Contact: Philip Sutton, Head of Youth Offending Services. Tel 01962 876100

E-mail: [email protected]

1. Introduction

1.1 This report is one of a series of reports provided during the year which set out the objectives and activities of the Youth Offending Team and partner agencies in relation to the Government's thirteen performance measures for the youth justice system. In this case Yots are expected to "ensure that Final Warnings are supported by interventions in 80% of cases by 2004".

2. Background

2.1 The Crime and Disorder Act introduced new procedures for dealing with young offenders outside the formal court processes. Prior to the

implementation of this legislation, police officers could either administer an informal warning to a young person or require them to attend the police station with their parent / carer for a formal caution. Records of cautions were not kept on a national, or even force-wide basis, with the result that some young people received repeated cautions. Following a caution, young offenders or their families were rarely offered support or guidance to help avoid a repetition of the offending behaviour. Despite these obvious problems, however, there was strong research evidence of a deterrent effect. Approximately 70% of young people subject to a first caution (and 50% of those who received a second caution) did not come to the notice of the police in the following two years.

2.2 The final warning systems involved the following changes:

_ The abolition of informal warnings and cautions;

_ The retention of police powers to take no formal action in relation to minor misdemeanours and criminal behaviour by children under 10;

_ The introduction of `gravity scores' for every type of offence (scale of 1 to 4);

_ The introduction of reprimands and warnings for first and second offenders pleading guilty to offences with a gravity score of 3 or less.;

_ The expectation that offenders who receive a final warning will be referred by the police to the Youth Offending Team for an assessment and for an intervention programme. Failure to co-operate with an intervention programme may be taken into account by the youth court, should the young person re-offend.

The Wessex Yot was one of a number of pilot sites for the final warning scheme between 1990 and 2000, when it became a national system.

3. Current Performance

3.1 Final warnings are administered by senior police officers, in uniform, at police stations. The police are required to notify the Yot within 24 hours of administering the warning. The initial paperwork processes proved too slow, but earlier this year the police developed computerised records for reprimands and warnings, which are now sent by electronic mail and are generally received on time.

3.2 Following the referral to the Yot, a member of the team arranges to visit the young person at their home, or, in the cases involving older teenagers, will call the young person for an office based interview. The interview is in two parts: an assessment of risk of re-offending and the development of an intervention plan aimed at reducing that risk. Typical intervention plans include:

_ Reparation and mediation, under the direction of specialist organisations working for the Yot

_ Access to a mentor

_ Attendance by parents at a parenting programme on a voluntary basis

_ Work on substance misuse problems

_ Referral to Youth Services, including the Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme.

3.3 An assessment of performance in relation to the Youth Justice Board's performance measure has been hampered by three problems:

_ A contradiction between the requirement to target resource where risk of re-offending is highest, and the Board's 70% target

_ Uncertainty about the definition of an intervention

_ Accuracy of inputting on to the computerised recording system.

As a consequence, the reports from the database for the first three months of the 2002/3 financial year show wide variations in performance. Isle of Wight, Southampton and Southwest Hampshire show a level of performance which is already at, or close to, the 2004 target. The rest of the Wessex area has not yet shown improvement on the figures shown in the Youth Justice Plan, i.e. only 11% of cases receiving a full intervention programme.

3.4 Levels of reconviction following a final warning shows that 67% are not reconvicted in the following twelve months. This compares with the figure cited above (2.1) for second cautions, i.e. 50% reconvicted within two years.

In order to improve on this figure, the Yot would need to concentrate its efforts on the most "at risk" young people. Approximately 15% of young people do not co-operate with the Yot, and it is probably amongst this group that the most "at risk" young people are to be found. The solution appears to be to develop a range of less resource-intensive interventions for low-risk cases, so that more staff resource can be used with those most at risk of non-compliance.

4. Future Developments

4.1 New guidance from the Home Office's Juvenile Offenders Unit will be published this autumn aimed at further enhancing the success of the final warning scheme. In particular, Central Government is likely to encourage and empower the police to bail young people for an assessment by the Yot before administering the warning. Wessex Yot and the constabulary have had some reservations about implementing such a procedure on the grounds that it runs counter for the general theme of speeding up the youth justice system. Clearly, however, it will be important to consider the new guidance and identify any opportunities for more effectively targeting interventions on high risk young offenders.

4.2 The level of public awareness of these early intervention procedures remains limited. It has proved difficult to dispel the myth that no action is taken against young offenders, when in fact there is in place a much more systematic approach to assessment and intervention. Members of the Committee might wish to explore ways in their own organisations of communicating this message, with a view to enhancing public awareness and confidence in the youth justice system.

5. Conclusion

It is recommended that the Committee:

_ note the report concerning early intervention and final warnings, and

_ promote awareness of the final warning scheme within their own organisations.

Philip Sutton

12.9.02

cyjc early intervention 02

Section 100D - Local Government Act 1972 - Background Documents:

The following documents disclose facts or matters on which this report or an important part of it, is based and has been relied upon to a material extent in the preparation of this report.

N.B. The list schedules:

i. Published works.

ii. Documents which disclose exempt or confidential information as defined in the Act.

None.