2

The Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 and the Scaled Approach

Implementation date: 30 November 2009

Insert date

A briefing for insert court

3

Purpose of the presentation (adapt for local use)

● Brief overview of the impact of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act and

the Youth Rehabilitation Order (YRO) on the youth offending team (YOT)

and its work with the court in dealing with young people on statutory orders

● The Scaled Approach

How the Scaled Approach works

Key messages about the Scaled Approach for courts

4

Impact of Criminal Justice and Immigration Act on YOT practice

The following is a suggested list. The YOT should adapt this slide for local relevance

● YOT resources required for delivering the 18 YRO requirements

● Local partner engagement in resourcing the 18 requirements

● Managing different orders during transition period

Sentences will be determined by the date of offence

● Managing old orders under new national standards

● Diversity implications of the new working practices

● Criminal Justice: Simple, Speedy, Summary (CJSSS)

● YOT service to court

5

Impact of Criminal Justice and Immigration Act on YOT practice

● It might be useful in a slide to present against each of the 18 requirements what your current provision looks like. You could then set out to the court what partners you are intending to engage with in order to attempt to secure some level of agreement for delivery with the other requirements.

● This of course is only a suggestion however it would be advantageous at some point to communicate to your court just exactly what provisions are likely to be available at a local level.

6

The Scaled Approach

7

Why the YJB developed the Scaled Approach

● Audit Commission (2004) recommendation: ‘YOTs should make better use of Asset to determine the amount as well as

the nature of interventions with individuals using a scaled approach’

● Significant evidence base (reflected in the Key Elements of Effective Practice)

● An existing tiered framework of interventions in the adult sector

● A risk-based approach was already existing practice in a number of YOTs

● A scaled approach was supported by evidence from the risk-based pilots (in four YOTs)

How was the Scaled Approach developed?

Used all available evidence

Piloted and evaluated risk-based approaches with four YOTs

Consulted widely with key people to try to address any concerns

Developed three intervention level bandings

Obtained legal advice from the Ministry of Justice

Developed and published the draft model in February 2009

9

Scaled Approach principles

● Assessment determines frequency of YOT contact and type of intervention (but quality is paramount as reflected in Key Elements of Effective Practice)

● Identifies the Scaled Approach intervention level using: Assessed likelihood of reoffending (from Asset – static and dynamic factors) Risk of serious harm to others (where applicable) Application of professional judgement where required (with management

signoff)

● Considerations of the impact of crime on victims remains part of all work undertaken by the YOT

● Assessment of vulnerability should influence YOT and multi-agency input

● A coherent relationship between: (revised) National Standards for Youth Justice Services Key Elements of Effective Practice the Scaled Approach and the YRO

How the Scaled Approach works

● The Scaled Approach is used by the YOT to determine the level of intervention (either standard, enhanced or intensive) required when a child or young person is subject to one of the following court orders:

Referral Order

YRO

Community element of a custodial sentence

● Interventions are designed to:

reduce the likelihood of reoffending

reduce the risk of serious harm to others

support the new sentencing framework

tailor interventions to individual risk and need

Court requests

PSR

Court indicates

likely sentence

YOT undertakes assessment

Gather Info fromrange of sources

Populate Asset

(and ROSH if applicable)

DetermineScaled Approach

Intervention level

Apply professional judgement if

applicable and seek managerial

signoff

Determine possible YRO requirements

Prepare PSR based on all available info

Scaled Approach in practice – an example

Intervention level

Function Possible proposal to court (not exclusive)

Standard Enabling compliance and repairing harm

• Reparation• Supervision • Stand-alone unpaid work• Stand-alone attendance centre • Stand-alone electronic monitoring requirement

Enhanced Enabling compliance and repairing harm ANDEnabling help/change

• Reparation• Supervision • Curfew or electronic monitoring requirement• Requirement/component to help or change behaviour, e.g. drug treatment, offending behaviour programme, education, programme• Combination of the above

Intensive Enabling compliance and repairing harm ANDEnabling help/change ANDEnsuring control

• Reparation• Supervision +• Requirement/component to help or change behaviour• Requirement/component to monitor or restrict movement, e.g. prohibited activity, curfew, exclusion or electronic monitoring• Combination of the above

Proposals to court

13

Statutory contacts for assessed intervention level

Intervention Level Contacts per month

for first three months

Contacts per month

for rest of order

Standard 2 1

Enhanced 4 2

Intensive 12 4

More efficient and effective allocation of YOT resources

Strengthened case management across the youth justice system

Improved practice in assessment quality, pre-sentence reports and intervention planning

Tailored interventions based on the young person’s risks and needs

Reduced reoffending Reduced risk of serious harm

Increased public confidence

Benefits of the Scaled Approach

15

Impact on/changes to practice (YOTs to complete locally)

Examples -

● Change in style of PSR

● Assessment improvements

● Court practice

● Increase in stand-down/same day reports

● Impact of CJSSS

● How offence seriousness will be addressed in PSR proposals

16

Offences per disposals

● Add local data if appropriate

17

One year reconviction rates

Disposal type National rate Local rate

Pre-court disposals 28%

First-tier disposals 48%

● Referral Orders 42%

● Fines 55%

● Reparation Orders 66%

Community sentences 69%

● Action plan Orders 62%

● Supervision Orders 74%

Custody 77%