stages of the CJ process.
Interventions and Services
Recommendation Thirteen
The Reducing Reoffending Board should encourage
and support key programmes, services and
interventions to review and develop practice
against the agreed model of effectiveness.
Recommendation Fourteen
The Police should commission a website via
Integrated Offender Management that provides
information about services and interventions across
the pathways out of offending. This should cover
both young people and adult services.
Recommendation Fifteen
The Reducing Reoffending Board, together with
Children’s Services, should ensure that there is an
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
10
analysis of need and the development of bespoke
and effective services/interventions for Women,
Black and Minority Ethnic young adults and those
young adults who are also Care Leavers.
Transitions Between Services
Recommendation Sixteen
The NPS, CRC and local Youth Offending
Management Boards should endorse the
development of a new protocol aimed at ensuring
high quality transitions between YOS and Probation
providers. This should include the CJ Hub (IOM)
taking on a developmental and tracking role for
quality and performance purposes.
Recommendation Seventeen
The Reducing Reoffending Board and local Youth
Offending Management Boards should pursue
opportunities to explore and improve transitions
between other young person and adult services,
including those that relate to mental health,
substance misuse and social care and health.
Communications
Recommendation Eighteen
The Reducing Reoffending Board should identify a
lead Communications Officer to continue and
develop the current Young Adult Communications
Strategy.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
11
Conclusion and
Recommendations
Conclusion
This report shares the main findings of Phase 1 of
the Young Adults Project. Although significant work
has been undertaken, this merely represents the
start of a journey that will need to continue for
some time. It will be necessary to develop our
collective understanding of the offending and needs
of young adults and what is effective in reducing
offending and reoffending on an on-going basis.
However the Project Board believes there is
sufficient evidence and information at this stage to
start to make the changes necessary to improve
outcomes for this group.
Local and national data highlights the over-
representation of young adults in the CJS as both
offenders and victims of crime. Local data confirms
that violence is the most frequently committed
offence by this age group, followed by drugs and
acquisitive offending. Of particular note is that the
majority of young adults within the identified
cohort committed just one offence, with nearly a
third committing more than one and a very small
minority committing a disproportionately high
amount of offences. This has implications for how
the system should respond. Interestingly, most of
these were dealt with through the Courts. Probation
data highlights that the majority of young adults
from the cohort received community sentences
although there is a notable over-representation in
short-term custodial sentences. The use of the
Attendance Centre requirements and requirements
that address specific areas of need (e.g. drug use,
programmes) impressed as low.
The evidence from research supports the
contention that young adulthood is a distinct stage
in life wherein the social, economic and
developmental milestones associated with
becoming an adult are reached at variable rates
depending on a variety of individual and social
factors. Evidence from brain development research
indicates that certain areas of psychosocial
functioning such as responsibility, temperance and
perspective are often not fully developed until
someone reaches their mid-20s. These findings hold
particular relevance to offending, including
violence. The local data on offender need supports
this, highlighting that on the whole young adults
experience a higher level and more complex need
across most areas. This is particularly the case in
areas such as thinking and behaviour, attitudes, ETE
and lifestyle and associates. The emotional needs
and vulnerability of young adults was also evident
locally. National data highlights the prevalence of
issues such as Acquired Brain Injury and childhood
trauma amongst young adults, but more work is
needed to understand these issues locally.
An early examination of local services for young
adults highlights a complex landscape which
practitioners found difficult to navigate. There is
only limited evidence of services delivering a
specific ‘young adult’ approach. The opportunities
for improving transitions between YOS and
probation and between other young people and
adult services were highlighted. We were impressed
by the enthusiasm of practitioners to improve how
we manage transitions locally and there was an
appetite for innovative change. Early themes from
the social research project highlight the many
challenges faced by young people experiencing the
transition to adulthood and between services. For
some, the approach of adult services was welcomed
which highlights the need to strike a balance of
support, but also a recognition that young adults
want to be treated as adults. ETE was one of the
most frequent needs identified by young adults. The
majority favoured the idea of a Transitions Mentor.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
12
The potential for improving outcomes with this
group is high. Young adult’s developing maturity,
their less entrenched lifestyles and the fact that they
remain particularly malleable to external influences
makes success more likely. However, in order to
capitalise on this opportunity, it is essential to
ensure the approach is right. As young adults differ
in many ways to older adults, it follows that the way
the system responds to young adult offending needs
to be different. Although still limited, there is
evidence available on approaches and interventions
that are likely to prove effective in reducing
offending and reoffending. The model provided at
the end of section 3, represents a starting point for
agreeing a local model of effectiveness.
Critically, for Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland
to improve outcomes for young adult offenders, a
change in thinking across partner agencies will be
required, away from a generic “all adult” approach
to one that recognises young adulthood as a distinct
stage in life, where a bespoke and tailored approach
is needed to support transitions and desistance
from crime.
Recommendations
Based on the evidence and information gathered,
the YAP Board makes the following
recommendations. They have been proposed
because, if fully implemented, they have the
potential to significantly improve outcomes for
young adults in contact with the CJS. Several of
these involve partner agencies reviewing and
developing current practices to ensure the services
offered meet the needs of young adults and are
embedded in the evidence of effectiveness. Other
recommendations require more significant work
due to the relevant area of business being under-
developed or inconsistent with the evidence of
effectiveness. It is also envisaged that as the local
response to young adults develops, there will be the
opportunity to make changes beyond these
recommendations.
Strategic Leadership and Governance
There is sufficient evidence for partners to identify
young adults (16-24 years) in contact with the CJS
as a priority group with the over-arching aim of
bringing about the changes required to secure
reductions in offending and reoffending. At present
there appears to be insufficient strategic focus on
this group within the sub-region. A cross-sector,
multi-agency strategic commitment to reducing the
offending and reoffending of young adults is a vital
building block in making system-wide changes
aimed at improving outcomes for young adults.
Relevant strategic plans across partner agencies
should make specific reference to this priority and
the stated age group.
The Strategic Partnership Board, within its current
terms of reference, is in an ideal position to provide
strategic leadership for driving forward system-
wide changes aimed at improving outcomes for
young adults involved in the CJS. It is proposed that
it requires the Reducing Re-offending Board to
compile and agree a Delivery Plan 2014-2017 which
is based on the delivery of these recommendations
and a performance framework that provides data
on the offending and reoffending of young adults
(and associated outcomes). The Plan should clearly
identify priorities and lead professionals and
timescales for each area of business. Inter-
dependencies with other strategic boards should be
identified and relevant links made to ensure a
joined-up approach. It is also proposed that the
Reducing Re-offending Board seeks to identify
‘champions’ at Senior Officer level across and
beyond those agencies represented at the Board
and should provide a chair and the governance for
the Delivery Group outlined below.
Recommendation One
The Strategic Partnership Board should
identify young adults, aged 16-24 years,
as a priority group who require a
tailored approach in order to reduce
offending and reoffending.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
13
Delivery Infrastructure
It is proposed that a Delivery Group is established,
in place of the current Young Adult Project Board, to
ensure the agreed recommendations and actions
within the Delivery Plan are implemented. In
essence, Phase 2 of the Young Adult project will
focus on the implementation of agreed
recommendations. It is proposed that the Delivery
Group is chaired by a member of the Reducing
Reoffending Board and membership comprises of
professionals who are given lead responsibility for
particular areas of business. It is envisaged that this
group will adopt a task and finish approach and
report progress directly to the RRB. The group
should have a core membership of professionals
from the Young Adults Project to ensure continuity
of knowledge, with other professionals being co-
opted into the group as and when required. It is
suggested that this includes a Data Analysis lead to
ensure that the project continues to adopt an
evidence-based approach. Administrative support
for this meeting can be made available through the
local Criminal Justice (IOM) Hub. A small operating
budget will need to be established.
This report highlights the importance of Young
Adult involvement in terms of ensuring both the
design and delivery of services is responsive and
more likely to be effective. The continuance of the
current social research project is recommended. It
is also proposed that every recommendation/action
relating to service design and delivery seeks to
involve young adults throughout. In order to
facilitate and embed this approach, it is
recommended that a young adult involvement
strategy is devised and implemented as part of the
above delivery plan. Furthermore, a young adult
representative should be a core member of the
Delivery Group. The opportunities for involving
young adults from other schemes, for example the
Youth Commission, should also be explored.
Effective Practice and Quality
The available evidence from the literature and
research highlights the key elements of an effective
approach to working with young adults in contact
with the CJS. The importance of the different
elements of effectiveness being in place across
services and the system is crucial. This requires
there to be an agreement over and shared
understanding of a model of effectiveness and the
establishment of a local quality benchmark for
young adult provision. This should be routinely
Recommendation Four
The Reducing Reoffending Board should
ensure a clear Young Adult Involvement
strategy is agreed and implemented
which includes young adult
representation on the Delivery Group.
Recommendation Three
The Reducing Reoffending Board should
establish a Delivery Group to ensure the
agreed recommendations and actions
within the Delivery Plan are
implemented. The Board should provide
a chair, agree membership and establish
an operating budget.
Recommendation Two
The Strategic Partnership Board should
provide the strategic leadership for
driving forward system-wide changes
aimed at improving outcomes for young
adults involved in the CJS. The Reducing
Re-offending Board should involve:
compiling a Delivery Plan for 2014-2017
which includes a performance
framework; identifying ‘champions’ at
Senior Officer level; and providing a Chair
and the governance for the Delivery
Group.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
14
referred/adhered to when developing strategies
and services for young adults across the sub-region.
Opportunities for peer review using agreed quality
assurance indicators should also be pursued over
time.
Workforce Development
This report highlights the many ways in which
young adults differ from older adult offenders. Of
particular note is the evidence from brain
development and maturity research and how this
impacts on offending. The data on offending,
vulnerability and need also show differences with
issues such as brain injury and childhood trauma
being particularly relevant to young adults. The
available information on the approaches and
interventions that are effective indicates that young
adults require a different approach to older adults.
In order to develop practice in a way that is more
effective in reducing offending/reoffending, it is
essential that managers and practitioners working
with young adults involved in the CJS have a shared
understanding, sound knowledge and relevant
skills. Awareness raising and training, as
appropriate to role, is therefore crucial. As
integrated working is a key element of effective
practice there is an opportunity to achieve this
across sectors and agencies. As a minimum, this
should include relevant police, probation, YOS staff
as well as key decision-makers, for example
prosecutors and magistrates. However, ideally it
will extend to other programmes and services to
reflect the wide-ranging needs of young adults. This
could be achieved by arranging for Staff
Development and Training Departments within
different agencies to work collaboratively around
this area of practice.
Criminal Justice Response
The local data on young adult offending and levels
of risk of harm/reoffending indicates that there
needs to be a range of criminal justice responses to
reflect levels of seriousness and to ensure the right
intervention is deployed at the right time. Decision-
making needs to be supported by a shared
understanding of maturity and how this impacts on
offending. This can be addressed through the above
workforce development recommendation.
Particular attention should be paid to ensure Pre-
Sentence Report writers are able to assess the
maturity, vulnerability and need of young adults
and formulate tailored and effective proposals. With
some young adults, the most appropriate response
to support desistance will be to divert them out of
the formal CJ process, whilst for others it will be
ensuring there are tailored sentences available.
Lessons learned by YOS and partners in reducing
the numbers of First Time Entrants should be
considered and where relevant applied to diverting
young adults away from the CJS.
Recommendation Six
The Reducing Reoffending Board should
commission a joint awareness-raising and
training programme to ensure shared
understanding and knowledge of issues
such as maturity, the vulnerabilities and
needs of young adults and effective
approaches and interventions in working
with young adults.
Recommendation Five
The National Probation Service,
Community Rehabilitation Company,
YOTS and other providers should
establish a local model of effective
practice for working with young adults.
The indicators of a quality service and a
mechanism for quality assurance should
also be developed.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
15
Given the high level of need relating to mental
health and substance misuse, the provision of
liaison and diversion services is particularly
relevant to this group. For example, young
adulthood is a stage in life wherein mental health
issues may arise or deteriorate and there may be a
simultaneous change in services due to age
boundaries and criteria thresholds changing. Multi-
agency systems need to be in place to divert young
adults into relevant services where appropriate.
Nationally, there are examples of how effective
sentences for young adults have been developed
within the existing legislative framework. It is
proposed that locally, partners should start to
identify and pursue opportunities to develop
tailored sentences for young adults based on need
and evidence of effectiveness. It is recommended
that this should commence with a review of the
model of delivery for Attendance Centre Orders
particularly given the forthcoming changes to the
commissioning arrangements. In time the
opportunities for developing requirements of
community sentences should also be pursued, for
example, developing Intensive Alternative to
Custody sentences and the wider use of
requirements that focus those areas of need that
local data confirms are particularly prevalent
amongst young adults (ETE, Substance Misuse). It is
also suggested that providers of requirements such
as Unpaid work and Programmes should review and
develop the design and delivery of these so they are
more engaging and effective for young adults.
Local data highlights that a minority of young adults
are assessed as posing a high risk of harm and/or
reoffending. However, young adults are
disproportionately represented in the local IOM and
MAPPA caseload. It is proposed that there is a joint
exploration of the offending and needs of the
highest risk young adults by MAPPA and IOM and
consider how the approach can be developed.
Those young adults who receive custodial sentences
pose the highest risk of reoffending. This is
particularly the case with those serving short-term
sentences. The potential negative impacts of
custody can have a particularly detrimental impact
on the transition to adulthood and resettlement,
which starts during the early stages of the custodial
term, plays a vital role in negating this. The
introduction of Resettlement Prisons provides an
opportunity to review and improve resettlement
services for young adults. The local provision of the
OPCC funded Resettlement Team (for those adults
Recommendation Ten
The Reducing Reoffending Board should
work with the local MAPPA Strategic
Management Board to ensure local
IOM/MAPPA arrangements consider the
variable maturity and different needs of
young adults and tailor the approach
accordingly.
Recommendation Nine
The Community Rehabilitation Company,
together with the NPS and YOTS, should
develop bespoke sentencing options for
young adults based on local need and
effectiveness in consultation with local
Sentencers.
Recommendation Eight
The Reducing Reoffending Board should
encourage local Mental Health Liaison
and Diversion schemes to consider the
specific needs of young adults and
develop the approach accordingly.
Recommendation Seven
The Strategic Partnership Board should
commission a review of the use of out-
of-court disposals for young adults
including conditional cautions and how
these could be used to divert young
adults involved in less serious offences
away from crime.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
16
without supervisory support) also provides an
opportunity to improve the resettlement of young
adults locally prior to the changes in law brought
about by the Transforming Rehabilitation reforms.
Research highlights that Restorative Justice
approaches, at all stages of the CJS, hold particular
promise to reducing reoffending amongst young
adults. At present the availability of RJ approaches
for young adult offenders and victims impress as
piecemeal. It is therefore proposed that there is a
commitment to developing RJ approaches and
interventions for young adults across the system.
The changes in commissioning arrangements for RJ
and Victim services provide an opportunity to do
this in an integrated way.
Interventions and Services
National and local evidence emphasises the
different needs of young adults and how often adult
services/interventions adopt a generic approach
that does not meet their specific needs. The
recommendation relating to Effective Practice
suggests that there should be local agreement over
and shared understanding of a model of
effectiveness and the establishment of a local
quality benchmark for young adult provision. It is
recommended that the RRB encourage key
services/interventions to review and develop their
approach in line with this model. It is suggested that
this commences with key interventions and services
that are particularly relevant to young adults. For
example:
Family programmes and interventions
Employment, Education and Training
services/interventions
Mental health and Learning Disabilities
Violence and Thinking Skills interventions
Substance Misuse
Practitioners and service users engaged in the
Project highlighted the complex landscape in
relation to young person and adult services and
interventions. Both described difficulties in
navigating these services, understanding their remit
fully and the various criteria and thresholds of
services. Although the model of effectiveness
emphasises the importance of holistic (or at least
integrated) services, this landscape is likely to
remain complex for the foreseeable future. This
presents a challenge for ensuring services are
identified for and accessed by young adults. It is
proposed that a website is commissioned for
service users and practitioners outlining all
available services across the pathways out of
offending. It is suggested that this is commissioned
via Integrated Offender Management.
Recommendation Thirteen
The Reducing Reoffending Board should
encourage and support key
programmes, services and interventions
to review and develop practice against
the agreed model of effectiveness.
Recommendation Twelve
The OPCC should ensure that the
forthcoming commissioning of RJ and
Victim services includes a specific focus
on young adults and the Strategic
Partnership Board should promote the
development of RJ approaches for young
adult offenders/victims at all stages of
the CJ process.
Recommendation Eleven
The Reducing Reoffending Board should
promote the development and
implementation of a local model of
resettlement for young adults.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
17
This report highlights the absence of sufficient local
data on women and Black and Minority Ethnic
young adults. The particular needs of young adults
who are also Care Leavers have also not been
specifically considered within this report. It is
proposed that the Reducing Reoffending Board
ensures that specific attention is afforded to
understanding their needs and developing bespoke
services and approaches in response. It is suggested
that this work is undertaken in partnership with
relevant specialist services.
Transitions between Services
The risks arising from young adults making the
transition between services is highlighted within
this report. The section on effective and promising
practice outlines the importance of exercising
flexibility in age boundaries wherever possible and
proactively managing any necessary transitions
between young person and adult services. A
separate report has been compiled on YOS to
Probation Transitions. This recommends that the
new Protocol adheres to the evidence of
effectiveness. More specifically it endorses pro-
active and detailed transition planning, agreeing a
Quality benchmark, the local CJ Hub (IOM)
providing a lead on developing practice in this area
and tracking all young people experiencing YOS to
Probation transitions for quality and performance
purposes. It is also suggested that probation
providers consider identifying officers who can take
on a specialist role and ensure additional support,
in the form of mentoring, is put in place to guide the
young adult through the transition process.
This report recognises that youth to adult transition
is far broader than the transition between YOS and
probation providers. It is anticipated that the
Protocol mentioned in the above recommendation
includes the need to ensure smooth transitions
across all relevant services. In order to facilitate this
it is also recommended that young person and adult
services across the pathways out of offending,
examine and where necessary, improve, the current
transitions arrangements. A small scale qualitative
study of transitions between CAMHS and AMHS is
already being planned. Other areas should include
substance misuse and social care and health.
Recommendation Sixteen
The NPS, CRC and local Youth Offending
Management Boards should endorse the
development of a new protocol aimed at
ensuring high quality transitions between
YOS and Probation providers. This should
include the CJ Hub (IOM) taking on a
developmental and tracking role for
quality and performance purposes.
Recommendation Fifteen
The Reducing Reoffending Board,
together with Children’s Services,
should ensure that there is an analysis
of need and the development of bespoke
and effective services/interventions for
Women, Black and Minority Ethnic
young adults and those young adults
who are also Care Leavers.
Recommendation Fourteen
The Police should commission a website
via Integrated Offender Management
that provides information about
services and interventions across the
pathways out of offending. This should
cover both young people and adult
services.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
18
Communications
It is recognised that the recommendations in this
report represent a significant shift in thinking and
approach across the system. This will require clear
communication and promotion across a range of
stakeholders. Opportunities to engage with
developments on a national level including
promoting Leicester, Leicestershire and Rutland’s
model should also be pursued.
Recommendation Eighteen
The Reducing Reoffending Board should
identify a lead Communications Officer
to continue and develop the current
Young Adult Communications Strategy.
Recommendation Seventeen
The Reducing Reoffending Board and
local Youth Offending Management
Boards should pursue opportunities to
explore and improve transitions
between other young person and adult
services, including those that relate to
mental health, substance misuse and
social care and health.